Modern autonomous Cyber-Physical Systems (CPSs), such as self-driving cars, face increasingly complex demands, and yet are expected to act reliably. The black-box nature often characterizing such systems, especially those relying on neural components, makes it impossible to fully verify the system behavior prior to deployment. Unfortunately, unexpected failures--cases when the system does not comply with its specification--are inevitable and may have catastrophic implications. To improve trust in the system and facilitate future mitigation after a failure occurs, it is important to try to derive an explanation for the unexpected system behavior. This paper introduces the novel concept of leveraging the framework of actual causality for CPS failure explanation. Up until now, this framework was only used to derive explanations in the context of simple systems, such as image classifiers. This paper addresses the theoretical gaps and provides the guidance needed to allow for correct explanation derivation in the CPS domain. Beyond the theoretical contribution, the paper presents two novel, practical, system-agnostic explanation derivation algorithms, allowing to prioritize either explanation optimality or derivation efficiency. The approach is demonstrated and evaluated in the context of a neural-network-controlled autonomous car, designed to avoid collisions.

The discounted sum is a way to aggregate a sequence of weights from a finite alphabet Σ, i.e., for a discount factor λ, the discounted sum of a sequence w_0 w_1 w_2 ⋯ over Σ is ∑_i ∈ℕ w_i λ^i. The target discounted-sum problem, which is currently open, asks, given λ,Σ and a target t, whether there exists an infinite sequence over Σ whose discounted sum is equal to t. We study and solve a probabilistic variant of this problem, i.e., the target discounted-sum problem on Markov chains. To do this, we prove that the event consisting of paths whose discounted sum is equal to the target and has infinitely many distinct suffix sums has probability zero. This structural property allows us to solve the target discounted-sum problem on Markov chains using an automata-theoretic technique. We apply our technical results to Markov decision processes with target discounted-sum objectives: we show that the infimum value and the finite-memory supremum value are computable in pseudo-polynomial time and are attained by deterministic finite-memory strategies.

Recent work in the field of multi-agent systems has sought to use techniques and concepts from the field of formal methods to provide rigorous theoretical analysis and guarantees on complex systems where multiple agents strategically interact, leading to the creation of the field of equilibrium analysis, which studies equilibria concepts from the field of game theory through a complexity-theoretic lens. Multi-agent systems, however, are complex mathematical objects, and, therefore, defining them in a precise mathematical manner is non-trivial. As a result, researchers often considered more restrictive models that are easier to model but lack expressive power or simply omit critical complexity-theoretic results in their analysis. This paper addresses this problem by carefully analyzing and contrasting complexity-theoretic results in the explicit model, a mathematically precise formulation of the models commonly used in the literature, and the circuit-based model, a novel model that addresses the problems found in the literature. The utility of the circuit-based model is demonstrated through a comprehensive analysis that considers upper and lower bounds for the realizability and verification problems, the two most important decision problems in equilibrium analysis, for both models. By conducting this analysis, we see that problematic issues that are endemic to the explicit model and the equilibrium analysis literature as a whole are adequately handled by the circuit-based model.

Finite-horizon probabilistic multiagent concurrent game systems, also known as finite multiplayer stochastic games, are a well-studied model in computer science due to their ability to represent a wide range of real-world scenarios involving strategic interactions among agents over a finite amount of iterations (given by the finite-horizon). The analysis of these games typically focuses on evaluating (verifying) and computing (synthesizing/realizing) which strategy profiles (functions that represent the behavior of each agent) qualify as equilibria. The two most prominent equilibrium concepts are the Nash equilibrium and the subgame perfect equilibrium, with the latter considered a conceptual refinement of the former. However, computing these equilibria from scratch is often computationally infeasible. Therefore, recent attention has shifted to the verification problem, where a given strategy profile must be evaluated to determine whether it satisfies equilibrium conditions. In this paper, we demonstrate that the verification problem for subgame perfect equilibria lies in PSPACE, while for Nash equilibria, it is EXPTIME-complete. This is a highly counterintuitive result since subgame perfect equilibria are often seen as a strict strengthening of Nash equilibria and are intuitively seen as more complicated.

Many reasoning tasks require short partial satisfying assignments (implicants), sometimes focusing on a set of important variables. SAT-to-Ising-QUBO formulations are implicitly designed so that ground states correspond to total assignments, since the Ising/QUBO model assigns a value to every spin and has no native representation of unassigned variables. We introduce an Ising/QUBO framework that incorporates "don't-care" semantics into the quadratic model via a dual-polarity representation, enabling the retrieval of short implicants. The encoding supports implicant shrinking and projection through minor objective modifications. We provide parameter regimes under which ground states correspond to short partial satisfying assignments, achieving minimality and, when the quadratic penalty function permits, minimum-cardinality. We empirically evaluate the encoding with simulated annealing on random 3-SAT enumeration benchmarks and non-CNF formulas, showing that it leaves about one-third of variables unassigned on random 3-SAT formulas while preserving satisfiability, and that consecutive polarity-freezing rounds achieve minimality (and minimum-cardinality) with high probability.

LTLf synthesis under partial observability requires reasoning about unobservable environment variables, which is typically handled by constructing a belief-state DFA via subset construction that universally quantifies these variables. Existing approaches perform this construction as a separate step prior to game solving, often generating belief states that are unnecessary in practice. We propose an on-the-fly approach to LTLf synthesis under partial observability based on observable progression. Our method incrementally builds the belief-state DFA by progressing the specification with respect to observable variables only, universally quantifying unobservable variables on the fly. We prove the correctness of the construction and show that it naturally enables on-the-fly game solving, leading to a fully on-the-fly synthesis framework. Our implementation leverages DFAs represented using Multi-Terminal Binary Decision Diagrams: a compact representation that has proven highly effective for LTLf synthesis under full observability. Experimental results demonstrate that our approach significantly outperforms existing methods and further highlight the practical benefits of integrating on-the-fly game solving with belief-state construction.

Syntactic obligations are a fragment of LTL formulas that translate to deterministic weak ω-automata (DWA). We show that syntactic obligations can be very efficiently converted to minimal DWA represented using multi-terminal binary decision diagrams (MTBDDs), and that synthesis of such specifications can be solved directly on the MTBDD representation on the fly. Our implementation in Spot shows substantial runtime improvements in translation and synthesis.

Linear Temporal Logic (LTL) is one of the most widely adopted languages for specifying temporal extended objectives in AI, with applications ranging from reactive synthesis to stochastic planning in Markov decision processes and reinforcement learning. Traditionally, solving any of these problems requires translating the LTL specification to a nondeterministic automata on infinite words and then determinizing it, a step that is notoriously difficult in theory and in practice. Recent work has introduced LTLf+, which lifts the finite-trace logic LTLf to infinite traces. LTLf+ has the same expressive power as LTL, yet it retains most of the crucial advantages of its base logic LTLf. Most reasoning in LTLf+ rests on finite automata on finite words, for which we have not only a canonical minimal representation but also an efficient determinization procedure. In this work we present the first translation from LTL to LTLf+. We first normalize an LTL formula into the syntactic reactivity fragment of the Manna-Pnueli hierarchy, to create the general fragment-based shape of LTLf+. We then present linear translations for each individual component of that fragment. As a consequence of this translation, the expanding body of techniques developed for LTLf+ now becomes available to many AI problems currently formulated in LTL. We further show that this comes at no asymptotic cost, as the pipeline from LTL to automaton via LTLf+ remains doubly exponential.

Over the past several decades, CDCL SAT solvers have proven remarkably effective on large industrial formulas, despite SAT being NP-complete and widely believed to be intractable. While considerable empirical research has been done on solver performance over benchmarks like the SAT competition, as well as scaling studies on random and crafted families, surprisingly little effort has gone into systematic scaling studies over industrial instances. To address this gap, we collect a large benchmark of Bounded Model Checking (BMC) instances (76,600+ across 766 families) and perform a systematic scaling study of solver performance. We observe a spectrum: some families scale linearly, others polynomially or exponentially. Building on this foundation, we study the structural parameters that have been proposed to explain this phenomenon. We first show that previously proposed parameters – clause-variable ratio, treewidth, and community structure – fail to discriminate between the linear and exponential regimes. By contrast, the recently proposed proofdoor parameter explains this phenomenon well. Informally, a proofdoor is a sequence of interpolants between chunks of a formula, where each interpolant represents the solver's memoization of reasoning effort on chunks it has already analyzed. In support of the proofdoor hypothesis, we make three key contributions. First, we empirically show that CDCL solvers do compute small proofdoors for linearly-scaling BMC instances. Second, we show that for exponentially-scaling instances, sampled proofdoors scale exponentially and are typically not incrementally absorbed. Third, we show that scrambling linearly-scaling instances yields larger proofdoor sizes relative to pre-scrambling, relating poor branching order to larger proofdoor sizes and drop in solver performance.

We study LTLf synthesis with multiple properties, where satisfying all properties may be impossible. Instead of enumerating subsets of properties, we compute in one fixed-point computation the relation between product-game states and the goal sets that are realizable from them, and we synthesize strategies achieving maximal realizable sets. We develop a fully symbolic algorithm that introduces Boolean goal variables and exploits monotonicity to represent exponentially many goal combinations compactly. Our approach substantially outperforms enumeration-based baselines, with speedups of up to two orders of magnitude.

In this work we investigate Weighted Model Enumeration (WME): given a Boolean formula and a weight function over its satisfying assignments, enumerate models while accounting for their weights. This setting supports weight-driven queries, such as producing the top-k models or all models above a threshold. While related to AllSAT, Weighted Model Counting, and MaxSAT, these paradigms do not treat selective enumeration under weights as a native solver task. We present CDCL-based algorithms for WME that integrate weight propagation, weight-based pruning, and weight-aware conflict analysis into both chronological and non-chronological backtracking frameworks. Chronological backtracking exploits implicit blocking and keeps the clause database compact, thereby reducing memory footprint and enabling efficient propagation. In contrast, non-chronological backtracking with clause learning supports explicit blocking and restarts. We show that both approaches are feasible and complementary, highlighting trade-offs in pruning effectiveness with weights and clarifying when each performs best.

We present an on-the-fly synthesis framework for Linear Temporal Logic over finite traces (LTLf) based on top-down deterministic automata construction. Existing approaches rely on constructing a complete Deterministic Finite Automaton (DFA) corresponding to the LTLf specification, a process with doubly exponential complexity relative to formula size in the worst case. In this case, the synthesis cannot be conducted until the entire DFA is constructed. This inefficiency is the main bottleneck of existing approaches. To address this challenge, we first present a method for converting LTLf into Transition-based DFA (TDFA) by directly leveraging LTLf semantics, incorporating intermediate results as direct components of the final automaton to enable parallelized synthesis and automata construction. We then explore the relationship between LTLf synthesis and TDFA games and subsequently develop an algorithm for performing LTLf synthesis via on-the-fly TDFA game solving. This algorithm traverses the state space in a global forward manner combined with a local backward method, along with detecting strongly connected components. Moreover, we introduce two optimization techniques — model-guided synthesis and state entailment — to enhance the practical efficiency of our approach. Experimental results demonstrate that our on-the-fly approach achieves the best performance on the tested benchmarks and effectively complements existing approaches.

In this paper, we study incremental LTLf synthesis -- a form of reactive synthesis where the goals are given incrementally while in execution. In other words, the protagonist agent is already executing a strategy for a certain goal when it receives a new goal: at this point, the agent has to abandon the current strategy and synthesize a new strategy still fulfilling the original goal, which was given at the beginning, as well as the new goal, starting from the current instant. In this paper, we formally define the problem of incremental synthesis and study its solution. We propose a solution technique that efficiently performs incremental synthesis for multiple LTLf goals by leveraging auxiliary data structures constructed during automata-based synthesis. We also consider an alternative solution technique based on LTLf formula progression. We show that, in spite of the fact that formula progression can generate formulas that are exponentially larger than the original ones, their minimal automata remain bounded in size by that of the original formula. On the other hand, we show experimentally that, if implemented naively, i.e., by actually computing the automaton of the progressed LTLf formulas from scratch every time a new goal arrives, the solution based on formula progression is not competitive.

Task planning with temporally extended goals (TEGs) is a critical challenge in AI and robotics, enabling agents to achieve complex sequences of objectives over time rather than addressing isolated, immediate tasks. Linear Temporal Logic on finite traces (LTLf ) provides a robust formalism for encoding these temporal goals. Traditional LTLf task planning approaches often transform the temporal planning problem into a classical planning problem with reachability goals, which are then solved using off-the-shelf planners. However, these methods often lack informed heuristics to provide a guided search for temporal goals. We introduce TIDE (Trace-Informed Depth-first Exploration), a novel approach that addresses this limitation by decomposing a temporal problem into a sequence of smaller, manageable reach-avoid sub-problems, each solvable using an off-the-shelf planner. TIDE identifies and prioritizes promising automaton traces within the domain graph, using cost-driven heuristics to guide exploration. Its adaptive backtracking mechanism systematically recovers from failed plans by recalculating costs and penalizing infeasible transitions, ensuring completeness and efficiency. Experimental results demonstrate that TIDE achieves promising performance and is a valuable addition to the portfolio of planning methods for temporally extended goals.

As part of an effort to apply the rigorous guarantees of formal verification to multi-agent systems, the field of equilibrium analysis, also called rational verification, studies equilibria in multiplayer games to reason about system-level properties such as safety and scalability. While most prior work focuses on deterministic settings, recent probabilistic extensions enable the use of richer equilibrium concepts. In this paper, we study one such equilibrium concept – correlated equilibria – and introduce a natural refinement – subgame-perfect correlated equilibria – in the context of the verification problem. We characterize the computational complexity of verifying such equilibria and show a somewhat surprising separation (under standard complexity-theoretic assumptions): despite being more general, correlated equilibria yield a strictly harder P-complete verification problem than the subgame-perfect correlated equilibria verification problem, which can be solved in log-squared-space. We further analyze the setting where inputs are given succinctly via Bayesian networks, as the study of succinct representations is an important direction to connect static complexity-theoretic analysis to real-world program representations, and show that this complexity gap disappears under such representations.

One of the most famous questions in the philosophy of mathematics is whether mathematics is discovered or invented. As Timothy Gowers wrote: “It has been asked over and over again, and it is not clear what would constitute a satisfactory answer.” In this short article, I address this question from the perspective of a computer scientist. I will argue that the developments of mathematics and computing have dovetailed with each other for thousands of years: Computing begat mathematics, and mathematics begat computing. Furthermore, both are connected to the real world via one of the most amazing faculties of the human mind: the capacity to abstract.