Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userSimulation Over One-counter Nets is PSPACE-Complete
130
0
0.0
(
0
)
Added by
Richard Mayr
Publication date
2013
fields
Informatics Engineering
and research's language is
English
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
One-counter nets (OCN) are Petri nets with exactly one unbounded place. They are equivalent to a subclass of one-counter automata with just a weak test for zero. Unlike many other semantic equivalences, strong and weak simulation preorder are decidable for OCN, but the computational complexity was an open problem. We show that both strong and weak simulation preorder on OCN are PSPACE-complete.
rate research
Read More
One-counter nets (OCN) are finite automata equipped with a counter that can store non-negative integer values, and that cannot be tested for zero. Equivalently, these are exactly 1-dimensional vector addition systems with states. We show that both strong and weak simulation preorder on OCN are PSPACE-complete.
Exactly 20 years ago at MFCS, Demaine posed the open problem whether the game of Dots & Boxes is PSPACE-complete. Dots & Boxes has been studied extensively, with for instance a chapter in Berlekamp et al. Winning Ways for Your Mathematical Plays, a whole book on the game The Dots and Boxes Game: Sophisticated Childs Play by Berlekamp, and numerous articles in the Games of No Chance series. While known to be NP-hard, the question of its complexity remained open. We resolve this question, proving that the game is PSPACE-complete by a reduction from a game played on propositional formulas.
Petri nets, also known as vector addition systems, are a long established model of concurrency with extensive applications in modelling and analysis of hardware, software and database systems, as well as chemical, biological and business processes. The central algorithmic problem for Petri nets is reachability: whether from the given initial configuration there exists a sequence of valid execution steps that reaches the given final configuration. The complexity of the problem has remained unsettled since the 1960s, and it is one of the most prominent open questions in the theory of verification. Decidability was proved by Mayr in his seminal STOC 1981 work, and the currently best published upper bound is non-primitive recursive Ackermannian of Leroux and Schmitz from LICS 2019. We establish a non-elementary lower bound, i.e. that the reachability problem needs a tower of exponentials of time and space. Until this work, the best lower bound has been exponential space, due to Lipton in 1976. The new lower bound is a major breakthrough for several reasons. Firstly, it shows that the reachability problem is much harder than the coverability (i.e., state reachability) problem, which is also ubiquitous but has been known to be complete for exponential space since the late 1970s. Secondly, it implies that a plethora of problems from formal languages, logic, concurrent systems, process calculi and other areas, that are known to admit reductions from the Petri nets reachability problem, are also not elementary. Thirdly, it makes obsolete the currently best lower bounds for the reachability problems for two key extensions of Petri nets: with branching and with a pushdown stack.
This paper discusses the hardness of finding minimal good-for-games (GFG) Buchi, Co-Buchi, and parity automata with state based acceptance. The problem appears to sit between finding small deterministic and finding small nondeterministic automata, where minimality is NP-complete and PSPACE-complete, respectively. However, recent work of Radi and Kupferman has shown that minimising Co-Buchi automata with transition based acceptance is tractable, which suggests that the complexity of minimising GFG automata might be cheaper than minimising deterministic automata. We show for the standard state based acceptance that the minimality of a GFG automaton is NP-complete for Buchi, Co-Buchi, and parity GFG automata. The proofs are a surprisingly straight forward generalisation of the proofs from deterministic Buchi automata: they use a similar reductions, and the same hard class of languages.
Consider $n^2-1$ unit-square blocks in an $n times n$ square board, where each block is labeled as movable horizontally (only), movable vertically (only), or immovable -- a variation of Rush Hour with only $1 times 1$ cars and fixed blocks. We prove that it is PSPACE-complete to decide whether a given block can reach the left edge of the board, by reduction from Nondeterministic Constraint Logic via 2-color oriented Subway Shuffle. By contrast, polynomial-time algorithms are known for deciding whether a given block can be moved by one space, or when each block either is immovable or can move both horizontally and vertically. Our result answers a 15-year-old open problem by Tromp and Cilibrasi, and strengthens previous PSPACE-completeness results for Rush Hour with vertical $1 times 2$ and horizontal $2 times 1$ movable blocks and 4-color Subway Shuffle.
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
