Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Detailed Answer
Quick Answer
Concise responses based on abstracts only
Detailed Answer
Well-researched responses based on abstracts and relevant paper content.
Custom Instructions Pro
Preferences or requirements that you'd like Emergent Mind to consider when generating responses
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash 64 tok/s
Gemini 2.5 Pro 50 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 Medium 30 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 High 35 tok/s Pro
GPT-4o 77 tok/s Pro
Kimi K2 174 tok/s Pro
GPT OSS 120B 457 tok/s Pro
Claude Sonnet 4 37 tok/s Pro
2000 character limit reached

The complexity of mean payoff games using universal graphs (1812.07072v2)

Published 17 Dec 2018 in cs.GT, cs.FL, and cs.LO

Abstract: We study the computational complexity of solving mean payoff games. This class of games can be seen as an extension of parity games, and they have similar complexity status: in both cases solving them is in $\textbf{NP} \cap \textbf{coNP}$ and not known to be in $\textbf{P}$. In a breakthrough result Calude, Jain, Khoussainov, Li, and Stephan constructed in 2017 a quasipolynomial time algorithm for solving parity games, which was quickly followed by two other algorithms with the same complexity. Our objective is to investigate how these techniques can be extended to the study of mean payoff games. The starting point is the notion of separating automata, which has been used to present all three quasipolynomial time algorithms for parity games and gives the best complexity to date. The notion naturally extends to mean payoff games and yields a class of algorithms for solving mean payoff games. The contribution of this paper is to prove tight bounds on the complexity of algorithms in this class. We construct two new algorithms for solving mean payoff games. Our first algorithm depends on the largest weight $N$ (in absolute value) appearing in the graph and runs in sublinear time in $N$, improving over the previously known linear dependence in $N$. Our second algorithm runs in polynomial time for a fixed number $k$ of weights. We complement our upper bounds by providing in both cases almost matching lower bounds, showing the limitations of the separating automata approach. We show that we cannot hope to improve on the dependence in $N$ nor break the linear dependence in the exponent in the number $k$ of weights. In particular, this shows that separating automata do not yield a quasipolynomial algorithm for solving mean payoff games.

Citations (8)
List To Do Tasks Checklist Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Collections

Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.

Dice Question Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Follow-Up Questions

We haven't generated follow-up questions for this paper yet.

Don't miss out on important new AI/ML research

See which papers are being discussed right now on X, Reddit, and more:

“Emergent Mind helps me see which AI papers have caught fire online.”

Philip

Philip

Creator, AI Explained on YouTube