IST Austria Technical Report

We consider two-player partial-observation stochastic games where player 1 has partial observation and player 2 has perfect observation. The winning condition we study are omega-regular conditions specified as parity objectives. The qualitative analysis problem given a partial-observation stochastic game and a parity objective asks whether there is a strategy to ensure that the objective is satisfied with probability 1 (resp. positive probability). While the qualitative analysis problems are known to be undecidable even for very special cases of parity objectives, they were shown to be decidable in 2EXPTIME under finite-memory strategies. We improve the complexity and show that the qualitative analysis problems for partial-observation stochastic parity games under finite-memory strategies are EXPTIME-complete; and also establish optimal (exponential) memory bounds for finite-memory strategies required for qualitative analysis

Qualitative Analysis of Concurrent Mean-payoff Games

We consider concurrent games played by two-players on a finite-state graph, where in every round the players simultaneously choose a move, and the current state along with the joint moves determine the successor state. We study a fundamental objective, namely, mean-payoff objective, where a reward is associated to each transition, and the goal of player 1 is to maximize the long-run average of the rewards, and the objective of player 2 is strictly the opposite. The path constraint for player 1 could be qualitative, i.e., the mean-payoff is the maximal reward, or arbitrarily close to it; or quantitative, i.e., a given threshold between the minimal and maximal reward. We consider the computation of the almost-sure (resp. positive) winning sets, where player 1 can ensure that the path constraint is satisfied with probability 1 (resp. positive probability). Our main results for qualitative path constraints are as follows: (1) we establish qualitative determinacy results that show that for every state either player 1 has a strategy to ensure almost-sure (resp. positive) winning against all player-2 strategies, or player 2 has a spoiling strategy to falsify almost-sure (resp. positive) winning against all player-1 strategies; (2) we present optimal strategy complexity results that precisely characterize the classes of strategies required for almost-sure and positive winning for both players; and (3) we present quadratic time algorithms to compute the almost-sure and the positive winning sets, matching the best known bound of algorithms for much simpler problems (such as reachability objectives). For quantitative constraints we show that a polynomial time solution for the almost-sure or the positive winning set would imply a solution to a long-standing open problem (the value problem for turn-based deterministic mean-payoff games) that is not known to be solvable in polynomial time

IST Austria Thesis

This dissertation concerns the automatic verification of probabilistic systems and programs with arrays by statistical and logical methods. Although statistical and logical methods are different in nature, we show that they can be successfully combined for system analysis. In the first part of the dissertation we present a new statistical algorithm for the verification of probabilistic systems with respect to unbounded properties, including linear temporal logic. Our algorithm often performs faster than the previous approaches, and at the same time requires less information about the system. In addition, our method can be generalized to unbounded quantitative properties such as mean-payoff bounds. In the second part, we introduce two techniques for comparing probabilistic systems. Probabilistic systems are typically compared using the notion of equivalence, which requires the systems to have the equal probability of all behaviors. However, this notion is often too strict, since probabilities are typically only empirically estimated, and any imprecision may break the relation between processes. On the one hand, we propose to replace the Boolean notion of equivalence by a quantitative distance of similarity. For this purpose, we introduce a statistical framework for estimating distances between Markov chains based on their simulation runs, and we investigate which distances can be approximated in our framework. On the other hand, we propose to compare systems with respect to a new qualitative logic, which expresses that behaviors occur with probability one or a positive probability. This qualitative analysis is robust with respect to modeling errors and applicable to many domains. In the last part, we present a new quantifier-free logic for integer arrays, which allows us to express counting. Counting properties are prevalent in array-manipulating programs, however they cannot be expressed in the quantified fragments of the theory of arrays. We present a decision procedure for our logic, and provide several complexity results