BZPEERPapers, people, evidence and research paths
Menu

Discover

SearchFind papers, people, topics, institutions and opportunities from one place.GraphSee how papers, authors, topics and evidence connect.

Research tools

HomeContinue from the papers, people and topics that matter now.CollectionsTurn saved papers into reading lists, evidence maps and shareable context.ResearchReconstruct the path that led you from search to paper to question.CollaborationMove from a paper, topic or expert request into a focused thread.PublishCreate full-text research articles with metadata, formulas and versions.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists whose work and reviews explain why they can help.CommunitiesJoin research groups organized around papers, topics and shared evidence.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations connected to real research context.

Account

Log inReturn to your saved papers, graph views and active threads.Create accountStart saving papers, building a research trail and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Source author record

Quentin Hautem

Quentin Hautem appears in the imported research catalog. Authorship, coauthor and topic links are available while profile ownership is still unclaimed.

ResearcherUnclaimed source record
Computer Science and Game TheoryFormal Languages and Automata TheoryLogic in Computer Science

Catalog footprint

What is connected

3works
3topics
3close collaborators

Actions

Connect this record

Log in to claim
Open graphBrowse works

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent papers, topics, institutions and collaborators without losing the researcher page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

3 published item(s)

preprint2016arXiv

On the complexity of heterogeneous multidimensional quantitative games

In this paper, we study two-player zero-sum turn-based games played on a finite multidimensional weighted graph. In recent papers all dimensions use the same measure, whereas here we allow to combine different measures. Such heterogeneous multidimensional quantitative games provide a general and natural model for the study of reactive system synthesis. We focus on classical measures like the Inf, Sup, LimInf, and LimSup of the weights seen along the play, as well as on the window mean-payoff (WMP) measure. This new measure is a natural strengthening of the mean-payoff measure. We allow objectives defined as Boolean combinations of heterogeneous constraints. While multidimensional games with Boolean combinations of mean-payoff constraints are undecidable, we show that the problem becomes EXPTIME-complete for DNF/CNF Boolean combinations of heterogeneous measures taken among {WMP, Inf, Sup, LimInf, LimSup} and that exponential memory strategies are sufficient for both players to win. We provide a detailed study of the complexity and the memory requirements when the Boolean combination of the measures is replaced by an intersection. EXPTIME-completeness and exponential memory strategies still hold for the intersection of measures in {WMP, Inf, Sup, LimInf, LimSup}, and we get PSPACE-completeness when WMP measure is no longer considered. To avoid EXPTIME-or PSPACE-hardness, we impose at most one occurrence of WMP measure and fix the number of Sup measures, and we propose several refinements (on the number of occurrences of the other measures) for which we get polynomial algorithms and lower memory requirements. For all the considered classes of games, we also study parameterized complexity.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2016arXiv

Window Parity Games: An Alternative Approach Toward Parity Games with Time Bounds

Classical objectives in two-player zero-sum games played on graphs often deal with limit behaviors of infinite plays: e.g., mean-payoff and total-payoff in the quantitative setting, or parity in the qualitative one (a canonical way to encode omega-regular properties). Those objectives offer powerful abstraction mechanisms and often yield nice properties such as memoryless determinacy. However, their very nature provides no guarantee on time bounds within which something good can be witnessed. In this work, we consider two approaches toward inclusion of time bounds in parity games. The first one, parity-response games, is based on the notion of finitary parity games [CHH09] and parity games with costs [FZ14,WZ16]. The second one, window parity games, is inspired by window mean-payoff games [CDRR15]. We compare the two approaches and show that while they prove to be equivalent in some contexts, window parity games offer a more tractable alternative when the time bound is given as a parameter (P-c. vs. PSPACE-c.). In particular, it provides a conservative approximation of parity games computable in polynomial time. Furthermore, we extend both approaches to the multi-dimension setting. We give the full picture for both types of games with regard to complexity and memory bounds. [CHH09] K. Chatterjee, T.A. Henzinger, F. Horn (2009): Finitary winning in omega-regular games. ACM Trans. Comput. Log. 11(1). [FZ14] N. Fijalkow, M. Zimmermann (2014): Parity and Streett Games with Costs. LMCS 10(2). [WZ16] A. Weinert, M. Zimmermann (2016): Easy to Win, Hard to Master: Optimal Strategies in Parity Games with Costs. Proc. of CSL, LIPIcs, Schloss Dagstuhl - LZI. To appear. [CDRR15] K. Chatterjee, L. Doyen, M. Randour, J.-F. Raskin (2015): Looking at mean-payoff and total-payoff through windows. Information and Computation 242, pp. 25-52.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2016arXiv

Window Parity Games: An Alternative Approach Toward Parity Games with Time Bounds (Full Version)

Classical objectives in two-player zero-sum games played on graphs often deal with limit behaviors of infinite plays: e.g., mean-payoff and total-payoff in the quantitative setting, or parity in the qualitative one (a canonical way to encode omega-regular properties). Those objectives offer powerful abstraction mechanisms and often yield nice properties such as memoryless determinacy. However, their very nature provides no guarantee on time bounds within which something good can be witnessed. In this work, we consider two approaches toward inclusion of time bounds in parity games. The first one, parity-response games, is based on the notion of finitary parity games [CHH09] and parity games with costs [FZ14,WZ16]. The second one, window parity games, is inspired by window mean-payoff games [CDRR15]. We compare the two approaches and show that while they prove to be equivalent in some contexts, window parity games offer a more tractable alternative when the time bound is given as a parameter (P-c. vs. PSPACE-C.). In particular, it provides a conservative approximation of parity games computable in polynomial time. Furthermore, we extend both approaches to the multi-dimension setting. We give the full picture for both types of games with regard to complexity and memory bounds. [CHH09] K. Chatterjee, T.A. Henzinger, F. Horn (2009): Finitary winning in omega-regular games. ACM Trans. Comput. Log. 11(1). [FZ14] N. Fijalkow, M. Zimmermann (2014): Parity and Streett Games with Costs. LMCS 10(2). [WZ16] A. Weinert, M. Zimmermann (2016): Easy to Win, Hard to Master: Optimal Strategies in Parity Games with Costs. Proc. of CSL, LIPIcs 62, pp. 31:1-31:17, Schloss Dagstuhl - LZI. [CDRR15] K. Chatterjee, L. Doyen, M. Randour, J.-F. Raskin (2015): Looking at mean-payoff and total-payoff through windows. Information and Computation 242, pp. 25-52.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access