Reasoning About Strategies: On the Model-Checking Problem
Fabio Mogavero, Aniello Murano, Giuseppe Perelli, and Moshe Y. Vardi

TL;DR
This paper introduces a more expressive strategy logic for multi-agent systems, proves its model-checking problem is decidable and not harder than existing logics, and explores fragments with elementary complexity.
Contribution
It presents a new, more general strategy logic called SL, extending CHP-SL, with a decidable and computationally manageable model-checking procedure.
Findings
SL includes CHP-SL and maintains decidability.
Model-checking for SL[1G] is 2ExpTime-complete.
Negative results show full SL has NonElementarySpace-hard complexity.
Abstract
In open systems verification, to formally check for reliability, one needs an appropriate formalism to model the interaction between agents and express the correctness of the system no matter how the environment behaves. An important contribution in this context is given by modal logics for strategic ability, in the setting of multi-agent games, such as ATL, ATL\star, and the like. Recently, Chatterjee, Henzinger, and Piterman introduced Strategy Logic, which we denote here by CHP-SL, with the aim of getting a powerful framework for reasoning explicitly about strategies. CHP-SL is obtained by using first-order quantifications over strategies and has been investigated in the very specific setting of two-agents turned-based games, where a non-elementary model-checking algorithm has been provided. While CHP-SL is a very expressive logic, we claim that it does not fully capture the…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsFormal Methods in Verification · Logic, programming, and type systems · Logic, Reasoning, and Knowledge
