  In GFG automata, it is possible to resolve nondeterminism in a way that only
depends on the past and still accepts all the words in the language. The
motivation for GFG automata comes from their adequacy for games and synthesis,
wherein general nondeterminism is inappropriate. We continue the ongoing effort
of studying the power of nondeterminism in GFG automata. Initial indications
have hinted that every GFG automaton embodies a deterministic one. Today we
know that this is not the case, and in fact GFG automata may be exponentially
more succinct than deterministic ones.
  We focus on the typeness question, namely the question of whether a GFG
automaton with a certain acceptance condition has an equivalent GFG automaton
with a weaker acceptance condition on the same structure. Beyond the
theoretical interest in studying typeness, its existence implies efficient
translations among different acceptance conditions. This practical issue is of
special interest in the context of games, where the Buchi and co-Buchi
conditions admit memoryless strategies for both players. Typeness is known to
hold for deterministic automata and not to hold for general nondeterministic
automata.
  We show that GFG automata enjoy the benefits of typeness, similarly to the
case of deterministic automata. In particular, when Rabin or Streett GFG
automata have equivalent Buchi or co-Buchi GFG automata, respectively, then
such equivalent automata can be defined on a substructure of the original
automata. Using our typeness results, we further study the place of GFG
automata in between deterministic and nondeterministic ones. Specifically,
considering automata complementation, we show that GFG automata lean toward
nondeterministic ones, admitting an exponential state blow-up in the
complementation of a Streett automaton into a Rabin automaton, as opposed to
the constant blow-up in the deterministic case.
