Paper detail

Upper bounds for Newton's method on monotone polynomial systems, and P-time model checking of probabilistic one-counter automata

A central computational problem for analyzing and model checking various classes of infinite-state recursive probabilistic systems (including quasi-birth-death processes, multi-type branching processes, stochastic context-free grammars, probabilistic pushdown automata and recursive Markov chains) is the computation of {\em termination probabilities}, and computing these probabilities in turn boils down to computing the {\em least fixed point} (LFP) solution of a corresponding {\em monotone polynomial system} (MPS) of equations, denoted x=P(x). It was shown by Etessami & Yannakakis that a decomposed variant of Newton's method converges monotonically to the LFP solution for any MPS that has a non-negative solution. Subsequently, Esparza, Kiefer, & Luttenberger obtained upper bounds on the convergence rate of Newton's method for certain classes of MPSs. More recently, better upper bounds have been obtained for special classes of MPSs. However, prior to this paper, for arbitrary (not necessarily strongly-connected) MPSs, no upper bounds at all were known on the convergence rate of Newton's method as a function of the encoding size |P| of the input MPS, x=P(x). In this paper we provide worst-case upper bounds, as a function of both the input encoding size |P|, and epsilon > 0, on the number of iterations required for decomposed Newton's method (even with rounding) to converge within additive error epsilon > 0 of q^*, for any MPS with LFP solution q^*. Our upper bounds are essentially optimal in terms of several important parameters. Using our upper bounds, and building on prior work, we obtain the first P-time algorithm (in the standard Turing model of computation) for quantitative model checking, to within desired precision, of discrete-time QBDs and (equivalently) probabilistic 1-counter automata, with respect to any (fixed) omega-regular or LTL property.

preprint2013arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

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 graph slice

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.