parity to safety in polynomial time for pushdown and
play

Parity to Safety in Polynomial Time for Pushdown and Collapsible - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Aug 25, 2023 •165 likes •890 views

Parity to Safety in Polynomial Time for Pushdown and Collapsible Pushdown Games Matthew Hague Royal Holloway, University of London with Roland Meyer, Sebastian Muskalla,and Martin Zimmermann Abstract Safety games for pushdown systems:

  1. Parity to Safety in Polynomial Time for Pushdown and Collapsible Pushdown Games Matthew Hague Royal Holloway, University of London with Roland Meyer, Sebastian Muskalla,and Martin Zimmermann

  2. Abstract Safety games for pushdown systems: n-EXPTIME-complete Parity games for pushdown systems: n-EXPTIME-complete (for order-n collapsible pushdown)

  3. Abstract Safety games for pushdown systems: n-EXPTIME-complete Parity games for pushdown systems: n-EXPTIME-complete (for order-n collapsible pushdown) We give a "natural" parity->safety reduction

  4. Abstract Safety games for pushdown systems: n-EXPTIME-complete Parity games for pushdown systems: n-EXPTIME-complete (for order-n collapsible pushdown) We give a "natural" parity->safety reduction (i.e. not parity algorithm -> TM -> safety)

  5. Motivation Safety is easy to reason about (Parity is hard) Parity is more expressive To know the relationship

  6. Ideas We Start With Finite-state parity to safety using counters (Bernet et al, 2002)

  7. Ideas We Start With Finite-state parity to safety using counters (Bernet et al, 2002) Pushdown parity to safety with large counters (Fridman and Zimmermann, 2012)

  8. Ideas We Start With Finite-state parity to safety using counters (Bernet et al, 2002) Pushdown parity to safety with large counters (Fridman and Zimmermann, 2012) Reduction order-n -> order-(n-1) Rank awareness (H, Murawski, Ong, Serre, 2008)

  9. Ideas We Start With Finite-state parity to safety using counters (Bernet et al, 2002) Pushdown parity to safety with large counters (Fridman and Zimmermann, 2012) Reduction order-n -> order-(n-1) Rank awareness (H, Murawski, Ong, Serre, 2008) Encoding large counters in a pushdown stack (Cachat and Walukiewicz, 2007)

  10. Contributions Generalise counter encoding to collapse Direct proof based on commutativity of Counters encoding Stack removal Counters behave like a stack

  11. Parity Game 1 2 4 4 Elvis Anarchist

  12. Parity Game 1 2 4 4 Elvis Play: 4 Anarchist

  13. Parity Game 1 2 4 4 Elvis Play: 4 1 Anarchist

  14. Parity Game 1 2 4 4 Elvis Play: 4 1 2 Anarchist

  15. Parity Game 1 2 4 4 Elvis Play: 4 1 2 4 Anarchist

  16. Parity Game 1 2 4 4 Elvis Play: 4 1 2 4 4 Anarchist

  17. Parity Game 1 2 4 4 Elvis Play: 4 1 2 4 4 1 4 4 1 2 4... Anarchist

  18. Parity Game 1 2 4 4 Elvis Play: 4 1 2 4 4 1 4 4 1 2 4... Winner: Elvis if least infinitely Anarchist occuring rank is even

  19. Parity with Counters 1 2 4 4 Count: number of each rank (without seeing anything smaller)

  20. Parity with Counters Counters: 1 1: 2: 2 4 3: 4: 4 Count: number of each rank (without seeing anything smaller)

  21. Parity with Counters Counters: 1 1: 2: 2 4 3: 4: 4 Count: number of each rank (without seeing anything smaller)

  22. Parity with Counters Counters: 1 1: 2: 2 4 3: 4: 4 Count: number of each rank (without seeing anything smaller)

  23. Parity with Counters Counters: 1 1: 2: 2 4 3: 4: 4 Count: number of each rank (without seeing anything smaller)

  24. Parity with Counters Counters: 1 1: 2: 2 4 3: 4: 4 Count: number of each rank (without seeing anything smaller)

  25. Parity with Counters Counters: 1 1: 2: 2 4 3: 4: 4 Count: number of each rank (without seeing anything smaller)

  26. Parity with Counters Counters: 1 1: 2: 2 4 3: 4: 4 Count: number of each rank (without seeing anything smaller)

  27. Parity with Counters Counters: 1 1: 2: 2 4 3: 4: 4 Count: number of each rank (without seeing anything smaller)

  28. Parity with Counters Counters: 1 1: 2: 2 4 3: 4: 4 Count: number of each rank (without seeing anything smaller)

  29. Parity with Counters Counters: 1 1: 2: 2 4 3: 4: 4 Count: number of each rank (without seeing anything smaller)

  30. Parity with Counters Counters: 1 1: 2: 2 4 3: 4: 4 Count: number of each rank (without seeing anything smaller)

  31. Parity with Counters Counters: 1 1: 2: 2 4 3: 4: 4 Count: number of each rank (without seeing anything smaller)

  32. Parity with Counters Counters: 1 1: 2: 2 4 3: 4: 4 Count: number of each rank (without seeing anything smaller)

  33. Parity with Counters Counters: 1 1: 2: 2 4 3: 4: 4 Count: number of each rank (without seeing anything smaller)

  34. Parity with Counters Counters: 1 1: 2: 2 4 3: 4: 4 Count: number of each rank (without seeing anything smaller)

  35. Parity with Counters Counters: 1 1: 2: 2 4 3: 4: 4 Count: number of each rank (without seeing anything smaller)

  36. Parity with Counters Counters: 1 1: 2: 2 4 3: 4: 4 Count: number of each rank (without seeing anything smaller)

  37. Parity with Counters Counters: 1 1: 2: 2 4 3: 4: 4 There is a loop! Count: number of each rank (Hit 1 five times over 4 states) (without seeing anything smaller)

  38. Parity with Counters Counters: 1 1: 2: 2 4 3: 4: 4 There is a loop! Count: number of each rank (Hit 1 five times over 4 states) (without seeing anything smaller) The smallest rank is odd: Elvis loses!

  39. Parity to Safety Reduce parity to safety game (Bernet et al): Keep counters in state (n * n^k states) Elvis loses if odd counter is high

  40. Parity to Safety Reduce parity to safety game (Bernet et al): Keep counters in state (n * n^k states) Elvis loses if odd counter is high Exponential blow up!

  41. Pushdown Games a a b b b b b b p1 c p2 c p3 c p4 c Each state has: Control state (from finite set) Stack of characters Model recursive programs

  42. Pushdown Parity to Safety Pushdown Parity Pushdown Safety (Walukiewicz 1996) Finite-state Finite-State Parity Safety

  43. Pushdown Parity to Safety Pushdown Parity Pushdown Safety (Walukiewicz 1996) Finite-state Finite-State Parity Safety (Bernet et al 2002)

  44. Pushdown Parity to Safety Pushdown Parity Pushdown Safety (Fridman and Zimmermann (Walukiewicz 2012) 1996) Finite-state Finite-State Parity Safety (Bernet et al 2002)

  45. Pushdown Parity to Safety Pushdown Parity Pushdown Safety (Fridman and Zimmermann (Walukiewicz 2012) 1996) Commutes! Finite-state Finite-State Parity Safety (Bernet et al 2002)

  46. Pushdown Parity to Safety From: a a b b b b b b p1 c p2 c p3 c p4 c To: (a, c1, c2) (b, c1, c2) (b, c1, c2') p1 (c, c1, c2) p2 (c, c1, c2)

  47. Pushdown Parity to Safety From: a a b b b b b b p1 c p2 c p3 c p4 c To: Counters (a, c1, c2) (b, c1, c2) (b, c1, c2') p1 (c, c1, c2) p2 (c, c1, c2)

  48. Exponential Blow Up? (a, c1, c2') p (b, c1, c2) Counter values: can be exponential (Pushdown->finite-state has 2^n states) Number of stack characters: (2^n)^k (For k ranks)

  49. Exponential Blow Up? (a, c1, c2') p (b, c1, c2) Counter values: can be exponential (Pushdown->finite-state has 2^n states) Number of stack characters: (2^n)^k (For k ranks)

  50. Reducing Size a From: To: c2' c1 (a, c1, c2') b p (b, c1, c2) c2 p c1

  51. Reducing Size a From: To: c2' c1 (a, c1, c2') b p (b, c1, c2) c2 p c1 Number of characters: 2^n

  52. Updating Counters Increment c1 a c2' c1 b c2 p c1

  53. Updating Counters Increment c1 a c2' c1 b c2 p c1 ( , a)

  54. Updating Counters Increment c1 a c2' c1 b c2 p c1 ( , a)

  55. Updating Counters Increment c1 a c2' Lost c2' c1 (It will be reset) b c2 p c1 ( , a)

  56. Updating Counters Increment c1 a c2' Lost c2' c1 ' (It will be reset) b c2 p c1 ( , a)

  57. Updating Counters Increment c1 a c2' 0 Lost c2' c1 ' (It will be reset) b c2 p c1 ( , a)

  58. Updating Counters Increment c1 a a c2' 0 Lost c2' c1 ' (It will be reset) b c2 p c1 ( , a)

  59. Polynomial No. of Characters a c2' c1 b c2 p c1 Counters up to 2^n Alphabet exponential

  60. Polynomial No. of Characters a a 0 1 c2' in binary c2' 1 c1 0 b 1 c1 in binary 0 c2 . p c1 . p . Counters up to 2^n Alphabet exponential

  61. Polynomial No. of Characters a a 0 1 c2' in binary c2' 1 c1 0 b 1 c1 in binary 0 c2 . p c1 . Pushdowns handle p . length-n binary Counters up to 2^n Alphabet exponential Alphabet polynomial!

  62. Pushdown Parity to Safety Pushdown parity game -> pushdown safety game Naively exponential Use stack discipline of counters Binary counter encoding of pushdowns Polynomial time reduction

  63. Collapsible Pushdown Systems Pushdown Systems = First-Order Recursion Collapsible Pushdown Systems = Higher-Order Recursion

  64. Higher-Order Programming: Niche? Almost all modern languages support it Scala, Go, JavaScript, Python, ... Retro-fitted to C++ and Java Asynchronous programs/callbacks Map/Reduce

  65. Collapsible Pushdown Systems Higher-order program: functions of functions Higher-order pushdown: stack of stacks a b p c

Download Presentation
Download Policy: The content available on the website is offered to you 'AS IS' for your personal information and use only. It cannot be commercialized, licensed, or distributed on other websites without prior consent from the author. To download a presentation, simply click this link. If you encounter any difficulties during the download process, it's possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.

Recommend

Partial solvers for parity games: effective polynomial-time composition Patrick Ah-Fat, Michael

Partial solvers for parity games: effective polynomial-time composition Patrick Ah-Fat, Michael

Partial solvers for parity games: effective polynomial-time composition Patrick Ah-Fat, Michael Huth Imperial College London 1 / 19 Background 1 Parity games Partial solvers and static analyses Residual games Composition Procedure and

426 views • 20 slides
Playing Pushdown Parity Games in a Hurry (Extended Abstract) Wladimir Fridman Martin Zimmermann

Playing Pushdown Parity Games in a Hurry (Extended Abstract) Wladimir Fridman Martin Zimmermann

Playing Pushdown Parity Games in a Hurry (Extended Abstract) Wladimir Fridman Martin Zimmermann Chair of Computer Science 7 Institute of Informatics RWTH Aachen University University of Warsaw Aachen, Germany Warsaw, Poland

593 views • 4 slides
Polynomial Time corresponds to Solutions of Polynomial Ordinary Differential Equations of

Polynomial Time corresponds to Solutions of Polynomial Ordinary Differential Equations of

Polynomial Time corresponds to Solutions of Polynomial Ordinary Differential Equations of Polynomial Length Olivier Bournez, Daniel Graa and Amaury Pouly July 13, 2015 Main result and consequences Theorem (Informal) PTIME = PIVP of

633 views • 47 slides
Polynomial-time reductions We have seen several reductions: Polynomial-time reductions Informal

Polynomial-time reductions We have seen several reductions: Polynomial-time reductions Informal

Polynomial-time reductions We have seen several reductions: Polynomial-time reductions Informal explanation of reductions: We have two problems, X and Y. Suppose we have a black-box solving problem X in polynomial-time. Can we use the black-box

1.38k views • 32 slides
Playing Pushdown Parity Games in a Hurry Joint work with Wladimir Fridman (RWTH Aachen

Playing Pushdown Parity Games in a Hurry Joint work with Wladimir Fridman (RWTH Aachen

Playing Pushdown Parity Games in a Hurry Joint work with Wladimir Fridman (RWTH Aachen University) Martin Zimmermann University of Warsaw September 7th, 2012 GandALF 2012 Naples, Italy Martin Zimmermann University of Warsaw Playing

442 views • 32 slides
Pushdown Automata A pushdown automata (PDA) is essentially: Pushdown Automata An NFA with

Pushdown Automata A pushdown automata (PDA) is essentially: Pushdown Automata An NFA with

Pushdown Automata A pushdown automata (PDA) is essentially: Pushdown Automata An NFA with a stack A move of a PDA will depend upon Current state of the machine Current symbol being read in Current symbol popped off the

315 views • 7 slides
Pushdown Automata 7-0 Pushdown Automata The automata we saw so far were

Pushdown Automata 7-0 Pushdown Automata The automata we saw so far were

Griffith University 3130CIT Theory of Computation (Based on slides by Harald Sndergaard of The University of Melbourne) Pushdown Automata 7-0 Pushdown Automata The automata we saw so far were limited by their

368 views • 15 slides
Polynomial-Time Problems Lecture 4: The polynomial method Part II: All-pairs shortest paths

Polynomial-Time Problems Lecture 4: The polynomial method Part II: All-pairs shortest paths

Complexity Theory of Polynomial-Time Problems Lecture 4: The polynomial method Part II: All-pairs shortest paths Sebastian Krinninger Overview on APSP Algorithms Floyd-Warshall algorithm: ( 3 ) Inserts one node at a time

687 views • 42 slides
NP-Completeness 1 Almost all the algorithms we have studies so far are polynomial-time

NP-Completeness 1 Almost all the algorithms we have studies so far are polynomial-time

Chapter 5 NP-Completeness 1 Almost all the algorithms we have studies so far are polynomial-time algorithms, i.e., the running time is O ( n k ) for some constant k . Generally, we think of problems that are solvable by polynomial-time

532 views • 42 slides
Halt return result; } true 5 6 1 The Halting Problem Undecidability Alan Turing, 1936

Halt return result; } true 5 6 1 The Halting Problem Undecidability Alan Turing, 1936

Polynomial-time Algorithms Most of the algorithms we have seen so far have been polynomial-time algorithms Introduction to NP Completeness Input size n => worst-case running time of n k , Chapter 9 where k is a constant CPTR 318 Can

212 views • 5 slides
Pushdown Automata Context Free Languages IV Input tape 1 2 Pushdown Automata 3 5 4 State

Pushdown Automata Context Free Languages IV Input tape 1 2 Pushdown Automata 3 5 4 State

Pushdown Automata Context Free Languages IV Input tape 1 2 Pushdown Automata 3 5 4 State machine Stack Plan for today Pushdown Automata Introduction to Pushdown Automata The stack The stack has its own alphabet

335 views • 8 slides
Polynomial-Time Problems Lecture 3: The polynomial method Part I: Orthogonal Vectors Sebastian

Polynomial-Time Problems Lecture 3: The polynomial method Part I: Orthogonal Vectors Sebastian

Complexity Theory of Polynomial-Time Problems Lecture 3: The polynomial method Part I: Orthogonal Vectors Sebastian Krinninger Organization of lecture No lecture on 26.05. (State holiday) 2 nd exercise sheet: Next week Tutorials:

380 views • 34 slides
Summary of What We Know Definition (Polynomial Time Reducibility) We write A P B iff there is

Summary of What We Know Definition (Polynomial Time Reducibility) We write A P B iff there is

Summary of What We Know Definition (Polynomial Time Reducibility) We write A P B iff there is a polynomial time computable Computability and Complexity function f such that for any input w we have w A iff f ( w ) B . Definition

36 views • 3 slides
1 Two-Dimensional Parity Internet Checksum Use 1-dimensional parity Idea Add up all

1 Two-Dimensional Parity Internet Checksum Use 1-dimensional parity Idea Add up all

Error Coding Parity 1-bit error detection with parity Transmission process may introduce errors into a message. Add an extra bit to a code to ensure an even (odd) number of 1s Single bit errors versus burst errors Every

284 views • 4 slides
Pushdown Automata Pushdown Automata p.1/25 Rationale CFG are specification

Pushdown Automata Pushdown Automata p.1/25 Rationale CFG are specification

Pushdown Automata Pushdown Automata p.1/25 Rationale CFG are specification mechanisms, i.e., a CFG generates a context-free language. Pushdown-automata are recognizing mechanisms, i.e., a PDA recognizes a context-free

413 views • 25 slides
CS 301 Lecture 25 NP -complete Stephen Checkoway April 29, 2018 1 / 30 Polynomial-time

CS 301 Lecture 25 NP -complete Stephen Checkoway April 29, 2018 1 / 30 Polynomial-time

CS 301 Lecture 25 NP -complete Stephen Checkoway April 29, 2018 1 / 30 Polynomial-time reducibility A function f is a polynomial-time computable function if some poly-time TM M exists that halts with just f ( w ) on its

1.36k views • 99 slides
Optimizing Redis for Locality and Capacity Kevin C., Yoongu K. Lavanya S. 15-799 Project

Optimizing Redis for Locality and Capacity Kevin C., Yoongu K. Lavanya S. 15-799 Project

Optimizing Redis for Locality and Capacity Kevin C., Yoongu K. Lavanya S. 15-799 Project Presentation 12/4/2013 1 Goals of Our Project Leverage DRAM and dataset characteristics to improve performance of in-memory database Locality :

485 views • 20 slides
Top-K Query Processing D. Gunopulos 1 Multimedia Top-K Queries The IBM QBIC project (90s):

Top-K Query Processing D. Gunopulos 1 Multimedia Top-K Queries The IBM QBIC project (90s):

Top-K Query Processing D. Gunopulos 1 Multimedia Top-K Queries The IBM QBIC project (90s): How to store and index multimedia objects? How to store and index multimedia objects? Multimedia objects can have many attributes, with

369 views • 35 slides
Advances in Programming Languages APL13: Concurrency Abstractions David Aspinall School of

Advances in Programming Languages APL13: Concurrency Abstractions David Aspinall School of

Advances in Programming Languages APL13: Concurrency Abstractions David Aspinall School of Informatics The University of Edinburgh Monday 22 February 2010 Semester 2 Week 7 N I V E U R S E I H T T Y O H F G R E U D I B

600 views • 25 slides
Hit Finder Validation & Prospects for Purity Measurement Matthew Thiesse 7 September 2016

Hit Finder Validation & Prospects for Purity Measurement Matthew Thiesse 7 September 2016

Hit Finder Validation & Prospects for Purity Measurement Matthew Thiesse 7 September 2016 35-ton Sim/Reco Meeting 1 Overview Recent progress has been good, some interesting plots ahead The priority to fjnd a good event list

391 views • 14 slides
PAPI-NUMA: Middleware to Support Hardware Sampling IVONNE LOPEZ AND SHIRLEY

PAPI-NUMA: Middleware to Support Hardware Sampling IVONNE LOPEZ AND SHIRLEY

PAPI-NUMA: Middleware to Support Hardware Sampling IVONNE LOPEZ AND SHIRLEY MOORE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT EL PASO VINCE WEAVER UNIVERSITY OF MAINE SCALABLE TOOLS WORKSHOP AUGUST 4, 2015 1

419 views • 17 slides
Christopher Dilks for the STAR Collaboration Spin2014 The 21 st International Symposium on Spin

Christopher Dilks for the STAR Collaboration Spin2014 The 21 st International Symposium on Spin

Christopher Dilks for the STAR Collaboration Spin2014 The 21 st International Symposium on Spin Physics Oct. 20-24, 2014 Peking University, Beijing, China Outline Current Status of Gluon Polarization Double Helicity Asymmetry A LL

631 views • 24 slides
The CBM Time-of-Flight wall Ingo Deppner Physikalisches Institut der Uni. Heidelberg Outline:

The CBM Time-of-Flight wall Ingo Deppner Physikalisches Institut der Uni. Heidelberg Outline:

RPC 2018 XIV Workshop on Resistive Plate Chambers and Related Detectors The CBM Time-of-Flight wall Ingo Deppner Physikalisches Institut der Uni. Heidelberg Outline: Introduction CBM-ToF requirements TDR ToF wall design

752 views • 24 slides
Austere Flash Caching with Deduplication and Compression Qiuping Wang * , Jinhong Li * , Wen Xia #

Austere Flash Caching with Deduplication and Compression Qiuping Wang * , Jinhong Li * , Wen Xia #

Austere Flash Caching with Deduplication and Compression Qiuping Wang * , Jinhong Li * , Wen Xia # Erik Kruus ^ , Biplob Debnath ^ , Patrick P. C. Lee * * The Chinese University of Hong Kong (CUHK) # Harbin Institute of Technology, Shenzhen ^ NEC

675 views • 22 slides

More recommend