{"title":"参数化博弈和参数化自动机","authors":"A. Pauly","doi":"10.4204/EPTCS.277.3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We introduce a way to parameterize automata and games on finite graphs with natural numbers. The parameters are accessed essentially by allowing counting down from the parameter value to 0 and branching depending on whether 0 has been reached. The main technical result is that in games, a player can win for some values of the parameters at all, if she can win for some values below an exponential bound. For many winning conditions, this implies decidability of any statements about a player being able to win with arbitrary quantification over the parameter values. \nWhile the result seems broadly applicable, a specific motivation comes from the study of chains of strategies in games. Chains of games were recently suggested as a means to define a rationality notion based on dominance that works well with quantitative games by Bassett, Jecker, P., Raskin and Van den Boogard. From the main result of this paper, we obtain generalizations of their decidability results with much simpler proofs. \nAs both a core technical notion in the proof of the main result, and as a notion of potential independent interest, we look at boolean functions defined via graph game forms. Graph game forms have properties akin to monotone circuits, albeit are more concise. We raise some open questions regarding how concise they are exactly, which have a flavour similar to circuit complexity. Answers to these questions could improve the bounds in the main theorem.","PeriodicalId":10720,"journal":{"name":"CoRR","volume":"63 1","pages":"30-42"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-09-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Parameterized Games and Parameterized Automata\",\"authors\":\"A. Pauly\",\"doi\":\"10.4204/EPTCS.277.3\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"We introduce a way to parameterize automata and games on finite graphs with natural numbers. The parameters are accessed essentially by allowing counting down from the parameter value to 0 and branching depending on whether 0 has been reached. The main technical result is that in games, a player can win for some values of the parameters at all, if she can win for some values below an exponential bound. For many winning conditions, this implies decidability of any statements about a player being able to win with arbitrary quantification over the parameter values. \\nWhile the result seems broadly applicable, a specific motivation comes from the study of chains of strategies in games. Chains of games were recently suggested as a means to define a rationality notion based on dominance that works well with quantitative games by Bassett, Jecker, P., Raskin and Van den Boogard. From the main result of this paper, we obtain generalizations of their decidability results with much simpler proofs. \\nAs both a core technical notion in the proof of the main result, and as a notion of potential independent interest, we look at boolean functions defined via graph game forms. Graph game forms have properties akin to monotone circuits, albeit are more concise. We raise some open questions regarding how concise they are exactly, which have a flavour similar to circuit complexity. Answers to these questions could improve the bounds in the main theorem.\",\"PeriodicalId\":10720,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"CoRR\",\"volume\":\"63 1\",\"pages\":\"30-42\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-09-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"CoRR\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4204/EPTCS.277.3\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"CoRR","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4204/EPTCS.277.3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
介绍了一种参数化有限自然数图上的自动机和对策的方法。通过允许从参数值向下计数到0并根据是否达到0进行分支来访问参数。主要的技术结果是,在游戏中,玩家可以在某些参数值下获胜,如果他可以在低于指数界限的值下获胜。对于许多获胜条件,这意味着任何关于玩家能够在参数值上任意量化获胜的陈述都是可决定的。虽然这一结果似乎具有广泛的适用性,但一个特定的动机来自于对游戏中的策略链的研究。最近,Bassett、Jecker、P.、Raskin和Van den Boogard建议将游戏链作为一种定义基于支配性的理性概念的方法,这种方法在定量游戏中非常有效。从本文的主要结果中,我们用更简单的证明得到了它们的可判性结果的推广。作为证明主要结果的核心技术概念,以及潜在的独立兴趣概念,我们来看看通过图形游戏形式定义的布尔函数。图形游戏形式具有类似于单调电路的属性,尽管更简洁。我们提出了一些关于它们到底有多简洁的开放性问题,它们有一种类似于电路复杂性的味道。这些问题的答案可以改进主要定理的范围。
We introduce a way to parameterize automata and games on finite graphs with natural numbers. The parameters are accessed essentially by allowing counting down from the parameter value to 0 and branching depending on whether 0 has been reached. The main technical result is that in games, a player can win for some values of the parameters at all, if she can win for some values below an exponential bound. For many winning conditions, this implies decidability of any statements about a player being able to win with arbitrary quantification over the parameter values.
While the result seems broadly applicable, a specific motivation comes from the study of chains of strategies in games. Chains of games were recently suggested as a means to define a rationality notion based on dominance that works well with quantitative games by Bassett, Jecker, P., Raskin and Van den Boogard. From the main result of this paper, we obtain generalizations of their decidability results with much simpler proofs.
As both a core technical notion in the proof of the main result, and as a notion of potential independent interest, we look at boolean functions defined via graph game forms. Graph game forms have properties akin to monotone circuits, albeit are more concise. We raise some open questions regarding how concise they are exactly, which have a flavour similar to circuit complexity. Answers to these questions could improve the bounds in the main theorem.