Solving Sequential Conditions by Finite-State Strategies
Our main purpose is to present an algorithm which decides whether or not a condition 𝕮(X, Y) stated in sequential calculus admits a finite automata solution, and produces one if it exists. This solves a problem stated in  and contains, as a very special case, the answer to Case 4 left open in . In an equally appealing form the result can be restated in the terminology of , , : Every ω-game definable in sequential calculus is determined. Moreover the player who has a winning strategy, in fact, has a winning finite-state strategy, that is one which can effectively be played in a strong sense. The main proof, that of the central Theorem 1, will be presented at the end. We begin with a discussion of its consequences.
KeywordsSequential Condition Finite Automaton Winning Strategy Sequential Calculus Recursive Operator
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 2.J. R. Buchi, C. E. Elgot and J. B. Wright, The nonexistence of certain algorithms of finite automata theory, Notices Amer. Math. Soc. 5 (1958), 98.Google Scholar
- 4.J. R. Buchi, On a decision method in restricted second order arithmetic, Proc. Internat. Congr. Logic, Method, and Philos. Sci. 1960, Stanford Univ. Press, Stanford, Calif., 1962.Google Scholar
- 5.A. Church, Application of recursive arithmetic to the problem of circuit synthesis, Summaries of Talks Presented at the Summer Institute for Symbolic Logic, Cornell Univ. 1957, 2nd ed; Princeton, N. J., 1960, 3–50.Google Scholar
- 6.A. Church, Logic arithmetic and automata, Proc. Internat. Congr. Math. 1963, Almqvist and Wiksells, Uppsala, 1963.Google Scholar
- 7.M. Davis, “Infinite games of perfect information” in Advances in game theory, Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, N. J., 1964, 85–101.Google Scholar
- 10.D. Gale and F. M. Stewart, “Infinite games with perfect information” in Contributions to the theory of games, Vol. II, Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, N. J., 1953, 245–266.Google Scholar
- 12.S. C. Kleene, “Representation of events in nerve nets and finite automata” in Automata studies, Princeton Univ. Press. Princeton, N. J., 1956, 3–41.Google Scholar
- 13.L. H. Landweber, Finite state games—A solvability algorithm for restricted second-order arithmetic, Notices Amer. Math. Soc. 14 (1967), 129–130.Google Scholar
- 17.M. Rabin, “Effective computability of winning strategies” in Contributions to the theory of games, Vol. III, Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, N. J., 1957, 147–157.Google Scholar
- 19.B. A. Trachtenbrot, Finite automata and the logic of single place predicates, Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR 140 (1961), 320–323 = Soviet Math. Dokl. 2 (1961), 623–626.Google Scholar
- 20.J. R. Buchi and L. G. Landweber, Definability in the monadic second-order theory of successor, J. Symbolic Logic 34 (1969).Google Scholar