skip to main content
research-article

Minkowski Games

Published:30 August 2018Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

We introduce and study Minkowski games. These are two-player games, where the players take turns to choose positions in R<sup<d</sup< based on some rules. Variants include boundedness games, where one player wants to keep the positions bounded, and the other wants to escape to infinity; as well as safety games, where one player wants to stay within a prescribed set, while the other wants to leave it.

We provide some general characterizations of which player can win such games and explore the computational complexity of the associated decision problems. A natural representation of boundedness games yields coNP-completeness, whereas the safety games are undecidable.

References

  1. Rajeev Alur, Vojtech Forejt, Salar Moarref, and Ashutosh Trivedi. 2013. Safe schedulability of bounded-rate multi-mode systems. In Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Hybrid Systems: Computation and Control (HSCC’13). ACM, 243--252. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Rajeev Alur, Ashutosh Trivedi, and Dominik Wojtczak. 2012. Optimal scheduling for constant-rate multi-mode systems. In Proceedings of the Conference on Hybrid Systems: Computation and Control (HSCC’12). ACM, 75--84. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Michael Ben-Or, Dexter Kozen, and John Reif. 1986. The complexity of elementary algebra and geometry. J. Comput. Syst. Sci. 32, 2 (1986), 251--264. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Krishnendu Chatterjee, Laurent Doyen, Thomas A. Henzinger, and Jean-François Raskin. 2010. Generalized mean-payoff and energy games. In Proceedings of the IARCS Annual Conference on Foundations of Software Technology and Theoretical Computer Science (FSTTCS’10), Vol. 8. Schloss Dagstuhl-Leibniz-Zentrum fuer Informatik, 505--516.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Bernard Chazelle. 1993. An optimal convex hull algorithm in any fixed dimension. Discrete Comput. Geom. 10 (1993), 377--409. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. David P. Dobkin and Steven P. Reiss. 1980. The complexity of linear programming. Theoret. Comput. Sci. 11, 1 (1980), 1--18. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Rod Downey and Michael Fellows. 1999. Parameterized Complexity. Springer.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Laurent Doyen and Alexander Rabinovich. 2013. Robot Games. Research Report LSV-13-02. Laboratoire Spécification et Vérification, ENS Cachan, France. Retrieved from http://www.lsv.ens-cachan.fr/Publis/RAPPORTS_LSV/PDF/rr-lsv-2013-02.pdf.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Solomon Feferman. 2006. Tarski’s influence on computer science. Logic. Methods Comput. Sci. 2, 3 (2006), 1--13.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Michael J. Fischer and Michael O. Rabin. 1974. Super-exponential complexity of Presburger arithmetic. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA. http://www.ncstrl.org:8900/ncstrl/servlet/search?formname&equals;detail&id&equals;&equals;&equals;oai%3Ancstrlh%3Amitai%3AMIT-LCS%2F%2FMIT%2FLCS%2FTM-43. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. D. Gale and F. M. Stewart. 1953. Infinite games with perfect information. Ann. Math. Studies 28 (1953), 245--266.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Panos Giannopoulos, Christian Knauer, and Günter Rote. 2009. The parameterized complexity of some geometric problems in unbounded dimension. In Proceedings of the 4th International Workshop on Parameterized and Exact Computation (IWPEC’09), Jianer Chen and Fedor V. Fomin (Eds.). Springer, 198--209. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Thomas A. Henzinger, Benjamin Horowitz, and Rupak Majumdar. 1999. Rectangular hybrid games. In Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Concurrency Theory (CONCUR’99) (Lecture Notes in Computer Science), Vol. 1664. Springer, 320--335. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Thomas A. Henzinger and Peter W. Kopke. 1997. Discrete-time control for rectangular hybrid automata. In Proceedings of the 24th International Colloquium on Automata, Languages, and Programming (ICALP’97) (Lecture Notes in Computer Science), Vol. 1256. Springer, 582--593. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Marcin Jurdzinski, Ranko Lazic, and Sylvain Schmitz. 2015. Fixed-dimensional energy games are in pseudo-polynomial time. In Proceedings of the 42nd International Colloquium on Automata, Languages, and Programming (ICALP’15) (Lecture Notes in Computer Science), Vol. 9135. Springer, 260--272. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Christian Knauer, Stefan König, and Daniel Werner. 2015. Fixed-parameter complexity and approximability of norm maximization. Discrete Comput. Geom. 53, 2 (2015), 276--295. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Stéphane Le Roux and Arno Pauly. 2015. Finite choice, convex choice and finding roots. Logic. Methods Comput. Sci. 11, 4 (2015).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Stéphane Le Roux, Arno Pauly, and Jean-François Raskin. 2017. Minkowski games. In Proceedings of the 34th Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Computer Science (STACS’17) (LIPIcs), Heribert Vollmer and Brigitte Valleé (Eds.), Vol. 66. Schloss Dagstuhl, 50:1--50:13.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Oded Maler, Amir Pnueli, and Joseph Sifakis. 1995. On the Synthesis of Discrete Controllers for Timed Systems. Springer, Berlin, 229--242.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Donald A. Martin. 1975. Borel determinacy. Ann. Math. 102, 2 (1975), pp. 363--371.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. Marvin L. Minsky. 1961. Recursive unsolvability of Post’s problem of “Tag” and other topics in theory of Turing machines. Ann. Math. 74, 3 (1961), 437--455.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. Reino Niskanen, Igor Potapov, and Julien Reichert. 2016. Undecidability of two-dimensional robot games. In Proceedings of the 41st International Symposium on Mathematical Foundations of Computer Science (MFCS’16) (LIPIcs), Piotr Faliszewski, Anca Muscholl, and Rolf Niedermeier (Eds.), Vol. 58. Schloss Dagstuhl, 73:1--73:13.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Christos H. Papadimitriou. 1981. On the complexity of integer programming. J. ACM 28, 4 (Oct. 1981), 765--768. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Arno Pauly. 2016. On the topological aspects of the theory of represented spaces. Computability 5, 2 (2016), 159--180.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  25. Arno Pauly and Willem Fouché. 2017. How constructive is constructing measures? J. Logic Anal. 9 (2017). Retrieved from http://logicandanalysis.org/index.php/jla/issue/view/16.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Amir Pnueli and Roni Rosner. 1989. On the synthesis of a reactive module. In Proceedings of the 16th Annual ACM Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages. ACM Press, 179--190. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Matthias Schröder. 2007. Admissible representations for probability measures. Math. Logic Quart. 53, 4 (2007), 431--445.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  28. user141614 (https://math.stackexchange.com/users/141614/user141614). 2016. Absorbing convex hull into Minkowski sum. Mathematics Stack Exchange. Retrieved from https://math.stackexchange.com/q/1814457.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Klaus Weihrauch. 2000. Computable Analysis. Springer-Verlag. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. Philip Wolfe. 1955. The strict determinateness of certain infinite games. Pacific J. Math. 5 (1955), 841--847.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  31. Martin Ziegler. 2004. Computable operators on regular sets. Math. Logic Quart. 50 (2004), 392--404.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. Minkowski Games

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in

      Full Access

      • Published in

        cover image ACM Transactions on Computational Logic
        ACM Transactions on Computational Logic  Volume 19, Issue 3
        July 2018
        269 pages
        ISSN:1529-3785
        EISSN:1557-945X
        DOI:10.1145/3274693
        • Editor:
        • Orna Kupferman
        Issue’s Table of Contents

        Copyright © 2018 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 30 August 2018
        • Revised: 1 May 2018
        • Accepted: 1 May 2018
        • Received: 1 April 2007
        Published in tocl Volume 19, Issue 3

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article
        • Research
        • Refereed

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader