Solving parity games: Explicit vs symbolic

In this paper we provide a broad investigation of the symbolic approach for solving Parity Games. Specifically, we implement in a fresh tool, called, four symbolic algorithms to solve Parity Games and compare their performances to the corresponding explicit versions for different classes of games. By means of benchmarks, we show that for random games, even for constrained random games, explicit algorithms actually perform better than symbolic algorithms. The situation changes, however, for structured games, where symbolic algorithms seem to have the advantage. This suggests that when evaluating algorithms for parity-game solving, it would be useful to have real benchmarks and not only random benchmarks, as the common practice has been

New Deterministic Algorithms for Solving Parity Games

We study parity games in which one of the two players controls only a small number $k$ of nodes and the other player controls the $n-k$ other nodes of the game. Our main result is a fixed-parameter algorithm that solves bipartite parity games in time $k^{O(\sqrt{k})}\cdot O(n^3)$, and general parity games in time $(p+k)^{O(\sqrt{k})} \cdot O(pnm)$, where $p$ is the number of distinct priorities and $m$ is the number of edges. For all games with $k = o(n)$ this improves the previously fastest algorithm by Jurdzi{\'n}ski, Paterson, and Zwick (SICOMP 2008). We also obtain novel kernelization results and an improved deterministic algorithm for graphs with small average degree

Local Strategy Improvement for Parity Game Solving

The problem of solving a parity game is at the core of many problems in model checking, satisfiability checking and program synthesis. Some of the best algorithms for solving parity game are strategy improvement algorithms. These are global in nature since they require the entire parity game to be present at the beginning. This is a distinct disadvantage because in many applications one only needs to know which winning region a particular node belongs to, and a witnessing winning strategy may cover only a fractional part of the entire game graph. We present a local strategy improvement algorithm which explores the game graph on-the-fly whilst performing the improvement steps. We also compare it empirically with existing global strategy improvement algorithms and the currently only other local algorithm for solving parity games. It turns out that local strategy improvement can outperform these others by several orders of magnitude

Winning Cores in Parity Games

We introduce the novel notion of winning cores in parity games and develop a deterministic polynomial-time under-approximation algorithm for solving parity games based on winning core approximation. Underlying this algorithm are a number properties about winning cores which are interesting in their own right. In particular, we show that the winning core and the winning region for a player in a parity game are equivalently empty. Moreover, the winning core contains all fatal attractors but is not necessarily a dominion itself. Experimental results are very positive both with respect to quality of approximation and running time. It outperforms existing state-of-the-art algorithms significantly on most benchmarks

Value Iteration Using Universal Graphs and the Complexity of Mean Payoff Games

We study the computational complexity of solving mean payoff games. This class of games can be seen as an extension of parity games, and they have similar complexity status: in both cases solving them is in NP ? coNP and not known to be in P. In a breakthrough result Calude, Jain, Khoussainov, Li, and Stephan constructed in 2017 a quasipolynomial time algorithm for solving parity games, which was quickly followed by a few other algorithms with the same complexity. Our objective is to investigate how these techniques can be extended to mean payoff games. The starting point is the combinatorial notion of universal trees: all quasipolynomial time algorithms for parity games have been shown to exploit universal trees. Universal graphs extend universal trees to arbitrary (positionally determined) objectives. We show that they yield a family of value iteration algorithms for solving mean payoff games which includes the value iteration algorithm due to Brim, Chaloupka, Doyen, Gentilini, and Raskin. The contribution of this paper is to prove tight bounds on the complexity of algorithms for mean payoff games using universal graphs. We consider two parameters: the largest weight N in absolute value and the number k of weights. The dependence in N in the existing value iteration algorithm is linear, we show that this can be improved to N^{1 - 1/n} and obtain a matching lower bound. However, we show that we cannot break the linear dependence in the exponent in the number k of weights implying that universal graphs do not yield a quasipolynomial time algorithm for solving mean payoff games

Non-oblivious Strategy Improvement

We study strategy improvement algorithms for mean-payoff and parity games. We describe a structural property of these games, and we show that these structures can affect the behaviour of strategy improvement. We show how awareness of these structures can be used to accelerate strategy improvement algorithms. We call our algorithms non-oblivious because they remember properties of the game that they have discovered in previous iterations. We show that non-oblivious strategy improvement algorithms perform well on examples that are known to be hard for oblivious strategy improvement. Hence, we argue that previous strategy improvement algorithms fail because they ignore the structural properties of the game that they are solving

An Exponential Lower Bound for the Latest Deterministic Strategy Iteration Algorithms

This paper presents a new exponential lower bound for the two most popular deterministic variants of the strategy improvement algorithms for solving parity, mean payoff, discounted payoff and simple stochastic games. The first variant improves every node in each step maximizing the current valuation locally, whereas the second variant computes the globally optimal improvement in each step. We outline families of games on which both variants require exponentially many strategy iterations

Simple Fixpoint Iteration To Solve Parity Games

A naive way to solve the model-checking problem of the mu-calculus uses fixpoint iteration. Traditionally however mu-calculus model-checking is solved by a reduction in linear time to a parity game, which is then solved using one of the many algorithms for parity games. We now consider a method of solving parity games by means of a naive fixpoint iteration. Several fixpoint algorithms for parity games have been proposed in the literature. In this work, we introduce an algorithm that relies on the notion of a distraction. The idea is that this offers a novel perspective for understanding parity games. We then show that this algorithm is in fact identical to two earlier published fixpoint algorithms for parity games and thus that these earlier algorithms are the same. Furthermore, we modify our algorithm to only partially recompute deeper fixpoints after updating a higher set and show that this modification enables a simple method to obtain winning strategies. We show that the resulting algorithm is simple to implement and offers good performance on practical parity games. We empirically demonstrate this using games derived from model-checking, equivalence checking and reactive synthesis and show that our fixpoint algorithm is the fastest solution for model-checking games.Comment: In Proceedings GandALF 2019, arXiv:1909.0597

The Fixpoint-Iteration Algorithm for Parity Games

It is known that the model checking problem for the modal mu-calculus reduces to the problem of solving a parity game and vice-versa. The latter is realised by the Walukiewicz formulas which are satisfied by a node in a parity game iff player 0 wins the game from this node. Thus, they define her winning region, and any model checking algorithm for the modal mu-calculus, suitably specialised to the Walukiewicz formulas, yields an algorithm for solving parity games. In this paper we study the effect of employing the most straight-forward mu-calculus model checking algorithm: fixpoint iteration. This is also one of the few algorithms, if not the only one, that were not originally devised for parity game solving already. While an empirical study quickly shows that this does not yield an algorithm that works well in practice, it is interesting from a theoretical point for two reasons: first, it is exponential on virtually all families of games that were designed as lower bounds for very particular algorithms suggesting that fixpoint iteration is connected to all those. Second, fixpoint iteration does not compute positional winning strategies. Note that the Walukiewicz formulas only define winning regions; some additional work is needed in order to make this algorithm compute winning strategies. We show that these are particular exponential-space strategies which we call eventually-positional, and we show how positional ones can be extracted from them.Comment: In Proceedings GandALF 2014, arXiv:1408.556