43,317 research outputs found

    Energy Parity Games

    Get PDF
    Energy parity games are infinite two-player turn-based games played on weighted graphs. The objective of the game combines a (qualitative) parity condition with the (quantitative) requirement that the sum of the weights (i.e., the level of energy in the game) must remain positive. Beside their own interest in the design and synthesis of resource-constrained omega-regular specifications, energy parity games provide one of the simplest model of games with combined qualitative and quantitative objective. Our main results are as follows: (a) exponential memory is necessary and sufficient for winning strategies in energy parity games; (b) the problem of deciding the winner in energy parity games can be solved in NP \cap coNP; and (c) we give an algorithm to solve energy parity by reduction to energy games. We also show that the problem of deciding the winner in energy parity games is polynomially equivalent to the problem of deciding the winner in mean-payoff parity games, while optimal strategies may require infinite memory in mean-payoff parity games. As a consequence we obtain a conceptually simple algorithm to solve mean-payoff parity games

    Positional Determinacy of Games with Infinitely Many Priorities

    Get PDF
    We study two-player games of infinite duration that are played on finite or infinite game graphs. A winning strategy for such a game is positional if it only depends on the current position, and not on the history of the play. A game is positionally determined if, from each position, one of the two players has a positional winning strategy. The theory of such games is well studied for winning conditions that are defined in terms of a mapping that assigns to each position a priority from a finite set. Specifically, in Muller games the winner of a play is determined by the set of those priorities that have been seen infinitely often; an important special case are parity games where the least (or greatest) priority occurring infinitely often determines the winner. It is well-known that parity games are positionally determined whereas Muller games are determined via finite-memory strategies. In this paper, we extend this theory to the case of games with infinitely many priorities. Such games arise in several application areas, for instance in pushdown games with winning conditions depending on stack contents. For parity games there are several generalisations to the case of infinitely many priorities. While max-parity games over omega or min-parity games over larger ordinals than omega require strategies with infinite memory, we can prove that min-parity games with priorities in omega are positionally determined. Indeed, it turns out that the min-parity condition over omega is the only infinitary Muller condition that guarantees positional determinacy on all game graphs

    Synthesising Strategy Improvement and Recursive Algorithms for Solving 2.5 Player Parity Games

    Get PDF
    2.5 player parity games combine the challenges posed by 2.5 player reachability games and the qualitative analysis of parity games. These two types of problems are best approached with different types of algorithms: strategy improvement algorithms for 2.5 player reachability games and recursive algorithms for the qualitative analysis of parity games. We present a method that - in contrast to existing techniques - tackles both aspects with the best suited approach and works exclusively on the 2.5 player game itself. The resulting technique is powerful enough to handle games with several million states

    Time and Parallelizability Results for Parity Games with Bounded Tree and DAG Width

    Full text link
    Parity games are a much researched class of games in NP intersect CoNP that are not known to be in P. Consequently, researchers have considered specialised algorithms for the case where certain graph parameters are small. In this paper, we study parity games on graphs with bounded treewidth, and graphs with bounded DAG width. We show that parity games with bounded DAG width can be solved in O(n^(k+3) k^(k + 2) (d + 1)^(3k + 2)) time, where n, k, and d are the size, treewidth, and number of priorities in the parity game. This is an improvement over the previous best algorithm, given by Berwanger et al., which runs in n^O(k^2) time. We also show that, if a tree decomposition is provided, then parity games with bounded treewidth can be solved in O(n k^(k + 5) (d + 1)^(3k + 5)) time. This improves over previous best algorithm, given by Obdrzalek, which runs in O(n d^(2(k+1)^2)) time. Our techniques can also be adapted to show that the problem of solving parity games with bounded treewidth lies in the complexity class NC^2, which is the class of problems that can be efficiently parallelized. This is in stark contrast to the general parity game problem, which is known to be P-hard, and thus unlikely to be contained in NC

    Benchmarks for Parity Games (extended version)

    Full text link
    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

    Solving parity games: Explicit vs symbolic

    Get PDF
    In this paper we provide a broad investigation of the symbolic approach for solving Parity Games. Specifically, we implement in a fresh tool, called, four symbolic algorithms to solve Parity Games and compare their performances to the corresponding explicit versions for different classes of games. By means of benchmarks, we show that for random games, even for constrained random games, explicit algorithms actually perform better than symbolic algorithms. The situation changes, however, for structured games, where symbolic algorithms seem to have the advantage. This suggests that when evaluating algorithms for parity-game solving, it would be useful to have real benchmarks and not only random benchmarks, as the common practice has been

    New Deterministic Algorithms for Solving Parity Games

    Full text link
    We study parity games in which one of the two players controls only a small number kk of nodes and the other player controls the nkn-k other nodes of the game. Our main result is a fixed-parameter algorithm that solves bipartite parity games in time kO(k)O(n3)k^{O(\sqrt{k})}\cdot O(n^3), and general parity games in time (p+k)O(k)O(pnm)(p+k)^{O(\sqrt{k})} \cdot O(pnm), where pp is the number of distinct priorities and mm is the number of edges. For all games with k=o(n)k = o(n) this improves the previously fastest algorithm by Jurdzi{\'n}ski, Paterson, and Zwick (SICOMP 2008). We also obtain novel kernelization results and an improved deterministic algorithm for graphs with small average degree
    corecore