From Quasi-Dominions to Progress Measures

In this paper we revisit the approaches to the solution of parity games based on progress measures and show how the notion of quasi dominions can be integrated with those approaches. The idea is that, while progress measure based techniques typically focus on one of the two players, little information is gathered on the other player during the solution process. Adding quasi dominions provides additional information on this player that can be leveraged to accelerate convergence to a progress measure. To accommodate quasi dominions, however, a non trivial refinement of the approach is necessary. In particular, we need to introduce a novel notion of measure and a new approach to prove correctness of the resulting solution technique.

[1]  Nicolas Bourbaki,et al.  Sur le théorème de Zorn , 1949 .

[2]  Andrzej Wlodzimierz Mostowski,et al.  Regular expressions for infinite trees and a standard form of automata , 1984, Symposium on Computation Theory.

[3]  E. Allen Emerson,et al.  An Automata Theoretic Decision Procedure for the Propositional Mu-Calculus , 1989, Inf. Comput..

[4]  A. Karzanov,et al.  Cyclic games and an algorithm to find minimax cycle means in directed graphs , 1990 .

[5]  Nils Klarlund,et al.  Rabin measures and their applications to fairness and automata theory , 1991, [1991] Proceedings Sixth Annual IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science.

[6]  Nils Klarlund,et al.  Progress measures for complementation omega -automata with applications to temporal logic , 1991, [1991] Proceedings 32nd Annual Symposium of Foundations of Computer Science.

[7]  Nils Klarlund,et al.  Liminf Progress Measures , 1991, MFPS.

[8]  Nils Klarlund,et al.  Progress measures and stack assertions for fair termination , 1992, PODC '92.

[9]  Anne Condon,et al.  The Complexity of Stochastic Games , 1992, Inf. Comput..

[10]  Nils Klarlund,et al.  Progress measures, immediate determinacy, and a subset construction for tree automata , 1992, [1992] Proceedings of the Seventh Annual IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science.

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

[12]  A. Prasad Sistla,et al.  On Model-Checking for Fragments of µ-Calculus , 1993, CAV.

[13]  Nils Klarlund,et al.  Progress measures, immediate determinacy, and a subset construction for tree automata , 1992, [1992] Proceedings of the Seventh Annual IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science.

[14]  Moshe Y. Vardi Rank Predicates vs. Progress Measures in Concurrent-Program Verification , 1996, Chic. J. Theor. Comput. Sci..

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

[16]  Marcin Jurdziński,et al.  Deciding the Winner in Parity Games is in UP \cap co-Up , 1998, Inf. Process. Lett..

[17]  Ernst Witt Beweisstudien zum Satz von M. Zorn , 1998 .

[18]  Orna Kupferman,et al.  Weak alternating automata and tree automata emptiness , 1998, STOC '98.

[19]  Pierre Wolper,et al.  An automata-theoretic approach to branching-time model checking , 2000, JACM.

[20]  Marcin Jurdzinski,et al.  Small Progress Measures for Solving Parity Games , 2000, STACS.

[21]  Thomas Wilke,et al.  Automata logics, and infinite games: a guide to current research , 2002 .

[22]  Oliver Friedmann,et al.  Solving Parity Games in Practice , 2009, ATVA.

[23]  John Fearnley,et al.  Non-oblivious Strategy Improvement , 2010, LPAR.

[24]  Krishnendu Chatterjee,et al.  Generalized Mean-payoff and Energy Games , 2010, FSTTCS.

[25]  Yao Liu,et al.  An Improved Recursive Algorithm for Parity Games , 2014, 2014 Theoretical Aspects of Software Engineering Conference.

[26]  Tim A. C. Willemse,et al.  Improvement in Small Progress Measures , 2015, GandALF.

[27]  Massimo Benerecetti,et al.  Solving Parity Games via Priority Promotion , 2016, CAV.

[28]  M. Gazda,et al.  Fixpoint logic, games, and relations of consequence , 2016 .

[29]  Massimo Benerecetti,et al.  A Delayed Promotion Policy for Parity Games , 2016, GandALF.

[30]  Massimo Benerecetti,et al.  Improving Priority Promotion for Parity Games , 2016, Haifa Verification Conference.

[31]  Sanjay Jain,et al.  An ordered approach to solving parity games in quasi polynomial time and quasi linear space , 2017, SPIN.

[32]  Marcin Jurdzinski,et al.  Succinct progress measures for solving parity games , 2017, 2017 32nd Annual ACM/IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science (LICS).

[33]  Tom van Dijk,et al.  Oink: an Implementation and Evaluation of Modern Parity Game Solvers , 2018, TACAS.

[34]  Tom van Dijk Attracting Tangles to Solve Parity Games , 2018, CAV.

[35]  Tom van Dijk,et al.  A Parity Game Tale of Two Counters , 2018, GandALF.

[36]  Massimo Benerecetti,et al.  Robust worst cases for parity games algorithms , 2020, Inf. Comput..

[37]  Massimo Benerecetti,et al.  Solving Mean-Payoff Games via Quasi Dominions , 2019, TACAS.

[38]  Maurice Bruynooghe,et al.  Improving Parity Game Solvers with Justifications , 2020, VMCAI.