Improved Algorithms for Parity and Streett objectives

The computation of the winning set for parity objectives and for Streett objectives in graphs as well as in game graphs are central problems in computer-aided verification, with application to the verification of closed systems with strong fairness conditions, the verification of open systems, checking interface compatibility, well-formedness of specifications, and the synthesis of reactive systems. We show how to compute the winning set on $n$ vertices for (1) parity-3 (aka one-pair Streett) objectives in game graphs in time $O(n^{5/2})$ and for (2) k-pair Streett objectives in graphs in time $O(n^2 + nk \log n)$. For both problems this gives faster algorithms for dense graphs and represents the first improvement in asymptotic running time in 15 years

Mixing Probabilistic and non-Probabilistic Objectives in Markov Decision Processes

In this paper, we consider algorithms to decide the existence of strategies in MDPs for Boolean combinations of objectives. These objectives are omega-regular properties that need to be enforced either surely, almost surely, existentially, or with non-zero probability. In this setting, relevant strategies are randomized infinite memory strategies: both infinite memory and randomization may be needed to play optimally. We provide algorithms to solve the general case of Boolean combinations and we also investigate relevant subcases. We further report on complexity bounds for these problems.Comment: Paper accepted to LICS 2020 - Full versio

Parity and Streett Games with Costs

We consider two-player games played on finite graphs equipped with costs on edges and introduce two winning conditions, cost-parity and cost-Streett, which require bounds on the cost between requests and their responses. Both conditions generalize the corresponding classical omega-regular conditions and the corresponding finitary conditions. For parity games with costs we show that the first player has positional winning strategies and that determining the winner lies in NP and coNP. For Streett games with costs we show that the first player has finite-state winning strategies and that determining the winner is EXPTIME-complete. The second player might need infinite memory in both games. Both types of games with costs can be solved by solving linearly many instances of their classical variants.Comment: A preliminary version of this work appeared in FSTTCS 2012 under the name "Cost-parity and Cost-Streett Games". The research leading to these results has received funding from the European Union's Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007-2013) under grant agreements 259454 (GALE) and 239850 (SOSNA

Computer aided synthesis: a game theoretic approach

In this invited contribution, we propose a comprehensive introduction to game theory applied in computer aided synthesis. In this context, we give some classical results on two-player zero-sum games and then on multi-player non zero-sum games. The simple case of one-player games is strongly related to automata theory on infinite words. All along the article, we focus on general approaches to solve the studied problems, and we provide several illustrative examples as well as intuitions on the proofs.Comment: Invitation contribution for conference "Developments in Language Theory" (DLT 2017

Symbolic Algorithms for Graphs and Markov Decision Processes with Fairness Objectives

Given a model and a specification, the fundamental model-checking problem asks for algorithmic verification of whether the model satisfies the specification. We consider graphs and Markov decision processes (MDPs), which are fundamental models for reactive systems. One of the very basic specifications that arise in verification of reactive systems is the strong fairness (aka Streett) objective. Given different types of requests and corresponding grants, the objective requires that for each type, if the request event happens infinitely often, then the corresponding grant event must also happen infinitely often. All $\omega$-regular objectives can be expressed as Streett objectives and hence they are canonical in verification. To handle the state-space explosion, symbolic algorithms are required that operate on a succinct implicit representation of the system rather than explicitly accessing the system. While explicit algorithms for graphs and MDPs with Streett objectives have been widely studied, there has been no improvement of the basic symbolic algorithms. The worst-case numbers of symbolic steps required for the basic symbolic algorithms are as follows: quadratic for graphs and cubic for MDPs. In this work we present the first sub-quadratic symbolic algorithm for graphs with Streett objectives, and our algorithm is sub-quadratic even for MDPs. Based on our algorithmic insights we present an implementation of the new symbolic approach and show that it improves the existing approach on several academic benchmark examples.Comment: Full version of the paper. To appear in CAV 201

A survey of stochastic ω regular games

We summarize classical and recent results about two-player games played on graphs with ω-regular objectives. These games have applications in the verification and synthesis of reactive systems. Important distinctions are whether a graph game is turn-based or concurrent; deterministic or stochastic; zero-sum or not. We cluster known results and open problems according to these classifications

Pure Nash Equilibria in Concurrent Deterministic Games

We study pure-strategy Nash equilibria in multi-player concurrent deterministic games, for a variety of preference relations. We provide a novel construction, called the suspect game, which transforms a multi-player concurrent game into a two-player turn-based game which turns Nash equilibria into winning strategies (for some objective that depends on the preference relations of the players in the original game). We use that transformation to design algorithms for computing Nash equilibria in finite games, which in most cases have optimal worst-case complexity, for large classes of preference relations. This includes the purely qualitative framework, where each player has a single omega-regular objective that she wants to satisfy, but also the larger class of semi-quantitative objectives, where each player has several omega-regular objectives equipped with a preorder (for instance, a player may want to satisfy all her objectives, or to maximise the number of objectives that she achieves.)Comment: 72 page

Succinct progress measures for solving parity games

The recent breakthrough paper by Calude et al. has given the first algorithm for solving parity games in quasi-polynomial time, where previously the best algorithms were mildly subexponential. We devise an alternative quasi-polynomial time algorithm based on progress measures, which allows us to reduce the space required from quasi-polynomial to nearly linear. Our key technical tools are a novel concept of ordered tree coding, and a succinct tree coding result that we prove using bounded adaptive multi-counters, both of which are interesting in their own right

Parameterized Linear Temporal Logics Meet Costs: Still not Costlier than LTL

We continue the investigation of parameterized extensions of Linear Temporal Logic (LTL) that retain the attractive algorithmic properties of LTL: a polynomial space model checking algorithm and a doubly-exponential time algorithm for solving games. Alur et al. and Kupferman et al. showed that this is the case for Parametric LTL (PLTL) and PROMPT-LTL respectively, which have temporal operators equipped with variables that bound their scope in time. Later, this was also shown to be true for Parametric LDL (PLDL), which extends PLTL to be able to express all omega-regular properties. Here, we generalize PLTL to systems with costs, i.e., we do not bound the scope of operators in time, but bound the scope in terms of the cost accumulated during time. Again, we show that model checking and solving games for specifications in PLTL with costs is not harder than the corresponding problems for LTL. Finally, we discuss PLDL with costs and extensions to multiple cost functions.Comment: In Proceedings GandALF 2015, arXiv:1509.0685