G | |
---|---|
[GBM18] | Patrick Gardy,
Patricia Bouyer et
Nicolas Markey.
Dependences in Strategy Logic.
In STACS'18,
Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics 96, pages 34:1-34:14. Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, février 2018.
@inproceedings{stacs2018-GBM, author = {Gardy, Patrick and Bouyer, Patricia and Markey, Nicolas}, title = {Dependences in Strategy Logic}, editor = {Niedermeier, Rolf and Vall{\'e}e, Brigitte}, booktitle = {{P}roceedings of the 35th {S}ymposium on {T}heoretical {A}spects of {C}omputer {S}cience ({STACS}'18)}, acronym = {{STACS}'18}, publisher = {Leibniz-Zentrum f{\"u}r Informatik}, series = {Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics}, volume = {96}, pages = {34:1-34:14}, year = {2018}, month = feb, doi = {10.4230/LIPIcs.STACS.2018.34}, abstract = {Strategy Logic~(\textsf{SL}) is a very expressive temporal logic for specifying and verifying properties of multi-agent systems: in~\textsf{SL}, one can quantify over strategies, assign them to agents, and express \textsf{LTL} properties of the resulting plays. Such a powerful framework has two drawbacks: first, model checking \textsf{SL} has non-elementary complexity; second, the exact semantics of \textsf{SL} is rather intricate, and may not correspond to what is expected. In~this paper, we~focus on \emph{strategy dependences} in~\textsf{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 \emph{et~al.}, Reasoning about strategies: On~the model-checking problem,~2014]. We~explain why \emph{elementary} dependences, as defined by Mogavero~\emph{et~al.}, do not exactly capture the intended concept of behavioral strategies. We~address this discrepancy by introducing \emph{timeline} dependences, and exhibit a large fragment of \textsf{SL} for which model checking can be performed in \textsf{2EXPTIME} under this new semantics.}, } |
- 1
- 1
- 1