The Hardness of Finding Linear Ranking Functions for Lasso Programs

Finding whether a linear-constraint loop has a linear ranking function is an important key to understanding the loop behavior, proving its termination and establishing iteration bounds. If no preconditions are provided, the decision problem is known to be in coNP when variables range over the integers and in PTIME for the rational numbers, or real numbers. Here we show that deciding whether a linear-constraint loop with a precondition, specifically with partially-specified input, has a linear ranking function is EXPSPACE-hard over the integers, and PSPACE-hard over the rationals. The precise complexity of these decision problems is yet unknown. The EXPSPACE lower bound is derived from the reachability problem for Petri nets (equivalently, Vector Addition Systems), and possibly indicates an even stronger lower bound (subject to open problems in VAS theory). The lower bound for the rationals follows from a novel simulation of Boolean programs. Lower bounds are also given for the problem of deciding if a linear ranking-function supported by a particular form of inductive invariant exists. For loops over integers, the problem is PSPACE-hard for convex polyhedral invariants and EXPSPACE-hard for downward-closed sets of natural numbers as invariants.Comment: In Proceedings GandALF 2014, arXiv:1408.5560. I thank the organizers of the Dagstuhl Seminar 14141, "Reachability Problems for Infinite-State Systems", for the opportunity to present an early draft of this wor

A Comment on Budach's Mouse-in-an-Octant Problem

Budach's Mouse-in-an-Octant Problem (attributed to Lothar Budach in a 1980 article by van Emde Boas and Karpinski) concerns the behaviour of a very simple finite-state machine ("the mouse") moving on the integer two-dimensional grid. Its decidability is apparently still open. This note sketches a proof that an extended version of the problem (a super-mouse) is undecidable.Comment: 3 pages, 2 bibliographic reference

On Decidable Growth-Rate Properties of Imperative Programs

In 2008, Ben-Amram, Jones and Kristiansen showed that for a simple "core" programming language - an imperative language with bounded loops, and arithmetics limited to addition and multiplication - it was possible to decide precisely whether a program had certain growth-rate properties, namely polynomial (or linear) bounds on computed values, or on the running time. This work emphasized the role of the core language in mitigating the notorious undecidability of program properties, so that one deals with decidable problems. A natural and intriguing problem was whether more elements can be added to the core language, improving its utility, while keeping the growth-rate properties decidable. In particular, the method presented could not handle a command that resets a variable to zero. This paper shows how to handle resets. The analysis is given in a logical style (proof rules), and its complexity is shown to be PSPACE-complete (in contrast, without resets, the problem was PTIME). The analysis algorithm evolved from the previous solution in an interesting way: focus was shifted from proving a bound to disproving it, and the algorithm works top-down rather than bottom-up

Tight polynomial worst-case bounds for loop programs

In 2008, Ben-Amram, Jones and Kristiansen showed that for a simple programming language - representing non-deterministic imperative programs with bounded loops, and arithmetics limited to addition and multiplication - it is possible to decide precisely whether a program has certain growth-rate properties, in particular whether a computed value, or the program's running time, has a polynomial growth rate. A natural and intriguing problem was to move from answering the decision problem to giving a quantitative result, namely, a tight polynomial upper bound. This paper shows how to obtain asymptotically-tight, multivariate, disjunctive polynomial bounds for this class of programs. This is a complete solution: whenever a polynomial bound exists it will be found. A pleasant surprise is that the algorithm is quite simple; but it relies on some subtle reasoning. An important ingredient in the proof is the forest factorization theorem, a strong structural result on homomorphisms into a finite monoid

Ranking Functions for Size-Change Termination II

Size-Change Termination is an increasingly-popular technique for verifying program termination. These termination proofs are deduced from an abstract representation of the program in the form of "size-change graphs". We present algorithms that, for certain classes of size-change graphs, deduce a global ranking function: an expression that ranks program states, and decreases on every transition. A ranking function serves as a witness for a termination proof, and is therefore interesting for program certification. The particular form of the ranking expressions that represent SCT termination proofs sheds light on the scope of the proof method. The complexity of the expressions is also interesting, both practicaly and theoretically. While deducing ranking functions from size-change graphs has already been shown possible, the constructions in this paper are simpler and more transparent than previously known. They improve the upper bound on the size of the ranking expression from triply exponential down to singly exponential (for certain classes of instances). We claim that this result is, in some sense, optimal. To this end, we introduce a framework for lower bounds on the complexity of ranking expressions and prove exponential lower bounds.Comment: 29 pages

Flowchart Programs, Regular Expressions, and Decidability of Polynomial Growth-Rate

We present a new method for inferring complexity properties for a class of programs in the form of flowcharts annotated with loop information. Specifically, our method can (soundly and completely) decide if computed values are polynomially bounded as a function of the input; and similarly for the running time. Such complexity properties are undecidable for a Turing-complete programming language, and a common work-around in program analysis is to settle for sound but incomplete solutions. In contrast, we consider a class of programs that is Turing-incomplete, but strong enough to include several challenges for this kind of analysis. For a related language that has well-structured syntax, similar to Meyer and Ritchie's LOOP programs, the problem has been previously proved to be decidable. The analysis relied on the compositionality of programs, hence the challenge in obtaining similar results for flowchart programs with arbitrary control-flow graphs. Our answer to the challenge is twofold: first, we propose a class of loop-annotated flowcharts, which is more general than the class of flowcharts that directly represent structured programs; secondly, we present a technique to reuse the ideas from the work on tructured programs and apply them to such flowcharts. The technique is inspired by the classic translation of non-deterministic automata to regular expressions, but we obviate the exponential cost of constructing such an expression, obtaining a polynomial-time analysis. These ideas may well be applicable to other analysis problems.Comment: In Proceedings VPT 2016, arXiv:1607.0183