Index problems for game automata

For a given regular language of infinite trees, one can ask about the minimal number of priorities needed to recognize this language with a non-deterministic, alternating, or weak alternating parity automaton. These questions are known as, respectively, the non-deterministic, alternating, and weak Rabin-Mostowski index problems. Whether they can be answered effectively is a long-standing open problem, solved so far only for languages recognizable by deterministic automata (the alternating variant trivializes). We investigate a wider class of regular languages, recognizable by so-called game automata, which can be seen as the closure of deterministic ones under complementation and composition. Game automata are known to recognize languages arbitrarily high in the alternating Rabin-Mostowski index hierarchy; that is, the alternating index problem does not trivialize any more. Our main contribution is that all three index problems are decidable for languages recognizable by game automata. Additionally, we show that it is decidable whether a given regular language can be recognized by a game automaton

Strategy Logic with Imperfect Information

We introduce an extension of Strategy Logic for the imperfect-information setting, called SLii, and study its model-checking problem. As this logic naturally captures multi-player games with imperfect information, the problem turns out to be undecidable. We introduce a syntactical class of "hierarchical instances" for which, intuitively, as one goes down the syntactic tree of the formula, strategy quantifications are concerned with finer observations of the model. We prove that model-checking SLii restricted to hierarchical instances is decidable. This result, because it allows for complex patterns of existential and universal quantification on strategies, greatly generalises previous ones, such as decidability of multi-player games with imperfect information and hierarchical observations, and decidability of distributed synthesis for hierarchical systems. To establish the decidability result, we introduce and study QCTL*ii, an extension of QCTL* (itself an extension of CTL* with second-order quantification over atomic propositions) by parameterising its quantifiers with observations. The simple syntax of QCTL* ii allows us to provide a conceptually neat reduction of SLii to QCTL*ii that separates concerns, allowing one to forget about strategies and players and focus solely on second-order quantification. While the model-checking problem of QCTL*ii is, in general, undecidable, we identify a syntactic fragment of hierarchical formulas and prove, using an automata-theoretic approach, that it is decidable. The decidability result for SLii follows since the reduction maps hierarchical instances of SLii to hierarchical formulas of QCTL*ii

On the decidability and complexity of Metric Temporal Logic over finite words

Metric Temporal Logic (MTL) is a prominent specification formalism for real-time systems. In this paper, we show that the satisfiability problem for MTL over finite timed words is decidable, with non-primitive recursive complexity. We also consider the model-checking problem for MTL: whether all words accepted by a given Alur-Dill timed automaton satisfy a given MTL formula. We show that this problem is decidable over finite words. Over infinite words, we show that model checking the safety fragment of MTL--which includes invariance and time-bounded response properties--is also decidable. These results are quite surprising in that they contradict various claims to the contrary that have appeared in the literature

Reachability in Higher-Order-Counters

Higher-order counter automata (\HOCS) can be either seen as a restriction of higher-order pushdown automata (\HOPS) to a unary stack alphabet, or as an extension of counter automata to higher levels. We distinguish two principal kinds of \HOCS: those that can test whether the topmost counter value is zero and those which cannot. We show that control-state reachability for level $k$ \HOCS with $0$-test is complete for \mbox{$(k-2)$}-fold exponential space; leaving out the $0$-test leads to completeness for \mbox{$(k-2)$}-fold exponential time. Restricting \HOCS (without $0$-test) to level $2$, we prove that global (forward or backward) reachability analysis is \PTIME-complete. This enhances the known result for pushdown systems which are subsumed by level $2$ \HOCS without $0$-test. We transfer our results to the formal language setting. Assuming that \PTIME \subsetneq \PSPACE \subsetneq \mathbf{EXPTIME}, we apply proof ideas of Engelfriet and conclude that the hierarchies of languages of \HOPS and of \HOCS form strictly interleaving hierarchies. Interestingly, Engelfriet's constructions also allow to conclude immediately that the hierarchy of collapsible pushdown languages is strict level-by-level due to the existing complexity results for reachability on collapsible pushdown graphs. This answers an open question independently asked by Parys and by Kobayashi.Comment: Version with Full Proofs of a paper that appears at MFCS 201

Visibly Linear Dynamic Logic

We introduce Visibly Linear Dynamic Logic (VLDL), which extends Linear Temporal Logic (LTL) by temporal operators that are guarded by visibly pushdown languages over finite words. In VLDL one can, e.g., express that a function resets a variable to its original value after its execution, even in the presence of an unbounded number of intermediate recursive calls. We prove that VLDL describes exactly the $\omega$-visibly pushdown languages. Thus it is strictly more expressive than LTL and able to express recursive properties of programs with unbounded call stacks. The main technical contribution of this work is a translation of VLDL into $\omega$-visibly pushdown automata of exponential size via one-way alternating jumping automata. This translation yields exponential-time algorithms for satisfiability, validity, and model checking. We also show that visibly pushdown games with VLDL winning conditions are solvable in triply-exponential time. We prove all these problems to be complete for their respective complexity classes.Comment: 25 Page

Reasoning About Strategies: On the Model-Checking Problem

In open systems verification, to formally check for reliability, one needs an appropriate formalism to model the interaction between agents and express the correctness of the system no matter how the environment behaves. An important contribution in this context is given by modal logics for strategic ability, in the setting of multi-agent games, such as ATL, ATL\star, and the like. Recently, Chatterjee, Henzinger, and Piterman introduced Strategy Logic, which we denote here by CHP-SL, with the aim of getting a powerful framework for reasoning explicitly about strategies. CHP-SL is obtained by using first-order quantifications over strategies and has been investigated in the very specific setting of two-agents turned-based games, where a non-elementary model-checking algorithm has been provided. While CHP-SL is a very expressive logic, we claim that it does not fully capture the strategic aspects of multi-agent systems. In this paper, we introduce and study a more general strategy logic, denoted SL, for reasoning about strategies in multi-agent concurrent games. We prove that SL includes CHP-SL, while maintaining a decidable model-checking problem. In particular, the algorithm we propose is computationally not harder than the best one known for CHP-SL. Moreover, we prove that such a problem for SL is NonElementarySpace-hard. This negative result has spurred us to investigate here syntactic fragments of SL, strictly subsuming ATL\star, with the hope of obtaining an elementary model-checking problem. Among the others, we study the sublogics SL[NG], SL[BG], and SL[1G]. They encompass formulas in a special prenex normal form having, respectively, nested temporal goals, Boolean combinations of goals and, a single goal at a time. About these logics, we prove that the model-checking problem for SL[1G] is 2ExpTime-complete, thus not harder than the one for ATL\star