Abstract

We introduce good-for-games $\omega$-pushdown automata ($\omega$-GFG-PDA). These are automata whose nondeterminism can be resolved based on the input processed so far. Good-for-gameness enables automata to be composed with games, trees, and other automata, applications which otherwise require deterministic automata. Our main results are that $\omega$-GFG-PDA are more expressive than deterministic $\omega$- pushdown automata and that solving infinite games with winning conditions specified by $\omega$-GFG-PDA is EXPTIME-complete. Thus, we have identified a new class of $\omega$-contextfree winning conditions for which solving games is decidable. It follows that the universality problem for $\omega$-GFG-PDA is in EXPTIME as well. Moreover, we study closure properties of the class of languages recognized by $\omega$-GFG- PDA and decidability of good-for-gameness of $\omega$-pushdown automata and languages. Finally, we compare $\omega$-GFG-PDA to $\omega$-visibly PDA, study the resources necessary to resolve the nondeterminism in $\omega$-GFG-PDA, and prove that the parity index hierarchy for $\omega$-GFG-PDA is infinite. This is a corrected version of the paper arXiv:2001.04392v6 published originally on January 7, 2022.

Highlights

  • Good-for-gameness is the new determinism, and not just for solving games

  • Our main results are that ω-GFG-PDA are more expressive than deterministic ωpushdown automata and that solving infinite games with winning conditions specified by ω-GFG-PDA is EXPTIME-complete

  • We have introduced good-for-games ω-pushdown automata and proved that they recognize a novel class of ω-contextfree languages for which solving games is decidable

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Good-for-gameness is the new determinism, and not just for solving games. Good-forgames automata lend themselves to composition with other automata and trees. A simple example is a winning condition that allows the player who resolves the nondeterminism to win the original game while her opponent wins in the arena-based game by using her nondeterministic choices against her This is the case in the parity automaton presented, which accepts all words, but in which nondeterminism must decide whether a word has finitely or infinitely many occurrences of a. Good-for-games automata ( known as history-deterministic automata2 [Col09]), introduced by Henzinger and Piterman [HP06], are nondeterministic (or even alternating [Col[13], BL19]) automata whose nondeterminism can be resolved based only on the input processed so far This property implies that the previously described procedure yields the correct winner, even if the automaton is not deterministic.

Preliminaries
Good-for-games Pushdown Automata
Good-for-games Pushdown Automata are Indeed Good for Games
Closure Properties
Deciding Good-for-gameness
Resource-bounded Resolvers
The Parity Index Hierarchy
Comparison to Visibly Pushdown Languages
10. Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call