Relational semantics of linear logic and higher-order model-checking

In this article, we develop a new and somewhat unexpected connection between higher-order model-checking and linear logic. Our starting point is the observation that once embedded in the relational semantics of linear logic, the Church encoding of any higher-order recursion scheme (HORS) comes together with a dual Church encoding of an alternating tree automata (ATA) of the same signature. Moreover, the interaction between the relational interpretations of the HORS and of the ATA identifies the set of accepting states of the tree automaton against the infinite tree generated by the recursion scheme. We show how to extend this result to alternating parity automata (APT) by introducing a parametric version of the exponential modality of linear logic, capturing the formal properties of colors (or priorities) in higher-order model-checking. We show in particular how to reunderstand in this way the type-theoretic approach to higher-order model-checking developed by Kobayashi and Ong. We briefly explain in the end of the paper how his analysis driven by linear logic results in a new and purely semantic proof of decidability of the formulas of the monadic second-order logic for higher-order recursion schemes.Comment: 24 pages. Submitte

Playing Games in the Baire Space

We solve a generalized version of Church's Synthesis Problem where a play is given by a sequence of natural numbers rather than a sequence of bits; so a play is an element of the Baire space rather than of the Cantor space. Two players Input and Output choose natural numbers in alternation to generate a play. We present a natural model of automata ("N-memory automata") equipped with the parity acceptance condition, and we introduce also the corresponding model of "N-memory transducers". We show that solvability of games specified by N-memory automata (i.e., existence of a winning strategy for player Output) is decidable, and that in this case an N-memory transducer can be constructed that implements a winning strategy for player Output.Comment: In Proceedings Cassting'16/SynCoP'16, arXiv:1608.0017

The Church Synthesis Problem with Parameters

For a two-variable formula ψ(X,Y) of Monadic Logic of Order (MLO) the Church Synthesis Problem concerns the existence and construction of an operator Y=F(X) such that ψ(X,F(X)) is universally valid over Nat. B\"{u}chi and Landweber proved that the Church synthesis problem is decidable; moreover, they showed that if there is an operator F that solves the Church Synthesis Problem, then it can also be solved by an operator defined by a finite state automaton or equivalently by an MLO formula. We investigate a parameterized version of the Church synthesis problem. In this version ψ might contain as a parameter a unary predicate P. We show that the Church synthesis problem for P is computable if and only if the monadic theory of is decidable. We prove that the B\"{u}chi-Landweber theorem can be extended only to ultimately periodic parameters. However, the MLO-definability part of the B\"{u}chi-Landweber theorem holds for the parameterized version of the Church synthesis problem

Benchmarks for Parity Games (extended version)

We propose a benchmark suite for parity games that includes all benchmarks that have been used in the literature, and make it available online. We give an overview of the parity games, including a description of how they have been generated. We also describe structural properties of parity games, and using these properties we show that our benchmarks are representative. With this work we provide a starting point for further experimentation with parity games.Comment: The corresponding tool and benchmarks are available from https://github.com/jkeiren/paritygame-generator. This is an extended version of the paper that has been accepted for FSEN 201

How unprovable is Rabin's decidability theorem?

We study the strength of set-theoretic axioms needed to prove Rabin's theorem on the decidability of the MSO theory of the infinite binary tree. We first show that the complementation theorem for tree automata, which forms the technical core of typical proofs of Rabin's theorem, is equivalent over the moderately strong second-order arithmetic theory $\mathsf{ACA}_0$ to a determinacy principle implied by the positional determinacy of all parity games and implying the determinacy of all Gale-Stewart games given by boolean combinations of ${\bf \Sigma^0_2}$ sets. It follows that complementation for tree automata is provable from $\Pi^1_3$- but not $\Delta^1_3$-comprehension. We then use results due to MedSalem-Tanaka, M\"ollerfeld and Heinatsch-M\"ollerfeld to prove that over $\Pi^1_2$-comprehension, the complementation theorem for tree automata, decidability of the MSO theory of the infinite binary tree, positional determinacy of parity games and determinacy of $\mathrm{Bool}({\bf \Sigma^0_2})$ Gale-Stewart games are all equivalent. Moreover, these statements are equivalent to the $\Pi^1_3$-reflection principle for $\Pi^1_2$-comprehension. It follows in particular that Rabin's decidability theorem is not provable in $\Delta^1_3$-comprehension.Comment: 21 page

Robust Exponential Worst Cases for Divide-et-Impera Algorithms for Parity Games

The McNaughton-Zielonka divide et impera algorithm is the simplest and most flexible approach available in the literature for determining the winner in a parity game. Despite its theoretical worst-case complexity and the negative reputation as a poorly effective algorithm in practice, it has been shown to rank among the best techniques for the solution of such games. Also, it proved to be resistant to a lower bound attack, even more than the strategy improvements approaches, and only recently a family of games on which the algorithm requires exponential time has been provided by Friedmann. An easy analysis of this family shows that a simple memoization technique can help the algorithm solve the family in polynomial time. The same result can also be achieved by exploiting an approach based on the dominion-decomposition techniques proposed in the literature. These observations raise the question whether a suitable combination of dynamic programming and game-decomposition techniques can improve on the exponential worst case of the original algorithm. In this paper we answer this question negatively, by providing a robustly exponential worst case, showing that no intertwining of the above mentioned techniques can help mitigating the exponential nature of the divide et impera approaches.Comment: In Proceedings GandALF 2017, arXiv:1709.0176

On the Problem of Computing the Probability of Regular Sets of Trees

We consider the problem of computing the probability of regular languages of infinite trees with respect to the natural coin-flipping measure. We propose an algorithm which computes the probability of languages recognizable by \emph{game automata}. In particular this algorithm is applicable to all deterministic automata. We then use the algorithm to prove through examples three properties of measure: (1) there exist regular sets having irrational probability, (2) there exist comeager regular sets having probability $0$ and (3) the probability of \emph{game languages} $W_{i,k}$, from automata theory, is $0$ if $k$ is odd and is $1$ otherwise

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+