Paper detail

Algorithmic Analysis of Qualitative and Quantitative Termination Problems for Affine Probabilistic Programs

In this paper, we consider termination of probabilistic programs with real-valued variables. The questions concerned are: 1. qualitative ones that ask (i) whether the program terminates with probability 1 (almost-sure termination) and (ii) whether the expected termination time is finite (finite termination); 2. quantitative ones that ask (i) to approximate the expected termination time (expectation problem) and (ii) to compute a bound B such that the probability to terminate after B steps decreases exponentially (concentration problem). To solve these questions, we utilize the notion of ranking supermartingales which is a powerful approach for proving termination of probabilistic programs. In detail, we focus on algorithmic synthesis of linear ranking-supermartingales over affine probabilistic programs (APP's) with both angelic and demonic non-determinism. An important subclass of APP's is LRAPP which is defined as the class of all APP's over which a linear ranking-supermartingale exists. Our main contributions are as follows. Firstly, we show that the membership problem of LRAPP (i) can be decided in polynomial time for APP's with at most demonic non-determinism, and (ii) is NP-hard and in PSPACE for APP's with angelic non-determinism; moreover, the NP-hardness result holds already for APP's without probability and demonic non-determinism. Secondly, we show that the concentration problem over LRAPP can be solved in the same complexity as for the membership problem of LRAPP. Finally, we show that the expectation problem over LRAPP can be solved in 2EXPTIME and is PSPACE-hard even for APP's without probability and non-determinism (i.e., deterministic programs). Our experimental results demonstrate the effectiveness of our approach to answer the qualitative and quantitative questions over APP's with at most demonic non-determinism.

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access4 authors2 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

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

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.