488 research outputs found
Complexity and Expressivity of Branching- and Alternating-Time Temporal Logics with Finitely Many Variables
We show that Branching-time temporal logics CTL and CTL*, as well as
Alternating-time temporal logics ATL and ATL*, are as semantically expressive
in the language with a single propositional variable as they are in the full
language, i.e., with an unlimited supply of propositional variables. It follows
that satisfiability for CTL, as well as for ATL, with a single variable is
EXPTIME-complete, while satisfiability for CTL*, as well as for ATL*, with a
single variable is 2EXPTIME-complete,--i.e., for these logics, the
satisfiability for formulas with only one variable is as hard as satisfiability
for arbitrary formulas.Comment: Prefinal version of the published pape
On the Complexity of ATL and ATL* Module Checking
Module checking has been introduced in late 1990s to verify open systems,
i.e., systems whose behavior depends on the continuous interaction with the
environment. Classically, module checking has been investigated with respect to
specifications given as CTL and CTL* formulas. Recently, it has been shown that
CTL (resp., CTL*) module checking offers a distinctly different perspective
from the better-known problem of ATL (resp., ATL*) model checking. In
particular, ATL (resp., ATL*) module checking strictly enhances the
expressiveness of both CTL (resp., CTL*) module checking and ATL (resp. ATL*)
model checking. In this paper, we provide asymptotically optimal bounds on the
computational cost of module checking against ATL and ATL*, whose upper bounds
are based on an automata-theoretic approach. We show that module-checking for
ATL is EXPTIME-complete, which is the same complexity of module checking
against CTL. On the other hand, ATL* module checking turns out to be
3EXPTIME-complete, hence exponentially harder than CTL* module checking.Comment: In Proceedings GandALF 2017, arXiv:1709.0176
Reasoning About Strategies: On the Model-Checking Problem
In open systems verification, to formally check for reliability, one needs an
appropriate formalism to model the interaction between agents and express the
correctness of the system no matter how the environment behaves. An important
contribution in this context is given by modal logics for strategic ability, in
the setting of multi-agent games, such as ATL, ATL\star, and the like.
Recently, Chatterjee, Henzinger, and Piterman introduced Strategy Logic, which
we denote here by CHP-SL, with the aim of getting a powerful framework for
reasoning explicitly about strategies. CHP-SL is obtained by using first-order
quantifications over strategies and has been investigated in the very specific
setting of two-agents turned-based games, where a non-elementary model-checking
algorithm has been provided. While CHP-SL is a very expressive logic, we claim
that it does not fully capture the strategic aspects of multi-agent systems. In
this paper, we introduce and study a more general strategy logic, denoted SL,
for reasoning about strategies in multi-agent concurrent games. We prove that
SL includes CHP-SL, while maintaining a decidable model-checking problem. In
particular, the algorithm we propose is computationally not harder than the
best one known for CHP-SL. Moreover, we prove that such a problem for SL is
NonElementarySpace-hard. This negative result has spurred us to investigate
here syntactic fragments of SL, strictly subsuming ATL\star, with the hope of
obtaining an elementary model-checking problem. Among the others, we study the
sublogics SL[NG], SL[BG], and SL[1G]. They encompass formulas in a special
prenex normal form having, respectively, nested temporal goals, Boolean
combinations of goals and, a single goal at a time. About these logics, we
prove that the model-checking problem for SL[1G] is 2ExpTime-complete, thus not
harder than the one for ATL\star
Reasoning about Knowledge and Strategies under Hierarchical Information
Two distinct semantics have been considered for knowledge in the context of
strategic reasoning, depending on whether players know each other's strategy or
not. The problem of distributed synthesis for epistemic temporal specifications
is known to be undecidable for the latter semantics, already on systems with
hierarchical information. However, for the other, uninformed semantics, the
problem is decidable on such systems. In this work we generalise this result by
introducing an epistemic extension of Strategy Logic with imperfect
information. The semantics of knowledge operators is uninformed, and captures
agents that can change observation power when they change strategies. We solve
the model-checking problem on a class of "hierarchical instances", which
provides a solution to a vast class of strategic problems with epistemic
temporal specifications on hierarchical systems, such as distributed synthesis
or rational synthesis
Model-checking Quantitative Alternating-time Temporal Logic on One-counter Game Models
We consider quantitative extensions of the alternating-time temporal logics
ATL/ATLs called quantitative alternating-time temporal logics (QATL/QATLs) in
which the value of a counter can be compared to constants using equality,
inequality and modulo constraints. We interpret these logics in one-counter
game models which are infinite duration games played on finite control graphs
where each transition can increase or decrease the value of an unbounded
counter. That is, the state-space of these games are, generally, infinite. We
consider the model-checking problem of the logics QATL and QATLs on one-counter
game models with VASS semantics for which we develop algorithms and provide
matching lower bounds. Our algorithms are based on reductions of the
model-checking problems to model-checking games. This approach makes it quite
simple for us to deal with extensions of the logical languages as well as the
infinite state spaces. The framework generalizes on one hand qualitative
problems such as ATL/ATLs model-checking of finite-state systems,
model-checking of the branching-time temporal logics CTL and CTLs on
one-counter processes and the realizability problem of LTL specifications. On
the other hand the model-checking problem for QATL/QATLs generalizes
quantitative problems such as the fixed-initial credit problem for energy games
(in the case of QATL) and energy parity games (in the case of QATLs). Our
results are positive as we show that the generalizations are not too costly
with respect to complexity. As a byproduct we obtain new results on the
complexity of model-checking CTLs in one-counter processes and show that
deciding the winner in one-counter games with LTL objectives is
2ExpSpace-complete.Comment: 22 pages, 12 figure
Logics of knowledge and action: critical analysis and challenges
International audienceWe overview the most prominent logics of knowledge and action that were proposed and studied in the multiagent systems literature. We classify them according to these two dimensions, knowledge and action, and moreover introduce a distinction between individual knowledge and group knowledge, and between a nonstrategic an a strategic interpretation of action operators. For each of the logics in our classification we highlight problematic properties. They indicate weaknesses in the design of these logics and call into question their suitability to represent knowledge and reason about it. This leads to a list of research challenges
Completeness of Flat Coalgebraic Fixpoint Logics
Modal fixpoint logics traditionally play a central role in computer science,
in particular in artificial intelligence and concurrency. The mu-calculus and
its relatives are among the most expressive logics of this type. However,
popular fixpoint logics tend to trade expressivity for simplicity and
readability, and in fact often live within the single variable fragment of the
mu-calculus. The family of such flat fixpoint logics includes, e.g., LTL, CTL,
and the logic of common knowledge. Extending this notion to the generic
semantic framework of coalgebraic logic enables covering a wide range of logics
beyond the standard mu-calculus including, e.g., flat fragments of the graded
mu-calculus and the alternating-time mu-calculus (such as alternating-time
temporal logic ATL), as well as probabilistic and monotone fixpoint logics. We
give a generic proof of completeness of the Kozen-Park axiomatization for such
flat coalgebraic fixpoint logics.Comment: Short version appeared in Proc. 21st International Conference on
Concurrency Theory, CONCUR 2010, Vol. 6269 of Lecture Notes in Computer
Science, Springer, 2010, pp. 524-53
- …