Hyperplane Separation Technique for Multidimensional Mean-Payoff Games

We consider both finite-state game graphs and recursive game graphs (or pushdown game graphs), that can model the control flow of sequential programs with recursion, with multi-dimensional mean-payoff objectives. In pushdown games two types of strategies are relevant: global strategies, that depend on the entire global history; and modular strategies, that have only local memory and thus do not depend on the context of invocation. We present solutions to several fundamental algorithmic questions and our main contributions are as follows: (1) We show that finite-state multi-dimensional mean-payoff games can be solved in polynomial time if the number of dimensions and the maximal absolute value of the weight is fixed; whereas if the number of dimensions is arbitrary, then problem is already known to be coNP-complete. (2) We show that pushdown graphs with multi-dimensional mean-payoff objectives can be solved in polynomial time. (3) For pushdown games under global strategies both single and multi-dimensional mean-payoff objectives problems are known to be undecidable, and we show that under modular strategies the multi-dimensional problem is also undecidable (whereas under modular strategies the single dimensional problem is NP-complete). We show that if the number of modules, the number of exits, and the maximal absolute value of the weight is fixed, then pushdown games under modular strategies with single dimensional mean-payoff objectives can be solved in polynomial time, and if either of the number of exits or the number of modules is not bounded, then the problem is NP-hard. (4) Finally we show that a fixed parameter tractable algorithm for finite-state multi-dimensional mean-payoff games or pushdown games under modular strategies with single-dimensional mean-payoff objectives would imply the solution of the long-standing open problem of fixed parameter tractability of parity games.Comment: arXiv admin note: text overlap with arXiv:1201.282

Finitary languages

The class of omega-regular languages provides a robust specification language in verification. Every omega-regular condition can be decomposed into a safety part and a liveness part. The liveness part ensures that something good happens "eventually". Finitary liveness was proposed by Alur and Henzinger as a stronger formulation of liveness. It requires that there exists an unknown, fixed bound b such that something good happens within b transitions. In this work we consider automata with finitary acceptance conditions defined by finitary Buchi, parity and Streett languages. We study languages expressible by such automata: we give their topological complexity and present a regular-expression characterization. We compare the expressive power of finitary automata and give optimal algorithms for classical decisions questions. We show that the finitary languages are Sigma 2-complete; we present a complete picture of the expressive power of various classes of automata with finitary and infinitary acceptance conditions; we show that the languages defined by finitary parity automata exactly characterize the star-free fragment of omega B-regular languages; and we show that emptiness is NLOGSPACE-complete and universality as well as language inclusion are PSPACE-complete for finitary parity and Streett automata

Energy Parity Games

Energy parity games are infinite two-player turn-based games played on weighted graphs. The objective of the game combines a (qualitative) parity condition with the (quantitative) requirement that the sum of the weights (i.e., the level of energy in the game) must remain positive. Beside their own interest in the design and synthesis of resource-constrained omega-regular specifications, energy parity games provide one of the simplest model of games with combined qualitative and quantitative objective. Our main results are as follows: (a) exponential memory is necessary and sufficient for winning strategies in energy parity games; (b) the problem of deciding the winner in energy parity games can be solved in NP \cap coNP; and (c) we give an algorithm to solve energy parity by reduction to energy games. We also show that the problem of deciding the winner in energy parity games is polynomially equivalent to the problem of deciding the winner in mean-payoff parity games, while optimal strategies may require infinite memory in mean-payoff parity games. As a consequence we obtain a conceptually simple algorithm to solve mean-payoff parity games

POMDPs under Probabilistic Semantics

We consider partially observable Markov decision processes (POMDPs) with limit-average payoff, where a reward value in the interval [0,1] is associated to every transition, and the payoff of an infinite path is the long-run average of the rewards. We consider two types of path constraints: (i) quantitative constraint defines the set of paths where the payoff is at least a given threshold lambda_1 in (0,1]; and (ii) qualitative constraint which is a special case of quantitative constraint with lambda_1=1. We consider the computation of the almost-sure winning set, where the controller needs to ensure that the path constraint is satisfied with probability 1. Our main results for qualitative path constraint are as follows: (i) the problem of deciding the existence of a finite-memory controller is EXPTIME-complete; and (ii) the problem of deciding the existence of an infinite-memory controller is undecidable. For quantitative path constraint we show that the problem of deciding the existence of a finite-memory controller is undecidable.Comment: Appears in Proceedings of the Twenty-Ninth Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence (UAI2013

Graph Planning with Expected Finite Horizon

Graph planning gives rise to fundamental algorithmic questions such as shortest path, traveling salesman problem, etc. A classical problem in discrete planning is to consider a weighted graph and construct a path that maximizes the sum of weights for a given time horizon $T$. However, in many scenarios, the time horizon is not fixed, but the stopping time is chosen according to some distribution such that the expected stopping time is $T$. If the stopping time distribution is not known, then to ensure robustness, the distribution is chosen by an adversary, to represent the worst-case scenario. A stationary plan for every vertex always chooses the same outgoing edge. For fixed horizon or fixed stopping-time distribution, stationary plans are not sufficient for optimality. Quite surprisingly we show that when an adversary chooses the stopping-time distribution with expected stopping time $T$, then stationary plans are sufficient. While computing optimal stationary plans for fixed horizon is NP-complete, we show that computing optimal stationary plans under adversarial stopping-time distribution can be achieved in polynomial time. Consequently, our polynomial-time algorithm for adversarial stopping time also computes an optimal plan among all possible plans

Obligation Blackwell Games and p-Automata

We recently introduced p-automata, automata that read discrete-time Markov chains. We used turn-based stochastic parity games to define acceptance of Markov chains by a subclass of p-automata. Definition of acceptance required a cumbersome and complicated reduction to a series of turn-based stochastic parity games. The reduction could not support acceptance by general p-automata, which was left undefined as there was no notion of games that supported it. Here we generalize two-player games by adding a structural acceptance condition called obligations. Obligations are orthogonal to the linear winning conditions that define winning. Obligations are a declaration that player 0 can achieve a certain value from a configuration. If the obligation is met, the value of that configuration for player 0 is 1. One cannot define value in obligation games by the standard mechanism of considering the measure of winning paths on a Markov chain and taking the supremum of the infimum of all strategies. Mainly because obligations need definition even for Markov chains and the nature of obligations has the flavor of an infinite nesting of supremum and infimum operators. We define value via a reduction to turn-based games similar to Martin's proof of determinacy of Blackwell games with Borel objectives. Based on this definition, we show that games are determined. We show that for Markov chains with Borel objectives and obligations, and finite turn-based stochastic parity games with obligations there exists an alternative and simpler characterization of the value function. Based on this simpler definition we give an exponential time algorithm to analyze finite turn-based stochastic parity games with obligations. Finally, we show that obligation games provide the necessary framework for reasoning about p-automata and that they generalize the previous definition

Qualitative Analysis of Concurrent Mean-payoff Games

We consider concurrent games played by two-players on a finite-state graph, where in every round the players simultaneously choose a move, and the current state along with the joint moves determine the successor state. We study a fundamental objective, namely, mean-payoff objective, where a reward is associated to each transition, and the goal of player 1 is to maximize the long-run average of the rewards, and the objective of player 2 is strictly the opposite. The path constraint for player 1 could be qualitative, i.e., the mean-payoff is the maximal reward, or arbitrarily close to it; or quantitative, i.e., a given threshold between the minimal and maximal reward. We consider the computation of the almost-sure (resp. positive) winning sets, where player 1 can ensure that the path constraint is satisfied with probability 1 (resp. positive probability). Our main results for qualitative path constraints are as follows: (1) we establish qualitative determinacy results that show that for every state either player 1 has a strategy to ensure almost-sure (resp. positive) winning against all player-2 strategies, or player 2 has a spoiling strategy to falsify almost-sure (resp. positive) winning against all player-1 strategies; (2) we present optimal strategy complexity results that precisely characterize the classes of strategies required for almost-sure and positive winning for both players; and (3) we present quadratic time algorithms to compute the almost-sure and the positive winning sets, matching the best known bound of algorithms for much simpler problems (such as reachability objectives). For quantitative constraints we show that a polynomial time solution for the almost-sure or the positive winning set would imply a solution to a long-standing open problem (the value problem for turn-based deterministic mean-payoff games) that is not known to be solvable in polynomial time