Strategy construction for parity games with imperfect information

We consider two-player parity games with imperfect information in which strategies rely on observations that provide imperfect information about the history of a play. To solve such games, i.e., to determine the winning regions of players and corresponding winning strategies, one can use the subset construction to build an equivalent perfect-information game. Recently, an algorithm that avoids the inefficient subset construction has been proposed. The algorithm performs a fixed-point computation in a lattice of antichains, thus maintaining a succinct representation of state sets. However, this representation does not allow to recover winning strategies. In this paper, we build on the antichain approach to develop an algorithm for constructing the winning strategies in parity games of imperfect information. One major obstacle in adapting the classical procedure is that the complementation of attractor sets would break the invariant of downward-closedness on which the antichain representation relies. We overcome this difficulty by decomposing problem instances recursively into games with a combination of reachability, safety, and simpler parity conditions. We also report on an experimental implementation of our algorithm; to our knowledge, this is the first implementation of a procedure for solving imperfect-information parity games on graphs.

[1]  Wolfgang Thomas,et al.  Languages, Automata, and Logic , 1997, Handbook of Formal Languages.

[2]  Thomas A. Henzinger,et al.  Antichains: A New Algorithm for Checking Universality of Finite Automata , 2006, CAV.

[3]  Jean-François Raskin,et al.  Antichains for the Automata-Based Approach to Model-Checking , 2009, Log. Methods Comput. Sci..

[4]  E. Allen Emerson,et al.  Tree automata, mu-calculus and determinacy , 1991, [1991] Proceedings 32nd Annual Symposium of Foundations of Computer Science.

[5]  Robert McNaughton,et al.  Infinite Games Played on Finite Graphs , 1993, Ann. Pure Appl. Logic.

[6]  Krishnendu Chatterjee,et al.  Alpaga: A Tool for Solving Parity Games with Imperfect Information , 2009, TACAS.

[7]  Roderick Bloem,et al.  Program Repair as a Game , 2005, CAV.

[8]  Wolfgang Thomas,et al.  On the Synthesis of Strategies in Infinite Games , 1995, STACS.

[9]  John H. Reif,et al.  The Complexity of Two-Player Games of Incomplete Information , 1984, J. Comput. Syst. Sci..

[10]  Jean-François Raskin,et al.  Antichains: Alternative Algorithms for LTL Satisfiability and Model-Checking , 2008, TACAS.

[11]  Wieslaw Zielonka,et al.  Infinite Games on Finitely Coloured Graphs with Applications to Automata on Infinite Trees , 1998, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[12]  Igor Walukiewicz,et al.  Permissive strategies: from parity games to safety games , 2002, RAIRO Theor. Informatics Appl..

[13]  Krishnendu Chatterjee,et al.  Algorithms for Omega-Regular Games with Imperfect Information , 2006, Log. Methods Comput. Sci..

[14]  Thomas A. Henzinger,et al.  Counterexample-Guided Control , 2003, ICALP.

[15]  Tayssir Touili,et al.  Antichain-Based Universality and Inclusion Testing over Nondeterministic Finite Tree Automata , 2008, CIAA.

[16]  Jean-François Raskin,et al.  A Lattice Theory for Solving Games of Imperfect Information , 2006, HSCC.

[17]  Krishnendu Chatterjee,et al.  Assume-Guarantee Synthesis , 2007, TACAS.