Strategy improvement for concurrent reachability and turn based stochastic safety games

We consider concurrent games played on graphs. At every round of a game, each player simultaneously and independently selects a move; the moves jointly determine the transition to a successor state. Two basic objectives are the safety objective to stay forever in a given set of states, and its dual, the reachability objective to reach a given set of states. First, we present a simple proof of the fact that in concurrent reachability games, for all ε>0, memoryless ε-optimal strategies exist. A memoryless strategy is independent of the history of plays, and an ε-optimal strategy achieves the objective with probability within ε of the value of the game. In contrast to previous proofs of this fact, our proof is more elementary and more combinatorial. Second, we present a strategy-improvement (a.k.a. policy-iteration) algorithm for concurrent games with reachability objectives. Finally, we present a strategy-improvement algorithm for turn-based stochastic games (where each player selects moves in turns) with safety objectives. Our algorithms yield sequences of player-1 strategies which ensure probabilities of winning that converge monotonically (from below) to the value of the game. © 2012 Elsevier Inc

Termination Criteria for Solving Concurrent Safety and Reachability Games

We consider concurrent games played on graphs. At every round of a game, each player simultaneously and independently selects a move; the moves jointly determine the transition to a successor state. Two basic objectives are the safety objective to stay forever in a given set of states, and its dual, the reachability objective to reach a given set of states. We present in this paper a strategy improvement algorithm for computing the value of a concurrent safety game, that is, the maximal probability with which player~1 can enforce the safety objective. The algorithm yields a sequence of player-1 strategies which ensure probabilities of winning that converge monotonically to the value of the safety game. Our result is significant because the strategy improvement algorithm provides, for the first time, a way to approximate the value of a concurrent safety game from below. Since a value iteration algorithm, or a strategy improvement algorithm for reachability games, can be used to approximate the same value from above, the combination of both algorithms yields a method for computing a converging sequence of upper and lower bounds for the values of concurrent reachability and safety games. Previous methods could approximate the values of these games only from one direction, and as no rates of convergence are known, they did not provide a practical way to solve these games

Strategy Improvement for Concurrent Safety Games

We consider concurrent games played on graphs. At every round of the game, each player simultaneously and independently selects a move; the moves jointly determine the transition to a successor state. Two basic objectives are the safety objective: ``stay forever in a set F of states'', and its dual, the reachability objective, ``reach a set R of states''. We present in this paper a strategy improvement algorithm for computing the value of a concurrent safety game, that is, the maximal probability with which player 1 can enforce the safety objective. The algorithm yields a sequence of player-1 strategies which ensure probabilities of winning that converge monotonically to the value of the safety game. The significance of the result is twofold. First, while strategy improvement algorithms were known for Markov decision processes and turn-based games, as well as for concurrent reachability games, this is the first strategy improvement algorithm for concurrent safety games. Second, and most importantly, the improvement algorithm provides a way to approximate the value of a concurrent safety game from below (the known value-iteration algorithms approximate the value from above). Thus, when used together with value-iteration algorithms, or with strategy improvement algorithms for reachability games, our algorithm leads to the first practical algorithm for computing converging upper and lower bounds for the value of reachability and safety games.Comment: 19 pages, 1 figur

A survey of stochastic ω regular games

We summarize classical and recent results about two-player games played on graphs with ω-regular objectives. These games have applications in the verification and synthesis of reactive systems. Important distinctions are whether a graph game is turn-based or concurrent; deterministic or stochastic; zero-sum or not. We cluster known results and open problems according to these classifications

Pure Nash Equilibria in Concurrent Deterministic Games

We study pure-strategy Nash equilibria in multi-player concurrent deterministic games, for a variety of preference relations. We provide a novel construction, called the suspect game, which transforms a multi-player concurrent game into a two-player turn-based game which turns Nash equilibria into winning strategies (for some objective that depends on the preference relations of the players in the original game). We use that transformation to design algorithms for computing Nash equilibria in finite games, which in most cases have optimal worst-case complexity, for large classes of preference relations. This includes the purely qualitative framework, where each player has a single omega-regular objective that she wants to satisfy, but also the larger class of semi-quantitative objectives, where each player has several omega-regular objectives equipped with a preorder (for instance, a player may want to satisfy all her objectives, or to maximise the number of objectives that she achieves.)Comment: 72 page

Equilibria-based Probabilistic Model Checking for Concurrent Stochastic Games

Probabilistic model checking for stochastic games enables formal verification of systems that comprise competing or collaborating entities operating in a stochastic environment. Despite good progress in the area, existing approaches focus on zero-sum goals and cannot reason about scenarios where entities are endowed with different objectives. In this paper, we propose probabilistic model checking techniques for concurrent stochastic games based on Nash equilibria. We extend the temporal logic rPATL (probabilistic alternating-time temporal logic with rewards) to allow reasoning about players with distinct quantitative goals, which capture either the probability of an event occurring or a reward measure. We present algorithms to synthesise strategies that are subgame perfect social welfare optimal Nash equilibria, i.e., where there is no incentive for any players to unilaterally change their strategy in any state of the game, whilst the combined probabilities or rewards are maximised. We implement our techniques in the PRISM-games tool and apply them to several case studies, including network protocols and robot navigation, showing the benefits compared to existing approaches

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

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

Bounded Rationality in Concurrent Parity Games

We consider 2-player games played on a finite state space for infinite rounds. The games are concurrent: in each round, the two players choose their moves simultaneously; the current state and the moves determine the successor. We consider omega-regular winning conditions given as parity objectives. We consider the qualitative analysis problems: the computation of the almost-sure and limit-sure winning set of states, where player 1 can ensure to win with probability 1 and with probability arbitrarily close to 1, respectively. In general the almost-sure and limit-sure winning strategies require both infinite-memory and infinite-precision. We study the bounded-rationality problem for qualitative analysis of concurrent parity games, where the strategy set player 1 is restricted to bounded-resource strategies. In terms of precision, strategies can be deterministic, uniform, finite-precision or infinite-precision; and in terms of memory, strategies can be memoryless, finite-memory or infinite-memory. We present a precise and complete characterization of the qualitative winning sets for all combinations of classes of strategies. In particular, we show that uniform memoryless strategies are as powerful as finite-precision infinite-memory strategies, and infinite-precision memoryless strategies are as powerful as infinite-precision finite-memory strategies. We show that the winning sets can be computed in O(n^{2d+3}) time, where n is the size of the game and 2d is the number of priorities, and our algorithms are symbolic. The membership problem of whether a state belongs to a winning set can be decided in NP cap coNP. While this complexity is the same as for the simpler class of turn-based games, where in each state only one of the players has a choice of moves, our algorithms, that are obtained by characterization of the winning sets as mu-calculus formulas, are considerably more involved