Repository landing page

We are not able to resolve this OAI Identifier to the repository landing page. If you are the repository manager for this record, please head to the Dashboard and adjust the settings.

Dependences in Strategy Logic

Abstract

International audienceStrategy Logic (SL) is a very expressive temporal logic for specifying and verifying properties of multi-agent systems: in SL, one can quantify over strategies, assign them to agents, and express LTL properties of the resulting plays. Such a powerful framework has two drawbacks: first, model checking SL has non-elementary complexity; second, the exact semantics of SL is rather intricate, and may not correspond to what is expected. In this paper, we focus on strategy dependences in SL, by tracking how existentially-quantified strategies in a formula may (or may not) depend on other strategies selected in the formula, revisiting the approach of [Mogavero et al., Reasoning about strategies: On the model-checking problem, 2014]. We explain why elementary dependences, as defined by Mogavero et al., do not exactly capture the intended concept of behavioral strategies. We address this discrepancy by introducing timeline dependences, and exhibit a large fragment of SL for which model checking can be performed in 2-EXPTIME under this new semantics. 1 Introduction Temporal logics. Since Pnueli's seminal paper [24] in 1977, temporal logics have been widely used in theoretical computer science, especially by the formal-verification community. Temporal logics provide powerful languages for expressing properties of reactive systems, and enjoy efficient algorithms for satisfiability and model checking [9]. Since the early 2000s, new temporal logics have appeared to address open and multi-agent systems. While classical temporal logics (e.g. CTL [8, 25] and LTL [24]) could only deal with one or all the behaviours of the whole system, ATL [2] expresses properties of (executions generated by) behaviours of individual components of the system. ATL has been extensively studied since then, both about its expressiveness and about its verification algorithms [2, 13, 16]. Strategic interactions in ATL. Strategies in ATL are handled in a very limited way, and there are no real strategic interactions in that logic (which, in return, enjoys a polynomial-time model-checking algorithm). Over the last 10 years, various extensions have been defined and studied in order to allow for more interactions [1, 7, 6, 18, 26]. Strategy Logic (SL for short) [7, 18] is such a powerful approach, in which strategies are first-class objects; formulas can quantify (universally and existentially) over strategies, store those strategies in variables, assign them to players, and express properties of the resulting plays. As a simple example, the existence of a winning strategy for Player A (with objective ϕ A) against any strategy of * Supported by ERC project EQualIS (308087)

Similar works

Full text

thumbnail-image

HAL-CentraleSupelec

redirect
Last time updated on 16/10/2019

This paper was published in HAL-CentraleSupelec.

Having an issue?

Is data on this page outdated, violates copyrights or anything else? Report the problem now and we will take corresponding actions after reviewing your request.