  We discuss and compare complexity measures for the modal $\mu$-calculus,
focusing on size and alternation depth. As a yardstick we take Wilke's
alternating tree automata, which we shall call parity formulas in the text.
Building on work by Bruse, Friedmann & Lange, we compare two size measures for
$\mu$-calculus formulas: subformula-size,i.e. , the number of subformulas of
the given formula, and closure-size. These notions correspond to the
representation of a formula as a parity formula based on, respectively, its
subformula dag, and its closure graph. What distinguishes our approach is that
we are explicit about the role of alpha-equivalence, as naively renaming bound
variables can lead to an exponential blow-up. In addition, we match the
formula's alternation depth with the index of the parity formula. We start in a
setting without alpha-equivalence. We define subformula-size and closure-size
and recall that a $\mu$-calculus formula can be transformed into a parity
formula of size linear wrt subformula size, and give a construction that
transforms a $\mu$-calculus formula into an equivalent parity formula linear
wrt closure-size. Conversely, there is a standard transformation producing a
$\mu$-calculus formula of exponential subformula -- but linear closure-size in
terms of the size of the original parity formula. We identify so-called
untwisted parity formulas for which a transformation linear in subformula-size
exists. We then introduce size notions that are completely invariant under
alpha equivalence. We transfer the result of Bruse et alii, showing that also
in our setting closure-size can be exponentially smaller than subformula-size.
We also show how to rename bound variables so that alpha-equivalence becomes
syntactic identity on the closure set. Finally, we review the complexity of
guarded transformations.
