Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Marie Fortin

dblp:177/6212 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
13ranked-venue papers
8as first author
8since 2021 · last 2025
—ORCID · conflict

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Theory of computation · 11 · 7 first-author · 6 since 2021Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 3 · 3 first-author · 3 since 2021Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 2 · 2 first-authorGraphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 1 · 1 first-author · 1 since 2021

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Theoretical computer science
5 papers
Logic in computer science · 62% Computational complexity · 24% Automated reasoning and model checking · 12%
Databases, data mining, and information retrieval
1 paper
Data models and query languages · 100%
Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
1 paper
Concurrent programming · 50% Program verification · 50%

Topics — the 14 heaviest of 14, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Logic in computer science › knowledge representation and reasoning
description logic
1.122022
Interpolants and Explicit Definitions in Extensions of the Description Logic EL · KR 2022
Unique Characterisability and Learnability of Temporal Instance Queries · KR 2022
Data models and query languages › query interface
query by example
0.712023
Reverse Engineering of Temporal Queries Mediated by LTL Ontologies · IJCAI 2023
Logic in computer science
temporal logic
0.712023
Reverse Engineering of Temporal Queries Mediated by LTL Ontologies · IJCAI 2023
Computational complexity › learning theory
exact learning
0.612022
Interpolants and Explicit Definitions in Extensions of the Description Logic EL · KR 2022
Computational complexity › learning theory
learnability
0.612022
Unique Characterisability and Learnability of Temporal Instance Queries · KR 2022
Logic in computer science
finite model theory
0.412019
FO = FO3 for Linear Orders with Monotone Binary Relations · ICALP 2019
Logic in computer science
modal logic
0.412019
FO = FO3 for Linear Orders with Monotone Binary Relations · ICALP 2019
Logic in computer science › modal logic › dynamic logic
propositional dynamic logic
0.412019
FO = FO3 for Linear Orders with Monotone Binary Relations · ICALP 2019
Program verification › concurrent program verification
parameterized verification
0.312017
Model-Checking Linear-Time Properties of Parametrized Asynchronous Shared-Memory Pushdown Systems · CAV (2) 2017
Concurrent programming › concurrency models
shared-memory concurrency
0.312017
Model-Checking Linear-Time Properties of Parametrized Asynchronous Shared-Memory Pushdown Systems · CAV (2) 2017
Automated reasoning and model checking
model checking
0.312017
Model-Checking Linear-Time Properties of Parametrized Asynchronous Shared-Memory Pushdown Systems · CAV (2) 2017
Automated reasoning and model checking › model checking › infinite-state model checking
pushdown system model checking
0.312017
Model-Checking Linear-Time Properties of Parametrized Asynchronous Shared-Memory Pushdown Systems · CAV (2) 2017
Data models and query languages › query language
temporal query language
0.212023
Reverse Engineering of Temporal Queries Mediated by LTL Ontologies · IJCAI 2023
Automata and formal languages
pushdown automata
0.112017
Model-Checking Linear-Time Properties of Parametrized Asynchronous Shared-Memory Pushdown Systems · CAV (2) 2017

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

ontology-mediated querying · 1.3linear temporal logic · 1.3linear-time property checking · 0.6
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2025 High-Level Message Sequence Charts: Satisfiability and Realizability Revisited
Benedikt Bollig, Marie Fortin, Paul Gastin
Petri Nets2
2025 HyperLTL Satisfiability Is Highly Undecidable, HyperCTL$^* is Even Harder
abstract
Temporal logics for the specification of information-flow properties are able to express relations between multiple executions of a system. The two most important such logics are HyperLTL and HyperCTL*, which generalise LTL and CTL* by trace quantification. It is known that this expressiveness comes at a price, i.e. satisfiability is undecidable for both logics. In this paper we settle the exact complexity of these problems, showing that both are in fact highly undecidable: we prove that HyperLTL satisfiability is $\Sigma_1^1$-complete and HyperCTL* satisfiability is $\Sigma_1^2$-complete. These are significant increases over the previously known lower bounds and the first upper bounds. To prove $\Sigma_1^2$-membership for HyperCTL*, we prove that every satisfiable HyperCTL* sentence has a model that is equinumerous to the continuum, the first upper bound of this kind. We also prove this bound to be tight. Furthermore, we prove that both countable and finitely-branching satisfiability for HyperCTL* are as hard as truth in second-order arithmetic, i.e. still highly undecidable. Finally, we show that the membership problem for every level of the HyperLTL quantifier alternation hierarchy is $\Pi_1^1$-complete. Comment: arXiv admin note: substantial text overlap with arXiv:2105.04176
Marie Fortin, Louwe B. Kuijer, Patrick Totzke, Martin Zimmermann 0002
Log. Methods Comput. Sci.1
2024 Logic and Languages of Higher-Dimensional Automata
Amazigh Amrane, Hugo Bazille, Uli Fahrenberg, Marie Fortin
DLT4
2023 Reverse Engineering of Temporal Queries Mediated by LTL Ontologies
abstract
In reverse engineering of database queries, we aim to construct a query from a given set of answers and non-answers; it can then be used to explore the data further or as an explanation of the answers and non-answers. We investigate this query-by-example problem for queries formulated in positive fragments of linear temporal logic LTL over timestamped data, focusing on the design of suitable query languages and the combined and data complexity of deciding whether there exists a query in the given language that separates the given answers from non-answers. We consider both plain LTL queries and those mediated by LTL ontologies.
Marie Fortin, Boris Konev, Vladislav Ryzhikov, Yury Savateev, Frank Wolter, Michael Zakharyaschev
IJCAI1
2022 Unique Characterisability and Learnability of Temporal Instance Queries
Marie Fortin, Boris Konev, Vladislav Ryzhikov, Yury Savateev, Frank Wolter, Michael Zakharyaschev
KR1
2022 Interpolants and Explicit Definitions in Extensions of the Description Logic EL
Marie Fortin, Boris Konev, Frank Wolter
KR1
2021 HyperLTL Satisfiability Is Σ₁¹-Complete, HyperCTL* Satisfiability Is Σ₁²-Complete
abstract
Temporal logics for the specification of information-flow properties are able to express relations between multiple executions of a system. The two most important such logics are HyperLTL and HyperCTL*, which generalise LTL and CTL* by trace quantification. It is known that this expressiveness comes at a price, i.e. satisfiability is undecidable for both logics. In this paper we settle the exact complexity of these problems, showing that both are in fact highly undecidable: we prove that HyperLTL satisfiability is Σ₁¹-complete and HyperCTL* satisfiability is Σ₁²-complete. These are significant increases over the previously known lower bounds and the first upper bounds. To prove Σ₁²-membership for HyperCTL*, we prove that every satisfiable HyperCTL* sentence has a model that is equinumerous to the continuum, the first upper bound of this kind. We prove this bound to be tight. Finally, we show that the membership problem for every level of the HyperLTL quantifier alternation hierarchy is Π₁¹-complete.
Marie Fortin, Louwe B. Kuijer, Patrick Totzke, Martin Zimmermann 0002
MFCS1
2021 Communicating finite-state machines, first-order logic, and star-free propositional dynamic logic
Benedikt Bollig, Marie Fortin, Paul Gastin
J. Comput. Syst. Sci.2
2019 FO = FO3 for Linear Orders with Monotone Binary Relations
abstract
We show that over the class of linear orders with additional binary relations satisfying some monotonicity conditions, monadic first-order logic has the three-variable property. This generalizes (and gives a new proof of) several known results, including the fact that monadic first-order logic has the three-variable property over linear orders, as well as over (R,<,+1), and answers some open questions mentioned in a paper from Antonopoulos, Hunter, Raza and Worrell [FoSSaCS 2015]. Our proof is based on a translation of monadic first-order logic formulas into formulas of a star-free variant of Propositional Dynamic Logic, which are in turn easily expressible in monadic first-order logic with three variables.
Marie Fortin
ICALP1
2018 It Is Easy to Be Wise After the Event: Communicating Finite-State Machines Capture First-Order Logic with "Happened Before"
abstract
Message sequence charts (MSCs) naturally arise as executions of communicating finite-state machines (CFMs), in which finite-state processes exchange messages through unbounded FIFO channels. We study the first-order logic of MSCs, featuring Lamport's happened-before relation. We introduce a star-free version of propositional dynamic logic (PDL) with loop and converse. Our main results state that (i) every first-order sentence can be transformed into an equivalent star-free PDL sentence (and conversely), and (ii) every star-free PDL sentence can be translated into an equivalent CFM. This answers an open question and settles the exact relation between CFMs and fragments of monadic second-order logic. As a byproduct, we show that first-order logic over MSCs has the three-variable property.
Benedikt Bollig, Marie Fortin, Paul Gastin
CONCUR2
2018 Communicating Finite-State Machines and Two-Variable Logic
abstract
Communicating finite-state machines are a fundamental, well-studied model of finite-state processes that communicate via unbounded first-in first-out channels. We show that they are expressively equivalent to existential MSO logic with two first-order variables and the order relation.
Benedikt Bollig, Marie Fortin, Paul Gastin
STACS2
2017 Model-Checking Linear-Time Properties of Parametrized Asynchronous Shared-Memory Pushdown Systems
Marie Fortin, Anca Muscholl, Igor Walukiewicz
CAV (2)1
2016 Verification of Parameterized Communicating Automata via Split-Width
Marie Fortin, Paul Gastin
FoSSaCS1