Synthesizing Dominant Strategies for Liveness (Full Version)
Bernd Finkbeiner, Noemi Passing

TL;DR
This paper introduces delay-dominance, a new strategy winning condition that is compositional for safety and liveness properties, enabling more flexible reactive synthesis in distributed systems.
Contribution
It proposes delay-dominance as a novel, compositional strategy condition for reactive synthesis, along with an automaton construction for recognizing such strategies.
Findings
Delay-dominance is compositional for safety and liveness specifications.
Automaton construction for delay-dominant strategies is sound and complete.
Synthesis of delay-dominant strategies is in 2EXPTIME.
Abstract
Reactive synthesis automatically derives a strategy that satisfies a given specification. However, requiring a strategy to meet the specification in every situation is, in many cases, too hard of a requirement. Particularly in compositional synthesis of distributed systems, individual winning strategies for the processes often do not exist. Remorsefree dominance, a weaker notion than winning, accounts for such situations: dominant strategies are only required to be as good as any alternative strategy, i.e., they are allowed to violate the specification if no other strategy would have satisfied it in the same situation. The composition of dominant strategies is only guaranteed to be dominant for safety properties, though; preventing the use of dominance in compositional synthesis for liveness specifications. Yet, safety properties are often not expressive enough. In this paper, we thus…
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.
