Showing 1–17 of 17 results for author: Boker, U

Synchronized CTL over One-Counter Automata

Authors: Shaull Almagor, Daniel Assa, Udi Boker

Abstract: We consider the model-checking problem of Synchronized Computation-Tree Logic (CTL+Sync) over One-Counter Automata (OCAs). CTL+Sync augments CTL with temporal operators that require several paths to satisfy properties in a synchronous manner, e.g., the property "all paths should eventually see $p$ at the same time". The model-checking problem for CTL+Sync over finite-state Kripke structures was sh… ▽ More We consider the model-checking problem of Synchronized Computation-Tree Logic (CTL+Sync) over One-Counter Automata (OCAs). CTL+Sync augments CTL with temporal operators that require several paths to satisfy properties in a synchronous manner, e.g., the property "all paths should eventually see $p$ at the same time". The model-checking problem for CTL+Sync over finite-state Kripke structures was shown to be in $\mathsf{P}^{\mathsf{NP}^{\mathsf{NP}}}$. OCAs are labelled transition systems equipped with a non-negative counter that can be zero-tested. Thus, they induce infinite-state systems whose computation trees are not regular. The model-checking problem for CTL over OCAs was shown to be $\mathsf{PSPACE}$-complete. We show that the model-checking problem for CTL+Sync over OCAs is decidable. However, the upper bound we give is non-elementary. We therefore proceed to study the problem for a central fragment of CTL+Sync, extending CTL with operators that require all paths to satisfy properties in a synchronous manner, and show that it is in $\mathsf{EXP}^\mathsf{NEXP}$ (and in particular in $\mathsf{EXPSPACE}$), by exhibiting a certain "segmented periodicity" in the computation trees of OCAs. △ Less

Submitted 21 December, 2023; v1 submitted 7 August, 2023; originally announced August 2023.

Discounted-Sum Automata with Multiple Discount Factors

Authors: Udi Boker, Guy Hefetz

Abstract: Discounting the influence of future events is a key paradigm in economics and it is widely used in computer-science models, such as games, Markov decision processes (MDPs), reinforcement learning, and automata. While a single game or MDP may allow for several different discount factors, discounted-sum automata (NDAs) were only studied with respect to a single discount factor. For every integer… ▽ More Discounting the influence of future events is a key paradigm in economics and it is widely used in computer-science models, such as games, Markov decision processes (MDPs), reinforcement learning, and automata. While a single game or MDP may allow for several different discount factors, discounted-sum automata (NDAs) were only studied with respect to a single discount factor. For every integer $λ\in\mathbb{N}\setminus\{0,1\}$, as opposed to every $λ\in \mathbb{Q}\setminus\mathbb{N}$, the class of NDAs with discount factor $λ$ ($λ$-NDAs) has good computational properties: it is closed under determinization and under the algebraic operations min, max, addition, and subtraction, and there are algorithms for its basic decision problems, such as automata equivalence and containment. We define and analyze discounted-sum automata in which each transition can have a different integral discount factor (integral NMDAs). We show that integral NMDAs with an arbitrary choice of discount factors are not closed under determinization and under algebraic operations and that their containment problem is undecidable. We then define and analyze a restricted class of integral NMDAs, which we call tidy NMDAs, in which the choice of discount factors depends on the prefix of the word read so far. Some of their special cases are NMDAs that correlate discount factors to actions (alphabet letters) or to the elapsed time. We show that for every function $θ$ that defines the choice of discount factors, the class of $θ$-NMDAs enjoys all of the above good properties of integral NDAs, as well as the same complexity of the required decision problems. Tidy NMDAs are also as expressive as deterministic integral NMDAs with an arbitrary choice of discount factors. All of our results hold for both automata on finite words and automata on infinite words. △ Less

Submitted 17 July, 2023; originally announced July 2023.

Comments: arXiv admin note: text overlap with arXiv:2301.04086

Safety and Liveness of Quantitative Properties and Automata

Authors: Udi Boker, Thomas A. Henzinger, Nicolas Mazzocchi, N. Ege Saraç

Abstract: Safety and liveness stand as fundamental concepts in formal languages, playing a key role in verification. The safety-liveness classification of boolean properties characterizes whether a given property can be falsified by observing a finite prefix of an infinite computation trace (always for safety, never for liveness). In the quantitative setting, properties are arbitrary functions from infinite… ▽ More Safety and liveness stand as fundamental concepts in formal languages, playing a key role in verification. The safety-liveness classification of boolean properties characterizes whether a given property can be falsified by observing a finite prefix of an infinite computation trace (always for safety, never for liveness). In the quantitative setting, properties are arbitrary functions from infinite words to partially-ordered domains. Extending this paradigm to the quantitative domain, where properties are arbitrary functions map** infinite words to partially-ordered domains, we introduce and study the notions of quantitative safety and liveness. First, we formally define quantitative safety and liveness, and prove that our definitions induce conservative quantitative generalizations of both the safety-progress hierarchy and the safety-liveness decomposition of boolean properties. Consequently, like their boolean counterparts, quantitative properties can be min-decomposed into safety and liveness parts, or alternatively, max-decomposed into co-safety and co-liveness parts. Second, we instantiate our framework with the specific classes of quantitative properties expressed by automata. These quantitative automata contain finitely many states and rational-valued transition weights, and their common value functions Inf, Sup, LimInf, LimSup, LimInfAvg, LimSupAvg, and DSum map infinite words into the totally-ordered domain of real numbers. In this automata-theoretic setting, we establish a connection between quantitative safety and topological continuity and provide alternative characterizations of quantitative safety and liveness in terms of their boolean analogs. For all common value functions, we provide a procedure for deciding whether a given automaton is safe or live, we show how to construct its safety closure, and we present a min-decomposition into safe and live automata. △ Less

Submitted 28 February, 2024; v1 submitted 12 July, 2023; originally announced July 2023.

Comments: arXiv admin note: text overlap with arXiv:2301.11175

On the Comparison of Discounted-Sum Automata with Multiple Discount Factors

Authors: Udi Boker, Guy Hefetz

Abstract: We look into the problems of comparing nondeterministic discounted-sum automata on finite and infinite words. That is, the problems of checking for automata $A$ and $B$ whether or not it holds that for all words $w$, $A(w)=B(w), A(w) \leq B(w)$, or $A(w)<B(w)$. These problems are known to be decidable when both automata have the same single integral discount factor, while decidability is open in… ▽ More We look into the problems of comparing nondeterministic discounted-sum automata on finite and infinite words. That is, the problems of checking for automata $A$ and $B$ whether or not it holds that for all words $w$, $A(w)=B(w), A(w) \leq B(w)$, or $A(w)<B(w)$. These problems are known to be decidable when both automata have the same single integral discount factor, while decidability is open in all other settings: when the single discount factor is a non-integral rational; when each automaton can have multiple discount factors; and even when each has a single integral discount factor, but the two are different. We show that it is undecidable to compare discounted-sum automata with multiple discount factors, even if all are integrals, while it is decidable to compare them if each has a single, possibly different, integral discount factor. To this end, we also provide algorithms to check for given nondeterministic automaton $N$ and deterministic automaton $D$, each with a single, possibly different, rational discount factor, whether or not $N(w) = D(w)$, $N(w) \geq D(w)$, or $N(w) > D(w)$ for all words $w$. △ Less

Submitted 8 June, 2023; v1 submitted 10 January, 2023; originally announced January 2023.

Comments: This is the full version of a chapter with the same title that appears in the FoSSaCS 2023 conference proceedings

Journal ref: proceedings of FoSSaCS. pp. 371-391 (2023)

On the Translation of Automata to Linear Temporal Logic

Authors: Udi Boker, Karoliina Lehtinen, Salomon Sickert

Abstract: While the complexity of translating future linear temporal logic (LTL) into automata on infinite words is well-understood, the size increase involved in turning automata back to LTL is not. In particular, there is no known elementary bound on the complexity of translating deterministic $ω$-regular automata to LTL. Our first contribution consists of tight bounds for LTL over a unary alphabet: alter… ▽ More While the complexity of translating future linear temporal logic (LTL) into automata on infinite words is well-understood, the size increase involved in turning automata back to LTL is not. In particular, there is no known elementary bound on the complexity of translating deterministic $ω$-regular automata to LTL. Our first contribution consists of tight bounds for LTL over a unary alphabet: alternating, nondeterministic and deterministic automata can be exactly exponentially, quadratically and linearly more succinct, respectively, than any equivalent LTL formula. Our main contribution consists of a translation of general counter-free deterministic $ω$-regular automata into LTL formulas of double exponential temporal-nesting depth and triple exponential length, using an intermediate Krohn-Rhodes cascade decomposition of the automaton. To our knowledge, this is the first elementary bound on this translation. Furthermore, our translation preserves the acceptance condition of the automaton in the sense that it turns a loo**, weak, Büchi, coBüchi or Muller automaton into a formula that belongs to the matching class of the syntactic future hierarchy. In particular, it can be used to translate an LTL formula recognising a safety language to a formula belonging to the safety fragment of LTL (over both finite and infinite words). △ Less

Submitted 8 May, 2022; v1 submitted 25 January, 2022; originally announced January 2022.

Comments: Full version with appendix of a chapter with the same title that appears in the FoSSaCS 2022 conference proceedings

Token Games and History-Deterministic Quantitative-Automata

Authors: Udi Boker, Karoliina Lehtinen

Abstract: A nondeterministic automaton is history-deterministic if its nondeterminism can be resolved by only considering the prefix of the word read so far. Due to their good compositional properties, history-deterministic automata are useful in solving games and synthesis problems. Deciding whether a given nondeterministic automaton is history-deterministic (the HDness problem) is generally a difficult ta… ▽ More A nondeterministic automaton is history-deterministic if its nondeterminism can be resolved by only considering the prefix of the word read so far. Due to their good compositional properties, history-deterministic automata are useful in solving games and synthesis problems. Deciding whether a given nondeterministic automaton is history-deterministic (the HDness problem) is generally a difficult task, which can involve an exponential procedure, or even be undecidable, as is the case for example with pushdown automata. Token games provide a PTime solution to the HDness problem of Büchi and coBüchi automata, and it is conjectured that 2-token games characterise HDness for all $ω$-regular automata. We extend token games to the quantitative setting and analyse their potential to help deciding HDness of quantitative automata. In particular, we show that 1-token games characterise HDness for all quantitative (and Boolean) automata on finite words, as well as discounted-sum (DSum), Inf and Reachability automata on infinite words, and that 2-token games characterise HDness of LimInf and LimSup automata, as well as Sup automata on infinite words. Using these characterisations, we provide solutions to the HDness problem of Safety, Reachability, Inf and Sup automata on finite and infinite words in PTime, of DSum automata on finite and infinite words in NP$\cap$co-NP, of LimSup automata in quasipolynomial time, and of LimInf automata in exponential time, where the latter two are only polynomial for automata with a logarithmic number of weights. △ Less

Submitted 2 November, 2023; v1 submitted 27 October, 2021; originally announced October 2021.

Journal ref: Logical Methods in Computer Science, Volume 19, Issue 4 (November 3, 2023) lmcs:9922

History Determinism vs. Good for Gameness in Quantitative Automata

Authors: Udi Boker, Karoliina Lehtinen

Abstract: Automata models between determinism and nondeterminism/alternations can retain some of the algorithmic properties of deterministic automata while enjoying some of the expressiveness and succinctness of nondeterminism. We study three closely related such models -- history determinism, good for gameness and determinisability by pruning -- on quantitative automata. While in the Boolean setting, histo… ▽ More Automata models between determinism and nondeterminism/alternations can retain some of the algorithmic properties of deterministic automata while enjoying some of the expressiveness and succinctness of nondeterminism. We study three closely related such models -- history determinism, good for gameness and determinisability by pruning -- on quantitative automata. While in the Boolean setting, history determinism and good for gameness coincide, we show that this is no longer the case in the quantitative setting: good for gameness is broader than history determinism, and coincides with a relaxed version of it, defined with respect to thresholds. We further identify criteria in which history determinism, which is generally broader than determinisability by pruning, coincides with it, which we then apply to typical quantitative automata types. As a key application of good for games and history deterministic automata is synthesis, we clarify the relationship between the two notions and various quantitative synthesis problems. We show that good-for-games automata are central for "global" (classical) synthesis, while "local" (good-enough) synthesis reduces to deciding whether a nondeterministic automaton is history deterministic. △ Less

Submitted 27 October, 2021; originally announced October 2021.

Comments: Accepted for publication at FSTTCS 2021

On the Succinctness of Alternating Parity Good-for-Games Automata

Authors: Udi Boker, Denis Kuperberg, Karoliina Lehtinen, Michał Skrzypczak

Abstract: We study alternating parity good-for-games (GFG) automata, i.e., alternating parity automata where both conjunctive and disjunctive choices can be resolved in an online manner, without knowledge of the suffix of the input word still to be read. We show that they can be exponentially more succinct than both their nondeterministic and universal counterparts. Furthermore, we present a single expone… ▽ More We study alternating parity good-for-games (GFG) automata, i.e., alternating parity automata where both conjunctive and disjunctive choices can be resolved in an online manner, without knowledge of the suffix of the input word still to be read. We show that they can be exponentially more succinct than both their nondeterministic and universal counterparts. Furthermore, we present a single exponential determinisation procedure and an Exptime upper bound to the problem of recognising whether an alternating automaton is GFG. We also study the complexity of deciding "half-GFGness", a property specific to alternating automata that only requires nondeterministic choices to be resolved in an online manner. We show that this problem is PSpace-hard already for alternating automata on finite words. △ Less

Submitted 29 September, 2020; originally announced September 2020.

Comments: Full version of an article of the same name in the proceedings of 40th IARCS Annual Conference on Foundations of Software Technology and Theoretical Computer Science (FSTTCS 2020). arXiv admin note: substantial text overlap with arXiv:2002.07278

ACM Class: F.4.3

Parametrized Universality Problems for One-Counter Nets

Authors: Shaull Almagor, Udi Boker, Piotr Hofman, Patrick Totzke

Abstract: We study the language universality problem for One-Counter Nets, also known as 1-dimensional Vector Addition Systems with States (1-VASS), parameterized either with an initial counter value, or with an upper bound on the allowed counter value during runs. The language accepted by an OCN (defined by reaching a final control state) is monotone in both parameters. This yields two natural questions: 1… ▽ More We study the language universality problem for One-Counter Nets, also known as 1-dimensional Vector Addition Systems with States (1-VASS), parameterized either with an initial counter value, or with an upper bound on the allowed counter value during runs. The language accepted by an OCN (defined by reaching a final control state) is monotone in both parameters. This yields two natural questions: 1) Does there exist an initial counter value that makes the language universal? 2) Does there exist a sufficiently high ceiling so that the bounded language is universal? Although the ordinary universality problem is decidable (and Ackermann-complete) and these parameterized problems seem to reduce to checking basic structural properties of the underlying automaton, we show that in fact both problems are undecidable. We also look into the complexities of the problems for several decidable subclasses, namely for unambiguous, and deterministic systems, and for those over a single-letter alphabet. △ Less

Submitted 4 July, 2020; v1 submitted 7 May, 2020; originally announced May 2020.

On Succinctness and Recognisability of Alternating Good-for-Games Automata

Authors: Udi Boker, Denis Kuperberg, Karoliina Lehtinen, Michał Skrzypczak

Abstract: We study alternating good-for-games (GFG) automata, i.e., alternating automata where both conjunctive and disjunctive choices can be resolved in an online manner, without knowledge of the suffix of the input word still to be read. We show that they can be exponentially more succinct than both their nondeterministic and universal counterparts. Furthermore, we lift many results from nondeterministic… ▽ More We study alternating good-for-games (GFG) automata, i.e., alternating automata where both conjunctive and disjunctive choices can be resolved in an online manner, without knowledge of the suffix of the input word still to be read. We show that they can be exponentially more succinct than both their nondeterministic and universal counterparts. Furthermore, we lift many results from nondeterministic parity GFG automata to alternating ones: a single exponential determinisation procedure, an Exptime upper bound to the GFGness problem, a PTime algorithm for the GFGness problem of weak automata, and a reduction from a positive solution to the $G_2$ conjecture to a PTime algorithm for the GFGness problem of parity automata with a fixed index. The $G_2$ conjecture states that a nondeterministic parity automaton A is GFG if and only if a token game, known as the $G_2$ game, played on A is won by the first player. So far, it had only been proved for Büchi automata; we provide further evidence for it by proving it for coBüchi automata. We also study the complexity of deciding "half-GFGness", a property specific to alternating automata that only requires nondeterministic choices to be resolved in an online manner. We show that this problem is strictly more difficult than GFGness check, already for alternating automata on finite words. △ Less

Submitted 17 February, 2020; originally announced February 2020.

ACM Class: F.4.3

Good for Games Automata: From Nondeterminism to Alternation

Authors: Udi Boker, Karoliina Lehtinen

Abstract: A word automaton recognizing a language $L$ is good for games (GFG) if its composition with any game with winning condition $L$ preserves the game's winner. While all deterministic automata are GFG, some nondeterministic automata are not. There are various other properties that are used in the literature for defining that a nondeterministic automaton is GFG, including "history-deterministic", "com… ▽ More A word automaton recognizing a language $L$ is good for games (GFG) if its composition with any game with winning condition $L$ preserves the game's winner. While all deterministic automata are GFG, some nondeterministic automata are not. There are various other properties that are used in the literature for defining that a nondeterministic automaton is GFG, including "history-deterministic", "compliant with some letter game", "good for trees", and "good for composition with other automata". The equivalence of these properties has not been formally shown. We generalize all of these definitions to alternating automata and show their equivalence. We further show that alternating GFG automata are as expressive as deterministic automata with the same acceptance conditions and indices. We then show that alternating GFG automata over finite words, and weak automata over infinite words, are not more succinct than deterministic automata, and that determinizing Büchi and co-Büchi alternating GFG automata involves a $2^{Θ(n)}$ state blow-up. We leave open the question of whether alternating GFG automata of stronger acceptance conditions allow for doubly-exponential succinctness compared to deterministic automata. △ Less

Submitted 28 June, 2019; v1 submitted 27 June, 2019; originally announced June 2019.

Comments: Full version of a paper of the same name accepted fr publication at the 30th International Conference on Concurrency Theory

Register Games

Authors: Karoliina Lehtinen, Udi Boker

Abstract: The complexity of parity games is a long standing open problem that saw a major breakthrough in 2017 when two quasi-polynomial algorithms were published. This article presents a third, independent approach to solving parity games in quasi-polynomial time, based on the notion of register game, a parameterised variant of a parity game. The analysis of register games leads to a quasi-polynomial algor… ▽ More The complexity of parity games is a long standing open problem that saw a major breakthrough in 2017 when two quasi-polynomial algorithms were published. This article presents a third, independent approach to solving parity games in quasi-polynomial time, based on the notion of register game, a parameterised variant of a parity game. The analysis of register games leads to a quasi-polynomial algorithm for parity games, a polynomial algorithm for restricted classes of parity games and a novel measure of complexity, the register index, which aims to capture the combined complexity of the priority assignement and the underlying game graph. We further present a translation of alternating parity word automata into alternating weak automata with only a quasi-polynomial increase in size, based on register games; this improves on the previous exponential translation. We also use register games to investigate the parity index hierarchy: while for words the index hierarchy of alternating parity automata collapses to the weak level, and for trees it is strict, for structures between trees and words, it collapses logarithmically, in the sense that any parity tree automaton of size n is equivalent, on these particular classes of structures, to an automaton with a number of priorities logarithmic in n. △ Less

Submitted 18 May, 2020; v1 submitted 27 February, 2019; originally announced February 2019.

MSC Class: 68Q45

Journal ref: Logical Methods in Computer Science, Volume 16, Issue 2 (May 19, 2020) lmcs:5217

How Deterministic are Good-For-Games Automata?

Authors: Udi Boker, Orna Kupferman, Michał Skrzypczak

Abstract: In GFG automata, it is possible to resolve nondeterminism in a way that only depends on the past and still accepts all the words in the language. The motivation for GFG automata comes from their adequacy for games and synthesis, wherein general nondeterminism is inappropriate. We continue the ongoing effort of studying the power of nondeterminism in GFG automata. Initial indications have hinted th… ▽ More In GFG automata, it is possible to resolve nondeterminism in a way that only depends on the past and still accepts all the words in the language. The motivation for GFG automata comes from their adequacy for games and synthesis, wherein general nondeterminism is inappropriate. We continue the ongoing effort of studying the power of nondeterminism in GFG automata. Initial indications have hinted that every GFG automaton embodies a deterministic one. Today we know that this is not the case, and in fact GFG automata may be exponentially more succinct than deterministic ones. We focus on the typeness question, namely the question of whether a GFG automaton with a certain acceptance condition has an equivalent GFG automaton with a weaker acceptance condition on the same structure. Beyond the theoretical interest in studying typeness, its existence implies efficient translations among different acceptance conditions. This practical issue is of special interest in the context of games, where the Buchi and co-Buchi conditions admit memoryless strategies for both players. Typeness is known to hold for deterministic automata and not to hold for general nondeterministic automata. We show that GFG automata enjoy the benefits of typeness, similarly to the case of deterministic automata. In particular, when Rabin or Streett GFG automata have equivalent Buchi or co-Buchi GFG automata, respectively, then such equivalent automata can be defined on a substructure of the original automata. Using our typeness results, we further study the place of GFG automata in between deterministic and nondeterministic ones. Specifically, considering automata complementation, we show that GFG automata lean toward nondeterministic ones, admitting an exponential state blow-up in the complementation of a Streett automaton into a Rabin automaton, as opposed to the constant blow-up in the deterministic case. △ Less

Submitted 11 October, 2017; originally announced October 2017.

Families of DFAs as Acceptors of $ω$-Regular Languages

Authors: Dana Angluin, Udi Boker, Dana Fisman

Abstract: Families of DFAs (FDFAs) provide an alternative formalism for recognizing $ω$-regular languages. The motivation for introducing them was a desired correlation between the automaton states and right congruence relations, in a manner similar to the Myhill-Nerode theorem for regular languages. This correlation is beneficial for learning algorithms, and indeed it was recently shown that $ω$-regular la… ▽ More Families of DFAs (FDFAs) provide an alternative formalism for recognizing $ω$-regular languages. The motivation for introducing them was a desired correlation between the automaton states and right congruence relations, in a manner similar to the Myhill-Nerode theorem for regular languages. This correlation is beneficial for learning algorithms, and indeed it was recently shown that $ω$-regular languages can be learned from membership and equivalence queries, using FDFAs as the acceptors. In this paper, we look into the question of how suitable FDFAs are for defining omega-regular languages. Specifically, we look into the complexity of performing Boolean operations, such as complementation and intersection, on FDFAs, the complexity of solving decision problems, such as emptiness and language containment, and the succinctness of FDFAs compared to standard deterministic and nondeterministic $ω$-automata. We show that FDFAs enjoy the benefits of deterministic automata with respect to Boolean operations and decision problems. Namely, they can all be performed in nondeterministic logarithmic space. We provide polynomial translations of deterministic Büchi and co-Büchi automata to FDFAs and of FDFAs to nondeterministic Büchi automata (NBAs). We show that translation of an NBA to an FDFA may involve an exponential blowup. Last, we show that FDFAs are more succinct than deterministic parity automata (DPAs) in the sense that translating a DPA to an FDFA can always be done with only a polynomial increase, yet the other direction involves an inevitable exponential blowup in the worst case. △ Less

Submitted 13 February, 2018; v1 submitted 24 December, 2016; originally announced December 2016.

ACM Class: F.1.1; D.2.4

Journal ref: Logical Methods in Computer Science, Volume 14, Issue 1 (February 14, 2018) lmcs:2624

Discounting in LTL

Authors: Shaull Almagor, Udi Boker, Orna Kupferman

Abstract: In recent years, there is growing need and interest in formalizing and reasoning about the quality of software and hardware systems. As opposed to traditional verification, where one handles the question of whether a system satisfies, or not, a given specification, reasoning about quality addresses the question of \emph{how well} the system satisfies the specification. One direction in this effort… ▽ More In recent years, there is growing need and interest in formalizing and reasoning about the quality of software and hardware systems. As opposed to traditional verification, where one handles the question of whether a system satisfies, or not, a given specification, reasoning about quality addresses the question of \emph{how well} the system satisfies the specification. One direction in this effort is to refine the "eventually" operators of temporal logic to {\em discounting operators}: the satisfaction value of a specification is a value in $[0,1]$, where the longer it takes to fulfill eventuality requirements, the smaller the satisfaction value is. In this paper we introduce an augmentation by discounting of Linear Temporal Logic (LTL), and study it, as well as its combination with propositional quality operators. We show that one can augment LTL with an arbitrary set of discounting functions, while preserving the decidability of the model-checking problem. Further augmenting the logic with unary propositional quality operators preserves decidability, whereas adding an average-operator makes some problems undecidable. We also discuss the complexity of the problem, as well as various extensions. △ Less

Submitted 19 November, 2014; v1 submitted 17 June, 2014; originally announced June 2014.

Exact and Approximate Determinization of Discounted-Sum Automata

Authors: Udi Boker, Thomas A. Henzinger

Abstract: A discounted-sum automaton (NDA) is a nondeterministic finite automaton with edge weights, valuing a run by the discounted sum of visited edge weights. More precisely, the weight in the i-th position of the run is divided by $λ^i$, where the discount factor $λ$ is a fixed rational number greater than 1. The value of a word is the minimal value of the automaton runs on it. Discounted summation is… ▽ More A discounted-sum automaton (NDA) is a nondeterministic finite automaton with edge weights, valuing a run by the discounted sum of visited edge weights. More precisely, the weight in the i-th position of the run is divided by $λ^i$, where the discount factor $λ$ is a fixed rational number greater than 1. The value of a word is the minimal value of the automaton runs on it. Discounted summation is a common and useful measuring scheme, especially for infinite sequences, reflecting the assumption that earlier weights are more important than later weights. Unfortunately, determinization of NDAs, which is often essential in formal verification, is, in general, not possible. We provide positive news, showing that every NDA with an integral discount factor is determinizable. We complete the picture by proving that the integers characterize exactly the discount factors that guarantee determinizability: for every nonintegral rational discount factor $λ$, there is a nondeterminizable $λ$-NDA. We also prove that the class of NDAs with integral discount factors enjoys closure under the algebraic operations min, max, addition, and subtraction, which is not the case for general NDAs nor for deterministic NDAs. For general NDAs, we look into approximate determinization, which is always possible as the influence of a word's suffix decays. We show that the naive approach, of unfolding the automaton computations up to a sufficient level, is doubly exponential in the discount factor. We provide an alternative construction for approximate determinization, which is singly exponential in the discount factor, in the precision, and in the number of states. We also prove matching lower bounds, showing that the exponential dependency on each of these three parameters cannot be avoided. All our results hold equally for automata over finite words and for automata over infinite words. △ Less

Submitted 12 February, 2014; v1 submitted 16 January, 2014; originally announced January 2014.

Journal ref: Logical Methods in Computer Science, Volume 10, Issue 1 (February 13, 2014) lmcs:1104

Comparing Computational Power

Authors: Udi Boker, Nachum Dershowitz

Abstract: It is common practice to compare the computational power of different models of computation. For example, the recursive functions are strictly more powerful than the primitive recursive functions, because the latter are a proper subset of the former (which includes Ackermann's function). Side-by-side with this "containment" method of measuring power, it is standard to use an approach based on "s… ▽ More It is common practice to compare the computational power of different models of computation. For example, the recursive functions are strictly more powerful than the primitive recursive functions, because the latter are a proper subset of the former (which includes Ackermann's function). Side-by-side with this "containment" method of measuring power, it is standard to use an approach based on "simulation". For example, one says that the (untyped) lambda calculus is as powerful--computationally speaking--as the partial recursive functions, because the lambda calculus can simulate all partial recursive functions by encoding the natural numbers as Church numerals. The problem is that unbridled use of these two ways of comparing power allows one to show that some computational models are strictly stronger than themselves! We argue that a better definition is that model A is strictly stronger than B if A can simulate B via some encoding, whereas B cannot simulate A under any encoding. We then show that the recursive functions are strictly stronger in this sense than the primitive recursive. We also prove that the recursive functions, partial recursive functions, and Turing machines are "complete", in the sense that no injective encoding can make them equivalent to any "hypercomputational" model. △ Less

Submitted 23 October, 2005; originally announced October 2005.

Comments: To appear in Logic Journal of the IGPL in 2006

Journal ref: Logic Journal of the IGPL, vol. 14, no. 5, pp. 633-648, 2006