27,221 research outputs found

    Finite-state Strategies in Delay Games (full version)

    Full text link
    What is a finite-state strategy in a delay game? We answer this surprisingly non-trivial question by presenting a very general framework that allows to remove delay: finite-state strategies exist for all winning conditions where the resulting delay-free game admits a finite-state strategy. The framework is applicable to games whose winning condition is recognized by an automaton with an acceptance condition that satisfies a certain aggregation property. Our framework also yields upper bounds on the complexity of determining the winner of such delay games and upper bounds on the necessary lookahead to win the game. In particular, we cover all previous results of that kind as special cases of our uniform approach

    Timed Parity Games: Complexity and Robustness

    Get PDF
    We consider two-player games played in real time on game structures with clocks where the objectives of players are described using parity conditions. The games are \emph{concurrent} in that at each turn, both players independently propose a time delay and an action, and the action with the shorter delay is chosen. To prevent a player from winning by blocking time, we restrict each player to play strategies that ensure that the player cannot be responsible for causing a zeno run. First, we present an efficient reduction of these games to \emph{turn-based} (i.e., not concurrent) \emph{finite-state} (i.e., untimed) parity games. Our reduction improves the best known complexity for solving timed parity games. Moreover, the rich class of algorithms for classical parity games can now be applied to timed parity games. The states of the resulting game are based on clock regions of the original game, and the state space of the finite game is linear in the size of the region graph. Second, we consider two restricted classes of strategies for the player that represents the controller in a real-time synthesis problem, namely, \emph{limit-robust} and \emph{bounded-robust} winning strategies. Using a limit-robust winning strategy, the controller cannot choose an exact real-valued time delay but must allow for some nonzero jitter in each of its actions. If there is a given lower bound on the jitter, then the strategy is bounded-robust winning. We show that exact strategies are more powerful than limit-robust strategies, which are more powerful than bounded-robust winning strategies for any bound. For both kinds of robust strategies, we present efficient reductions to standard timed automaton games. These reductions provide algorithms for the synthesis of robust real-time controllers

    Finite-state Strategies in Delay Games

    Get PDF
    What is a finite-state strategy in a delay game? We answer this surprisingly non-trivial question by presenting a very general framework that allows to remove delay: finite-state strategies exist for all winning conditions where the resulting delay-free game admits a finite-state strategy. The framework is applicable to games whose winning condition is recognized by an automaton with an acceptance condition that satisfies a certain aggregation property. Our framework also yields upper bounds on the complexity of determining the winner of such delay games and upper bounds on the necessary lookahead to win the game. In particular, we cover all previous results of that kind as special cases of our uniform approach.SCOPUS: ar.jinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishe

    Finite-state Strategies in Delay Games

    Get PDF
    What is a finite-state strategy in a delay game? We answer this surprisingly non-trivial question and present a very general framework for computing such strategies: they exist for all winning conditions that are recognized by automata with acceptance conditions that satisfy a certain aggregation property. Our framework also yields upper bounds on the complexity of determining the winner of such delay games and upper bounds on the necessary lookahead to win the game. In particular, we cover all previous results of that kind as special cases of our uniform approach.Comment: In Proceedings GandALF 2017, arXiv:1709.01761. Full version at arXiv:1704.0888

    Games with Delays. A Frankenstein Approach

    Get PDF
    We investigate infinite games on finite graphs where the information flow is perturbed by nondeterministic signalling delays. It is known that such perturbations make synthesis problems virtually unsolvable, in the general case. On the classical model where signals are attached to states, tractable cases are rare and difficult to identify. Here, we propose a model where signals are detached from control states, and we identify a subclass on which equilibrium outcomes can be preserved, even if signals are delivered with a delay that is finitely bounded. To offset the perturbation, our solution procedure combines responses from a collection of virtual plays following an equilibrium strategy in the instant- signalling game to synthesise, in a Frankenstein manner, an equivalent equilibrium strategy for the delayed-signalling game

    Degrees of Lookahead in Regular Infinite Games

    Full text link
    We study variants of regular infinite games where the strict alternation of moves between the two players is subject to modifications. The second player may postpone a move for a finite number of steps, or, in other words, exploit in his strategy some lookahead on the moves of the opponent. This captures situations in distributed systems, e.g. when buffers are present in communication or when signal transmission between components is deferred. We distinguish strategies with different degrees of lookahead, among them being the continuous and the bounded lookahead strategies. In the first case the lookahead is of finite possibly unbounded size, whereas in the second case it is of bounded size. We show that for regular infinite games the solvability by continuous strategies is decidable, and that a continuous strategy can always be reduced to one of bounded lookahead. Moreover, this lookahead is at most doubly exponential in the size of a given parity automaton recognizing the winning condition. We also show that the result fails for non-regular gamesxwhere the winning condition is given by a context-free omega-language.Comment: LMCS submissio

    How Much Lookahead is Needed to Win Infinite Games?

    Get PDF
    Delay games are two-player games of infinite duration in which one player may delay her moves to obtain a lookahead on her opponent's moves. For ω\omega-regular winning conditions it is known that such games can be solved in doubly-exponential time and that doubly-exponential lookahead is sufficient. We improve upon both results by giving an exponential time algorithm and an exponential upper bound on the necessary lookahead. This is complemented by showing EXPTIME-hardness of the solution problem and tight exponential lower bounds on the lookahead. Both lower bounds already hold for safety conditions. Furthermore, solving delay games with reachability conditions is shown to be PSPACE-complete. This is a corrected version of the paper https://arxiv.org/abs/1412.3701v4 published originally on August 26, 2016
    • …
    corecore