On the synthesis of a reactive module
POPL '89 Proceedings of the 16th ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT symposium on Principles of programming languages
The complexity of probabilistic verification
Journal of the ACM (JACM)
POPL '81 Proceedings of the 8th ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT symposium on Principles of programming languages
Realizable and Unrealizable Specifications of Reactive Systems
ICALP '89 Proceedings of the 16th International Colloquium on Automata, Languages and Programming
On the Synthesis of an Asynchronous Reactive Module
ICALP '89 Proceedings of the 16th International Colloquium on Automata, Languages and Programming
Design and Synthesis of Synchronization Skeletons Using Branching-Time Temporal Logic
Logic of Programs, Workshop
Realizability and Synthesis of Reactive Modules
CAV '94 Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Computer Aided Verification
Freedom, Weakness, and Determinism: From Linear-Time to Branching-Time
LICS '98 Proceedings of the 13th Annual IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science
STOC '82 Proceedings of the fourteenth annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing
Synthesizing Distributed Systems
LICS '01 Proceedings of the 16th Annual IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science
Synthesis of communicating processes from temporal logic specifications
Synthesis of communicating processes from temporal logic specifications
LICS '05 Proceedings of the 20th Annual IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science
Hi-index | 0.00 |
In synthesis we construct finite state systems from temporal specifications. While this problem is well understood in the classical setting of non-probabilistic synthesis, this paper suggests the novel approach of open synthesis under the assumptions of an environment that chooses its actions randomized rather than nondeterministically. Assuming a randomized environment inspires alternative semantics both for linear-time and branching-time logics. For linear-time, natural acceptance criteria are almost-sure and observable acceptance, where it suffices if the probability measure of accepting paths is 1 and greater than 0, respectively. We distinguish 0-environments, which can freely assign probabilities to each environment action, from ε-environments, where the probabilities assigned by the environment are bound from below by some ε0. While the results in case of 0-environments are essentially the same as for nondeterministic environments, the languages occurring in case of ε-environments are topologically different from the results for nondeterministic and 0-environments (in case of LTL, recognizable by weak alternating automata vs. recognizable by deterministic automata). The complexity of open synthesis is, in both cases, EXPTIME and 2EXPTIME-complete for CTL and LTL specifications, respectively.