The DOI matches its Crossref record.
The complexity of propositional linear temporal logics
Open accessAbstract
The complexity of satisfiability and determination of truth in a particular finite structure are considered for different propositional linear temporal logics. It is shown that these problems are NP-complete for the logic with F and are PSPACE-complete for the logics with F, X, with U, with U, S, X operators and for the extended logic with regular operators given by Wolper.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Model Checking of Safety Properties
Kupferman, O., & Vardi, M. Y. (2001) · Formal Methods in System Design · doi:10.1023/a:1011254632723 · Cited by 566
A general approach to network configuration verification
Beckett, R., Gupta, A., Mahajan, R., & Walker, D. (2017) · Proceedings of the Conference of the ACM Special Interest Group on Data Communication · doi:10.1145/3098822.3098834 · Cited by 262
The complexity of reasoning about knowledge and time. I. Lower bounds
Halpern, J. Y., & Vardi, M. Y. (1989) · Journal of Computer and System Sciences · doi:10.1016/0022-0000(89)90039-1 · Cited by 252
Metadata
- Authors
- Sistla, A. P., & Clarke, E. M.
- Venue
- Journal of the ACM
- Published
- 1985-07
- Volume
- 32
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 733-749
- ISSN
- 0004-5411 (ISSN-L)
- 1557-735X
- OpenAlex
- W2003227046
- Cited by
- 1,095
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 9.81
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The complexity of propositional linear temporal logics. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1145/3828.3837
- The paper
- Sistla, A. P., & Clarke, E. M. (1985). The complexity of propositional linear temporal logics. Journal of the ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3828.3837
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
