Generating and Solving Symbolic Parity Games

We present a new tool for verification of modal mu-calculus formulae for process specifications, based on symbolic parity games. It enhances an existing method, that first encodes the problem to a Parameterised Boolean Equation System (PBES) and then instantiates the PBES to a parity game. We improved the translation from specification to PBES to preserve the structure of the specification in the PBES, we extended LTSmin to instantiate PBESs to symbolic parity games, and implemented the recursive parity game solving algorithm by Zielonka for symbolic parity games. We use Multi-valued Decision Diagrams (MDDs) to represent sets and relations, thus enabling the tools to deal with very large systems. The transition relation is partitioned based on the structure of the specification, which allows for efficient manipulation of the MDDs. We performed two case studies on modular specifications, that demonstrate that the new method has better time and memory performance than existing PBES based tools and can be faster (but slightly less memory efficient) than the symbolic model checker NuSMV.Comment: In Proceedings GRAPHITE 2014, arXiv:1407.767

A Comparison of BDD-Based Parity Game Solvers

Parity games are two player games with omega-winning conditions, played on finite graphs. Such games play an important role in verification, satisfiability and synthesis. It is therefore important to identify algorithms that can efficiently deal with large games that arise from such applications. In this paper, we describe our experiments with BDD-based implementations of four parity game solving algorithms, viz. Zielonka's recursive algorithm, the more recent Priority Promotion algorithm, the Fixpoint-Iteration algorithm and the automata based APT algorithm. We compare their performance on several types of random games and on a number of cases taken from the Keiren benchmark set.Comment: In Proceedings GandALF 2018, arXiv:1809.0241

Efficient Instantiation of Parameterised Boolean Equation Systems to Parity Games

Parameterised Boolean Equation Systems (PBESs) are sequences of Boolean fixed point equations with data variables, used for, e.g., verification of modal μ-calculus formulae for process algebraic specifications with data. Solving a PBES is usually done by instantiation to a Parity Game and then solving the game. Practical game solvers exist, but the instantiation step is the bottleneck. We enhance the instantiation in two steps. First, we transform the PBES to a Parameterised Parity Game (PPG), a PBES with each equation either conjunctive or disjunctive. Then we use LTSmin, that offers transition caching, efficient storage of states and both distributed and symbolic state space generation, for generating the game graph. To that end we define a language module for LTSmin, consisting of an encoding of variables with parameters into state vectors, a grouped transition relation and a dependency matrix to indicate the dependencies between parts of the state vector and transition groups. Benchmarks on some large case studies, show that the method speeds up the instantiation significantly and decreases memory usage drastically

Solving parity games: Explicit vs symbolic

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

Reasoning about LTL Synthesis over finite and infinite games

In the last few years, research formal methods for the analysis and the verification of properties of systems has increased greatly. A meaningful contribution in this area has been given by algorithmic methods developed in the context of synthesis. The basic idea is simple and appealing: instead of developing a system and verifying that it satisfies its specification, we look for an automated procedure that, given the specification returns a system that is correct by construction. Synthesis of reactive systems is one of the most popular variants of this problem, in which we want to synthesize a system characterized by an ongoing interaction with the environment. In this setting, large effort has been devoted to analyze specifications given as formulas of linear temporal logic, i.e., LTL synthesis. Traditional approaches to LTL synthesis rely on transforming the LTL specification into parity deterministic automata, and then to parity games, for which a so-called winning region is computed. Computing such an automaton is, in the worst-case, double-exponential in the size of the LTL formula, and this becomes a computational bottleneck in using the synthesis process in practice. The first part of this thesis is devoted to improve the solution of parity games as they are used in solving LTL synthesis, trying to give efficient techniques, in terms of running time and space consumption, for solving parity games. We start with the study and the implementation of an automata-theoretic technique to solve parity games. More precisely, we consider an algorithm introduced by Kupferman and Vardi that solves a parity game by solving the emptiness problem of a corresponding alternating parity automaton. Our empirical evaluation demonstrates that this algorithm outperforms other algorithms when the game has a small number of priorities relative to the size of the game. In many concrete applications, we do indeed end up with parity games where the number of priorities is relatively small. This makes the new algorithm quite useful in practice. We then provide a broad investigation of the symbolic approach for solving parity games. Specifically, we implement in a fresh tool, called SPGSolver, 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. LTL synthesis has been largely investigated also in artificial intelligence, and specifically in automated planning. Indeed, LTL synthesis corresponds to fully observable nondeterministic planning in which the domain is given compactly and the goal is an LTL formula, that in turn is related to two-player games with LTL goals. Finding a strategy for these games means to synthesize a plan for the planning problem. The last part of this thesis is then dedicated to investigate LTL synthesis under this different view. In particular, we study a generalized form of planning under partial observability, in which we have multiple, possibly infinitely many, planning domains with the same actions and observations, and goals expressed over observations, which are possibly temporally extended. By building on work on two-player games with imperfect information in the Formal Methods literature, we devise a general technique, generalizing the belief-state construction, to remove partial observability. This reduces the planning problem to a game of perfect information with a tight correspondence between plans and strategies. Then we instantiate the technique and solve some generalized planning problems

Solving Odd-Fair Parity Games

This paper discusses the problem of efficiently solving parity games where player Odd has to obey an additional 'strong transition fairness constraint' on its vertices -- given that a player Odd vertex $v$ is visited infinitely often, a particular subset of the outgoing edges (called live edges) of $v$ has to be taken infinitely often. Such games, which we call 'Odd-fair parity games', naturally arise from abstractions of cyber-physical systems for planning and control. In this paper, we present a new Zielonka-type algorithm for solving Odd-fair parity games. This algorithm not only shares 'the same worst-case time complexity' as Zielonka's algorithm for (normal) parity games but also preserves the algorithmic advantage Zielonka's algorithm possesses over other parity solvers with exponential time complexity. We additionally introduce a formalization of Odd player winning strategies in such games, which were unexplored previous to this work. This formalization serves dual purposes: firstly, it enables us to prove our Zielonka-type algorithm; secondly, it stands as a noteworthy contribution in its own right, augmenting our understanding of additional fairness assumptions in two-player games.Comment: To be published in FSTTCS 202

Symbolic Parity Game Solvers that Yield Winning Strategies

Parity games play an important role for LTL synthesis as evidenced by recent breakthroughs on LTL synthesis, which rely in part on parity game solving. Yet state space explosion remains a major issue if we want to scale to larger systems or specifications. In order to combat this problem, we need to investigate symbolic methods such as BDDs, which have been successful in the past to tackle exponentially large systems. It is therefore essential to have symbolic parity game solving algorithms, operating using BDDs, that are fast and that can produce the winning strategies used to synthesize the controller in LTL synthesis. Current symbolic parity game solving algorithms do not yield winning strategies. We now propose two symbolic algorithms that yield winning strategies, based on two recently proposed fixpoint algorithms. We implement the algorithms and empirically evaluate them using benchmarks obtained from SYNTCOMP 2020. Our conclusion is that the algorithms are competitive with or faster than an earlier symbolic implementation of Zielonka's recursive algorithm, while also providing the winning strategies.Comment: In Proceedings GandALF 2020, arXiv:2009.0936

A Universal Attractor Decomposition Algorithm for Parity Games

An attractor decomposition meta-algorithm for solving parity games is given that generalizes the classic McNaughton-Zielonka algorithm and its recent quasi-polynomial variants due to Parys (2019), and to Lehtinen, Schewe, and Wojtczak (2019). The central concepts studied and exploited are attractor decompositions of dominia in parity games and the ordered trees that describe the inductive structure of attractor decompositions. The main technical results include the embeddable decomposition theorem and the dominion separation theorem that together help establish a precise structural condition for the correctness of the universal algorithm: it suffices that the two ordered trees given to the algorithm as inputs embed the trees of some attractor decompositions of the largest dominia for each of the two players, respectively. The universal algorithm yields McNaughton-Zielonka, Parys's, and Lehtinen-Schewe-Wojtczak algorithms as special cases when suitable universal trees are given to it as inputs. The main technical results provide a unified proof of correctness and deep structural insights into those algorithms. A symbolic implementation of the universal algorithm is also given that improves the symbolic space complexity of solving parity games in quasi-polynomial time from $O(d \lg n)$---achieved by Chatterjee, Dvo\v{r}\'{a}k, Henzinger, and Svozil (2018)---down to $O(\lg d)$, where $n$ is the number of vertices and $d$ is the number of distinct priorities in a parity game. This not only exponentially improves the dependence on $d$, but it also entirely removes the dependence on $n$