State of B\"uchi Complementation

Complementation of B\"uchi automata has been studied for over five decades since the formalism was introduced in 1960. Known complementation constructions can be classified into Ramsey-based, determinization-based, rank-based, and slice-based approaches. Regarding the performance of these approaches, there have been several complexity analyses but very few experimental results. What especially lacks is a comparative experiment on all of the four approaches to see how they perform in practice. In this paper, we review the four approaches, propose several optimization heuristics, and perform comparative experimentation on four representative constructions that are considered the most efficient in each approach. The experimental results show that (1) the determinization-based Safra-Piterman construction outperforms the other three in producing smaller complements and finishing more tasks in the allocated time and (2) the proposed heuristics substantially improve the Safra-Piterman and the slice-based constructions.Comment: 28 pages, 4 figures, a preliminary version of this paper appeared in the Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Implementation and Application of Automata (CIAA

From Finite Automata to Regular Expressions and Back--A Summary on Descriptional Complexity

The equivalence of finite automata and regular expressions dates back to the seminal paper of Kleene on events in nerve nets and finite automata from 1956. In the present paper we tour a fragment of the literature and summarize results on upper and lower bounds on the conversion of finite automata to regular expressions and vice versa. We also briefly recall the known bounds for the removal of spontaneous transitions (epsilon-transitions) on non-epsilon-free nondeterministic devices. Moreover, we report on recent results on the average case descriptional complexity bounds for the conversion of regular expressions to finite automata and brand new developments on the state elimination algorithm that converts finite automata to regular expressions.Comment: In Proceedings AFL 2014, arXiv:1405.527

Buffered Simulation Games for B\"uchi Automata

Simulation relations are an important tool in automata theory because they provide efficiently computable approximations to language inclusion. In recent years, extensions of ordinary simulations have been studied, for instance multi-pebble and multi-letter simulations which yield better approximations and are still polynomial-time computable. In this paper we study the limitations of approximating language inclusion in this way: we introduce a natural extension of multi-letter simulations called buffered simulations. They are based on a simulation game in which the two players share a FIFO buffer of unbounded size. We consider two variants of these buffered games called continuous and look-ahead simulation which differ in how elements can be removed from the FIFO buffer. We show that look-ahead simulation, the simpler one, is already PSPACE-hard, i.e. computationally as hard as language inclusion itself. Continuous simulation is even EXPTIME-hard. We also provide matching upper bounds for solving these games with infinite state spaces.Comment: In Proceedings AFL 2014, arXiv:1405.527

Satisfiability Games for Branching-Time Logics

The satisfiability problem for branching-time temporal logics like CTL*, CTL and CTL+ has important applications in program specification and verification. Their computational complexities are known: CTL* and CTL+ are complete for doubly exponential time, CTL is complete for single exponential time. Some decision procedures for these logics are known; they use tree automata, tableaux or axiom systems. In this paper we present a uniform game-theoretic framework for the satisfiability problem of these branching-time temporal logics. We define satisfiability games for the full branching-time temporal logic CTL* using a high-level definition of winning condition that captures the essence of well-foundedness of least fixpoint unfoldings. These winning conditions form formal languages of \omega-words. We analyse which kinds of deterministic {\omega}-automata are needed in which case in order to recognise these languages. We then obtain a reduction to the problem of solving parity or B\"uchi games. The worst-case complexity of the obtained algorithms matches the known lower bounds for these logics. This approach provides a uniform, yet complexity-theoretically optimal treatment of satisfiability for branching-time temporal logics. It separates the use of temporal logic machinery from the use of automata thus preserving a syntactical relationship between the input formula and the object that represents satisfiability, i.e. a winning strategy in a parity or B\"uchi game. The games presented here work on a Fischer-Ladner closure of the input formula only. Last but not least, the games presented here come with an attempt at providing tool support for the satisfiability problem of complex branching-time logics like CTL* and CTL+

A Hierarchy of Scheduler Classes for Stochastic Automata

Stochastic automata are a formal compositional model for concurrent stochastic timed systems, with general distributions and non-deterministic choices. Measures of interest are defined over schedulers that resolve the nondeterminism. In this paper we investigate the power of various theoretically and practically motivated classes of schedulers, considering the classic complete-information view and a restriction to non-prophetic schedulers. We prove a hierarchy of scheduler classes w.r.t. unbounded probabilistic reachability. We find that, unlike Markovian formalisms, stochastic automata distinguish most classes even in this basic setting. Verification and strategy synthesis methods thus face a tradeoff between powerful and efficient classes. Using lightweight scheduler sampling, we explore this tradeoff and demonstrate the concept of a useful approximative verification technique for stochastic automata

Approximating the Termination Value of One-Counter MDPs and Stochastic Games

One-counter MDPs (OC-MDPs) and one-counter simple stochastic games (OC-SSGs) are 1-player, and 2-player turn-based zero-sum, stochastic games played on the transition graph of classic one-counter automata (equivalently, pushdown automata with a 1-letter stack alphabet). A key objective for the analysis and verification of these games is the termination objective, where the players aim to maximize (minimize, respectively) the probability of hitting counter value 0, starting at a given control state and given counter value. Recently, we studied qualitative decision problems ("is the optimal termination value = 1?") for OC-MDPs (and OC-SSGs) and showed them to be decidable in P-time (in NP and coNP, respectively). However, quantitative decision and approximation problems ("is the optimal termination value ? p", or "approximate the termination value within epsilon") are far more challenging. This is so in part because optimal strategies may not exist, and because even when they do exist they can have a highly non-trivial structure. It thus remained open even whether any of these quantitative termination problems are computable. In this paper we show that all quantitative approximation problems for the termination value for OC-MDPs and OC-SSGs are computable. Specifically, given a OC-SSG, and given epsilon > 0, we can compute a value v that approximates the value of the OC-SSG termination game within additive error epsilon, and furthermore we can compute epsilon-optimal strategies for both players in the game. A key ingredient in our proofs is a subtle martingale, derived from solving certain LPs that we can associate with a maximizing OC-MDP. An application of Azuma's inequality on these martingales yields a computable bound for the "wealth" at which a "rich person's strategy" becomes epsilon-optimal for OC-MDPs.Comment: 35 pages, 1 figure, full version of a paper presented at ICALP 2011, invited for submission to Information and Computatio

Enriched MU-Calculi Module Checking

The model checking problem for open systems has been intensively studied in the literature, for both finite-state (module checking) and infinite-state (pushdown module checking) systems, with respect to Ctl and Ctl*. In this paper, we further investigate this problem with respect to the \mu-calculus enriched with nominals and graded modalities (hybrid graded Mu-calculus), in both the finite-state and infinite-state settings. Using an automata-theoretic approach, we show that hybrid graded \mu-calculus module checking is solvable in exponential time, while hybrid graded \mu-calculus pushdown module checking is solvable in double-exponential time. These results are also tight since they match the known lower bounds for Ctl. We also investigate the module checking problem with respect to the hybrid graded \mu-calculus enriched with inverse programs (Fully enriched \mu-calculus): by showing a reduction from the domino problem, we show its undecidability. We conclude with a short overview of the model checking problem for the Fully enriched Mu-calculus and the fragments obtained by dropping at least one of the additional constructs