Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revision Previous revision
Next revision Both sides next revision
lat:homework [2009/11/27 22:53]
barbara.jobstmann
lat:homework [2009/11/27 22:54]
barbara.jobstmann
Line 28: Line 28:
      - Consider the game shown on page 6 of {{:​slide10.pdf}}. We propose the following "​latest appearance queue" (LAQ) strategy for Player 0, initializing the queue with s<​sub>​1</​sub>​s<​sub>​2</​sub>​s<​sub>​3</​sub>​s<​sub>​4</​sub>,​      - Consider the game shown on page 6 of {{:​slide10.pdf}}. We propose the following "​latest appearance queue" (LAQ) strategy for Player 0, initializing the queue with s<​sub>​1</​sub>​s<​sub>​2</​sub>​s<​sub>​3</​sub>​s<​sub>​4</​sub>,​
         - add the current state at the front of the LAQ and delete the last state         - add the current state at the front of the LAQ and delete the last state
-        - move to the state t<​sub>​i</​sub>​ whose number i is the number of different states in the current LAQ,\\ e.g., for the sequence of states s<​sub>​1</​sub>,​ s<​sub>​3</​sub>,​ s<​sub>​3</​sub>,​ s<​sub>​4</​sub>,​ s<​sub>​1</​sub>,​... we obtain the following sequence of LAQs: s<​sub>​1</​sub>​s<​sub>​2</​sub>​s<​sub>​3</​sub>​s<​sub>​4</​sub>,​ s<​sub>​1</​sub>​s<​sub>​1</​sub>​s<​sub>​2</​sub>​s<​sub>​3</​sub>,​ s<​sub>​3</​sub>​s<​sub>​1</​sub>​s<​sub>​1</​sub>​s<​sub>​2</​sub>,​ s<​sub>​3</​sub>​s<​sub>​3</​sub>​s<​sub>​1</​sub>​s<​sub>​1</​sub>,​ s<​sub>​4</​sub>​s<​sub>​3</​sub>​s<​sub>​3</​sub>​s<​sub>​1</​sub>,​s<​sub>​1</​sub>​s<​sub>​4</​sub>​s<​sub>​3</​sub>​s<​sub>​3</​sub>,​... ​    ​Decide wheater the new LAQ strategy is a winning strategy for Player 0. Prove this or give a counter-example.+        - move to the state t<​sub>​i</​sub>​ whose number i is the number of different states in the current LAQ,\\ e.g., for the sequence of states s<​sub>​1</​sub>,​ s<​sub>​3</​sub>,​ s<​sub>​3</​sub>,​ s<​sub>​4</​sub>,​ s<​sub>​1</​sub>,​... we obtain the following sequence of LAQs: s<​sub>​1</​sub>​s<​sub>​2</​sub>​s<​sub>​3</​sub>​s<​sub>​4</​sub>,​ s<​sub>​1</​sub>​s<​sub>​1</​sub>​s<​sub>​2</​sub>​s<​sub>​3</​sub>,​ s<​sub>​3</​sub>​s<​sub>​1</​sub>​s<​sub>​1</​sub>​s<​sub>​2</​sub>,​ s<​sub>​3</​sub>​s<​sub>​3</​sub>​s<​sub>​1</​sub>​s<​sub>​1</​sub>,​ s<​sub>​4</​sub>​s<​sub>​3</​sub>​s<​sub>​3</​sub>​s<​sub>​1</​sub>,​s<​sub>​1</​sub>​s<​sub>​4</​sub>​s<​sub>​3</​sub>​s<​sub>​3</​sub>,​...\\ Decide wheater the new LAQ strategy is a winning strategy for Player 0. Prove this or give a counter-example.
      - Let A=(S,​s<​sub>​0</​sub>,​T,​p) be a parity automaton with p:S -> {1,..,k}. Construct a Streett automaton B=(S,​s<​sub>​0</​sub>,​T,​F) equivalent to A that has the same transition structure as A. (i.e., find a suitable set of Streett pairs (F_i,E_i))      - Let A=(S,​s<​sub>​0</​sub>,​T,​p) be a parity automaton with p:S -> {1,..,k}. Construct a Streett automaton B=(S,​s<​sub>​0</​sub>,​T,​F) equivalent to A that has the same transition structure as A. (i.e., find a suitable set of Streett pairs (F_i,E_i))