Average Case Analysis of the Classical Algorithm for Markov Decision Processes with B\"uchi Objectives

We consider Markov decision processes (MDPs) with $\omega$-regular specifications given as parity objectives. We consider the problem of computing the set of almost-sure winning vertices from where the objective can be ensured with probability 1. The algorithms for the computation of the almost-sure winning set for parity objectives iteratively use the solutions for the almost-sure winning set for B\"uchi objectives (a special case of parity objectives). We study for the first time the average case complexity of the classical algorithm for computing almost-sure winning vertices for MDPs with B\"uchi objectives. Our contributions are as follows: First, we show that for MDPs with constant out-degree the expected number of iterations is at most logarithmic and the average case running time is linear (as compared to the worst case linear number of iterations and quadratic time complexity). Second, we show that for general MDPs the expected number of iterations is constant and the average case running time is linear (again as compared to the worst case linear number of iterations and quadratic time complexity). Finally we also show that given all graphs are equally likely, the probability that the classical algorithm requires more than constant number of iterations is exponentially small

Symbolic Algorithms for Qualitative Analysis of Markov Decision Processes with B\"uchi Objectives

We consider Markov decision processes (MDPs) with \omega-regular specifications given as parity objectives. We consider the problem of computing the set of almost-sure winning states from where the objective can be ensured with probability 1. The algorithms for the computation of the almost-sure winning set for parity objectives iteratively use the solutions for the almost-sure winning set for B\"uchi objectives (a special case of parity objectives). Our contributions are as follows: First, we present the first subquadratic symbolic algorithm to compute the almost-sure winning set for MDPs with B\"uchi objectives; our algorithm takes O(n \sqrt{m}) symbolic steps as compared to the previous known algorithm that takes O(n^2) symbolic steps, where $n$ is the number of states and $m$ is the number of edges of the MDP. In practice MDPs have constant out-degree, and then our symbolic algorithm takes O(n \sqrt{n}) symbolic steps, as compared to the previous known $O(n^2)$ symbolic steps algorithm. Second, we present a new algorithm, namely win-lose algorithm, with the following two properties: (a) the algorithm iteratively computes subsets of the almost-sure winning set and its complement, as compared to all previous algorithms that discover the almost-sure winning set upon termination; and (b) requires O(n \sqrt{K}) symbolic steps, where K is the maximal number of edges of strongly connected components (scc's) of the MDP. The win-lose algorithm requires symbolic computation of scc's. Third, we improve the algorithm for symbolic scc computation; the previous known algorithm takes linear symbolic steps, and our new algorithm improves the constants associated with the linear number of steps. In the worst case the previous known algorithm takes 5n symbolic steps, whereas our new algorithm takes 4n symbolic steps

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

LIPIcs

We consider Markov decision processes (MDPs) with specifications given as Büchi (liveness) objectives. We consider the problem of computing the set of almost-sure winning vertices from where the objective can be ensured with probability 1. We study for the first time the average case complexity of the classical algorithm for computing the set of almost-sure winning vertices for MDPs with Büchi objectives. Our contributions are as follows: First, we show that for MDPs with constant out-degree the expected number of iterations is at most logarithmic and the average case running time is linear (as compared to the worst case linear number of iterations and quadratic time complexity). Second, for the average case analysis over all MDPs we show that the expected number of iterations is constant and the average case running time is linear (again as compared to the worst case linear number of iterations and quadratic time complexity). Finally we also show that given that all MDPs are equally likely, the probability that the classical algorithm requires more than constant number of iterations is exponentially small

Fast Symbolic Algorithms for Omega-Regular Games under Strong Transition Fairness

We consider fixpoint algorithms for two-player games on graphs with $\omega$-regular winning conditions, where the environment is constrained by a strong transition fairness assumption. Strong transition fairness is a widely occurring special case of strong fairness, which requires that any execution is strongly fair with respect to a specified set of live edges: whenever the source vertex of a live edge is visited infinitely often along a play, the edge itself is traversed infinitely often along the play as well. We show that, surprisingly, strong transition fairness retains the algorithmic characteristics of the fixpoint algorithms for $\omega$-regular games -- the new algorithms can be obtained simply by replacing certain occurrences of the controllable predecessor by a new almost sure predecessor operator. For Rabin games with $k$ pairs, the complexity of the new algorithm is $O(n^{k+2}k!)$ symbolic steps, which is independent of the number of live edges in the strong transition fairness assumption. Further, we show that GR(1) specifications with strong transition fairness assumptions can be solved with a 3-nested fixpoint algorithm, same as the usual algorithm. In contrast, strong fairness necessarily requires increasing the alternation depth depending on the number of fairness assumptions. We get symbolic algorithms for (generalized) Rabin, parity and GR(1) objectives under strong transition fairness assumptions as well as a direct symbolic algorithm for qualitative winning in stochastic $\omega$-regular games that runs in $O(n^{k+2}k!)$ symbolic steps, improving the state of the art. Finally, we have implemented a BDD-based synthesis engine based on our algorithm. We show on a set of synthetic and real benchmarks that our algorithm is scalable, parallelizable, and outperforms previous algorithms by orders of magnitude

Qualitative Logics and Equivalences for Probabilistic Systems

We investigate logics and equivalence relations that capture the qualitative behavior of Markov Decision Processes (MDPs). We present Qualitative Randomized CTL (QRCTL): formulas of this logic can express the fact that certain temporal properties hold over all paths, or with probability 0 or 1, but they do not distinguish among intermediate probability values. We present a symbolic, polynomial time model-checking algorithm for QRCTL on MDPs. The logic QRCTL induces an equivalence relation over states of an MDP that we call qualitative equivalence: informally, two states are qualitatively equivalent if the sets of formulas that hold with probability 0 or 1 at the two states are the same. We show that for finite alternating MDPs, where nondeterministic and probabilistic choices occur in different states, qualitative equivalence coincides with alternating bisimulation, and can thus be computed via efficient partition-refinement algorithms. On the other hand, in non-alternating MDPs the equivalence relations cannot be computed via partition-refinement algorithms, but rather, they require non-local computation. Finally, we consider QRCTL*, that extends QRCTL with nested temporal operators in the same manner in which CTL* extends CTL. We show that QRCTL and QRCTL* induce the same qualitative equivalence on alternating MDPs, while on non-alternating MDPs, the equivalence arising from QRCTL* can be strictly finer. We also provide a full characterization of the relation between qualitative equivalence, bisimulation, and alternating bisimulation, according to whether the MDPs are finite, and to whether their transition relations are finitely-branching.Comment: The paper is accepted for LMC

IST Austria Technical Report

We consider Markov decision processes (MDPs) which are a standard model for probabilistic systems. We focus on qualitative properties for MDPs that can express that desired behaviors of the system arise almost-surely (with probability 1) or with positive probability. We introduce a new simulation relation to capture the refinement relation of MDPs with respect to qualitative properties, and present discrete graph theoretic algorithms with quadratic complexity to compute the simulation relation. We present an automated technique for assume-guarantee style reasoning for compositional analysis of MDPs with qualitative properties by giving a counter-example guided abstraction-refinement approach to compute our new simulation relation. We have implemented our algorithms and show that the compositional analysis leads to significant improvements

IST Austria Technical Report

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 the most fundamental objective for concurrent games, namely, mean-payoff or limit-average objective, where a reward is associated to every 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 (i.e., the games are zero-sum). 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). Almost-sure winning with qualitative constraint exactly corresponds to the question whether there exists a strategy to ensure that the payoff is the maximal reward of the game. Our main results for qualitative path constraints are as follows: (1) we establish qualitative determinacy results that show 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 the 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 (of solving the value problem of mean-payoff games) that is not known to be in polynomial time

Solving Odd-Fair Parity Games

This paper discusses the problem of efficiently solving parity games where player Odd has to obey an additional 'strong transition fairness constraint' on its vertices -- given that a player Odd vertex $v$ is visited infinitely often, a particular subset of the outgoing edges (called live edges) of $v$ has to be taken infinitely often. Such games, which we call 'Odd-fair parity games', naturally arise from abstractions of cyber-physical systems for planning and control. In this paper, we present a new Zielonka-type algorithm for solving Odd-fair parity games. This algorithm not only shares 'the same worst-case time complexity' as Zielonka's algorithm for (normal) parity games but also preserves the algorithmic advantage Zielonka's algorithm possesses over other parity solvers with exponential time complexity. We additionally introduce a formalization of Odd player winning strategies in such games, which were unexplored previous to this work. This formalization serves dual purposes: firstly, it enables us to prove our Zielonka-type algorithm; secondly, it stands as a noteworthy contribution in its own right, augmenting our understanding of additional fairness assumptions in two-player games.Comment: To be published in FSTTCS 202