Does It Pay to Extend the Perimeter of a World Model?

  • Werner Damm
  • Bernd Finkbeiner
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6664)


Will the cost for observing additional real-world phenomena in a world model be recovered by the resulting increase in the quality of the implementations based on the model? We address the quest for optimal models in light of industrial practices in systems engineering, where the development of control strategies is based on combined models of a system and its environment. We introduce the notion of remorsefree dominance between strategies, where one strategy is preferred over another if it outperforms the other strategy in comparable situations, even if neither strategy is guaranteed to achieve all objectives. We call a world model optimal if it is sufficiently precise to allow for a remorsefree dominating strategy that is guaranteed to remain dominant even if the world model is refined. We present algorithms for the automatic verification and synthesis of dominant strategies, based on tree automata constructions from reactive synthesis.


Dominant Strategy Strategy Class World Model Driver Assistance System Tree Automaton 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Pnueli, A., Rosner, R.: On the synthesis of a reactive module. In: Proc. of POPL, pp. 179–190 (1989)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kupferman, O., Vardi, M.Y.: Synthesis with incomplete informatio. In: Proc. of ICTL (1997)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Finkbeiner, B., Schewe, S.: Uniform distributed synthesis. In: Proc. of LICS, pp. 321–330 (2005)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Piterman, N., Pnueli, A., Sa’ar, Y.: Synthesis of reactive(1) designs. In: Proc. of VMCAI, pp. 364–380 (2006)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Finkbeiner, B., Schewe, S.: SMT-based synthesis of distributed systems. In: Proc. of AFM (2007)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Manna, Z., Pnueli, A.: The Temporal Logic of Reactive and Concurrent Systems: Specification. Springer, New York (1991)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Grädel, E., Thomas, W., Wilke, T. (eds.): Automata, Logics, and Infinite Games. LNCS, vol. 2500. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Vardi, M.Y., Wilke, T.: Automata: from logics to algorithms. In: Flum, J., Grädel, E., Wilke, T. (eds.) Logic and Automata: History and Perspectives, pp. 629–736 (2007)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Jurdziński, M.: Small progress measures for solving parity games. In: Proc. STACS, pp. 290–301 (2000)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Loomes, G., Sugden, R.: Regret theory: An alternative theory of rational choice under uncertainty. Economic Journal 92, 805–824 (1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Werner Damm
    • 1
  • Bernd Finkbeiner
    • 2
  1. 1.Carl von Ossietzky Universität OldenburgGermany
  2. 2.Universität des SaarlandesGermany

Personalised recommendations