The Complexity of Reachability in Affine Vector Addition Systems with States
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Vector addition systems with states (VASS) are widely used for the formal verification of concurrent systems. Given their tremendous computational complexity, practical approaches have relied on techniques such as reachability relaxations, e.g., allowing for negative intermediate counter values. It is natural to question their feasibility for VASS enriched with primitives that typically translate into undecidability. Spurred by this concern, we pinpoint the complexity of integer relaxations with respect to arbitrary classes of affine operations. More specifically, we provide a trichotomy on the complexity of integer reachability in VASS extended with affine operations (affine VASS). Namely, we show that it is NP-complete for VASS with resets, PSPACE-complete for VASS with (pseudo-)transfers and VASS with (pseudo-)copies, and undecidable for any other class. We further present a dichotomy for standard reachability in affine VASS: it is decidable for VASS with permutations, and undecidable for any other class. This yields a complete and unified complexity landscape of reachability in affine VASS. We also consider the reachability problem parameterized by a fixed affine VASS, rather than a class, and we show that the complexity landscape is arbitrary in this setting.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".