Fair Simulation Minimization

  • Sankar Gurumurthy
  • Roderick Bloem
  • Fabio Somenzi
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2404)


We present an algorithm for the minimization of Büchi automata based on the notion of fair simulation introduced in [6]. Unlike direct simulation, fair simulation allows flexibility in the satisfaction of the acceptance conditions, and hence leads to larger relations. However, it is not always possible to remove edges to simulated states or merge simulation-equivalent states without altering the language of the automaton. Solutions proposed in the past consisted in checking sufficient conditions [11, Theorem 3], or resorting to more restrictive notions like delayed simulation [5]. By contrast, our algorithm exploits the full power of fair simulation by efficiently checking the correctness of changes to the automaton (both merging of states and removal of edges).


Model Check Direct Simulation Winning Strategy Acceptance Condition Simulation Relation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. [1]
    R. Bloem, K. Ravi, and F. Somenzi. Efficient decision procedures for model checking of linear time logic properties. In N. Halbwachs and D. Peled, editors, Eleventh Conference on Computer Aided Verification (CAV’99), pages 222–235. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1999. LNCS 1633.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    D. L. Dill, A. J. Hu, and H. Wong-Toi. Checking for language inclusion using simulation relations. In K. G. Larsen and A. Skou, editors, Third Workshop on Computer Aided Verification (CAV’91), pages 255–265. Springer, Berlin, July 1991. LNCS 575.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    E. A. Emerson and C. S. Jutla. Tree automata, mu-calculus and determinacy. In Proc. 32nd IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, pages 368–377, October 1991.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    K. Etessami and G. J. Holzmann. Optimizing Büchi automata. In Proc. 11th International Conference on Concurrency Theory (CONCUR2000), pages 153–167. Springer, 2000. LNCS 1877.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    K. Etessami, T. Wilke, and A. Schuller. Fair simulation relations, parity games, and state space reduction for Büchi automata. In F. Orejas, P. G. Spirakis, and J. van Leeuwen, editors, Automata, Languages and Programming: 28th International Colloquium, pages 694–707, Crete, Greece, July 2001. Springer. LNCS 2076.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. [6]
    T. Henzinger, O. Kupferman, and S. Rajamani. Fair simulation. In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Concurrency Theory (CONCUR’97), pages 273–287. Springer-Verlag, 1997. LNCS 1243.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    M. Jurdziński. Small progress measures for solving parity games. In STACS 2000, 17th Annual Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Computer Science, pages 290–301, Lille, France, February 2000. Springer. LNCS 1770.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    R. P. Kurshan. Computer-Aided Verification of Coordinating Processes. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 1994.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    O. Lichtenstein and A. Pnueli. Checking that finite state concurrent programs satisfy their linear specification. In Proceedings of the Twelfth Annual ACM Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages, pages 97–107, New Orleans, January 1985.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    R. Milner. Communication and Concurrency. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1989.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. [11]
    F. Somenzi and R. Bloem. Efficient Büchi automata from LTL formulae. In E. A. Emerson and A. P. Sistla, editors, Twelfth Conference on Computer Aided Verification (CAV’00), pages 248–263. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, July 2000. LNCS 1855.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. [12]
    W. Thomas. On the synthesis of strategies in infinite games. In Proc. 12th Annual Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Computer Science, pages 1–13. Springer-Verlag, 1995. LNCS 900.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    P. Wolper, M. Y. Vardi, and A. P. Sistla. Reasoning about infinite computation paths. In Proceedings of the 24th IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, pages 185–194, 1983.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sankar Gurumurthy
    • 1
  • Roderick Bloem
    • 2
  • Fabio Somenzi
    • 1
  1. 1.University of Colorado at BoulderUSA
  2. 2.Technical University of GrazAustria

Personalised recommendations