  We consider concurrent games played by two-players on a finite-state graph,
where in every round the players simultaneously choose a move, and the current
state along with the joint moves determine the successor state. We study a
fundamental objective, namely, mean-payoff objective, where a reward is
associated to each transition, and the goal of player 1 is to maximize the
long-run average of the rewards, and the objective of player 2 is strictly the
opposite. The path constraint for player 1 could be qualitative, i.e., the
mean-payoff is the maximal reward, or arbitrarily close to it; or quantitative,
i.e., a given threshold between the minimal and maximal reward. We consider the
computation of the almost-sure (resp. positive) winning sets, where player 1
can ensure that the path constraint is satisfied with probability 1 (resp.
positive probability). Our main results for qualitative path constraints are as
follows: (1) we establish qualitative determinacy results that show that for
every state either player 1 has a strategy to ensure almost-sure (resp.
positive) winning against all player-2 strategies, or player 2 has a spoiling
strategy to falsify almost-sure (resp. positive) winning against all player-1
strategies; (2) we present optimal strategy complexity results that precisely
characterize the classes of strategies required for almost-sure and positive
winning for both players; and (3) we present quadratic time algorithms to
compute the almost-sure and the positive winning sets, matching the best known
bound of algorithms for much simpler problems (such as reachability
objectives). For quantitative constraints we show that a polynomial time
solution for the almost-sure or the positive winning set would imply a solution
to a long-standing open problem (the value problem for turn-based deterministic
mean-payoff games) that is not known to be solvable in polynomial time.
