On the expressiveness and complexity of ATL

Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics)

Volumn 4423 LNCS, Issue , 2007, Pages 243-257

  Laroussinie, François ^a   Markey, Nicolas ^a   Oreiby, Ghassan ^a  

^a CNRS   (France)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

MATHEMATICAL MODELS; MODEL CHECKING; MULTI AGENT SYSTEMS;

COALITIONS; MODALITIES; MULTI-AGENT MODELS;

COMPUTATIONAL COMPLEXITY;

EID: 37149034096     PISSN: 03029743     EISSN: 16113349     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-540-71389-0_18     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (21)

1. M. Adler and N. Immerman. An n! lower bound on formula size. In Proceedings of the 16th Annual Symposium on Logic in Computer Science (LICS'01), p. 197-206. IEEE CSP, 2001.
2. R. Alur, T. A. Henzinger, and O. Kupferman. Alternating-time temporal logic. In Proc. 38th Annual Symp. Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS'97), p. 100-109. IEEE CSP, 1997.
3. R. Alur, T. A. Henzinger, and O. Kupferman. Alternating-time temporal logic. J. ACM, 49(5):672-713, 2002.
4. R. Alur, T. A. Henzinger, O. Kupferman, and M. Y. Vardi. Alternating refinement relations. In Proc. 9th Intl Conf. Concurrency Theory (CONCUR '98), vol. 1466 of LNCS, p. 163-178. Springer, 1998.
5. R. Alur, T. A. Henzinger, F. Y. C. Mang, S. Qadeer, S. K. Rajamani, and S. Tasiran. Mocha: Modularity in model checking. In Proc. 10th Intl Conf. Computer Aided Verification (CAV'98), vol. 1427 of LNCS, p. 521-525. Springer, 1998.
6. M. Cadoli, A. Giovanardi, and M. Schaerf. An algorithm to evaluate quantified boolean formulae. Journal of Automated Reasoning, 28(2):101-142, 2002.
7. E. M. Clarke and E. A. Emerson. Design and synthesis of synchronous skeletons using branching-time temporal logic. In Proc. 3rd Workshop Logics of Programs (LOP'81), vol. 131 of LNCS, p. 52-71. Springer, 1981.
8. E. A. Emerson. Temporal and modal logic. In Handbook of Theoretical Computer Science, vol. B, chapter 16, p. 995-1072. Elsevier, 1990.
9. V. Goranko and G. van Drimmelen. Complete axiomatization and decidability of alternating-time temporal logic. Theoretical Computer Science, 353(1-3):93-117, Mar. 2006.
10. A. Harding, M. Ryan, and P.-Y. Schobbens. Approximating ATL* in ATL. In Revised Papers 3rd Intl Workshop Verification, Model Checking, and Abstract Interpretation (VMCAI'02), vol. 2294 of LNCS, p. 289-301. Springer, 2002.
11. W. Jamroga and J. Dix. Do agents make model checking explode (computationally)? In Proc. 4th Intl Centr. and East. Europ. Conf. Multi-Agent Systems (CEEMAS'05), vol. 3690 of LNCS. Springer, 2005.
12. W. Jamroga and J. Dix. Model checking abilities of agents: A closer look. Technical Report IfI-06-02, Institut für Informatik, Technische Universität Clausthal, Germany, 2006.
13. F. Laroussinie, N. Markey, and G. Oreiby. Expressiveness and complexity of ATL. Technical Report LSV-06-03, Lab. Spécification & Vérification, ENS Cachan, France, 2006.
14. + and FCTL is hard. In Proc. 4th Intl Conf. Foundations of Software Science and Computation Structure (FoSSaCS'01), vol. 2030 of LNCS, p. 318-331. Springer, 2001.
15. Ch. Papadimitriou. Computational Complexity. Addison-Wesley, 1994.
16. A. Pnueli. The temporal logic of programs. In Proc. 18th Ann. Symp. Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS'77), p. 46-57. IEEE Comp. Soc. Press, 1977.
17. J.-P. Queille and J. Sifakis. Specification and verification of concurrent systems in CESAR. In Proc. 5th Intl Symp. on Programming (SOP'82), vol. 137 of LNCS, p. 337-351. Springer, 1982.
18. P.-Y. Schobbens. Alternating-time logic with imperfect recall. In Proc. 1st Workshop Logic and Communication in Multi-Agent Systems (LCMAS'03), vol. 85 of ENTCS. Elsevier, 2004.
19. D. Walther, C. Lutz, F. Wolter, and M. Wooldridge. ATL satisfiability is indeed EXPTIME-complete. Journal of Logic and Computation, 2006. To appear.
20. I. Walukiewicz. A landscape with games in the background. In Proc. 19th Ann. Symp. Logic in Computer Science (LICS'04), p. 356-366. IEEE CSP, 2004.
21. + is exponentially more succinct than CTL. In Proc. 19th Conf. Foundations of Software Technology and Theoretical Computer Science (FSTTCS'99), vol. 1738 of LNCS, p. 110-121. Springer, 1999.