Memory-efficient algorithms for the verification of temporal properties

Courcoubetis, Costas; Vardi, Moshe Y.; Wolper, Pierre; Yannakakis, Mihalis

doi:10.1007/bf00121128

Cited by 364 publications

(259 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

258

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Unlike the algorithms proposed in [14,16,20], our algorithm uses only one depthfirst search (DFS) instead of two. This is due to the fact that our algorithm explores directly the product graph using the sign of the nodes (positive, negative or neutral).…”

Section: Model Checking Algorithmmentioning

confidence: 99%

Model checking communicative agent-based systems

Meyer

Wang

2009

Knowledge-Based Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Model checking is a formal technique used to verify communication protocols against given properties. In this paper, we address the problem of verifying systems designed as a set of autonomous interacting agents using such a technique. These software agents are equipped with knowledge and beliefs and interact with each other according to protocols governed by a set of logical rules. We present a tableau-based model checking algorithm for these systems and provide the termination and complexity results.

show abstract

Section: Model Checking Algorithmmentioning

confidence: 99%

Model checking communicative agent-based systems

Meyer

Wang

2009

Knowledge-Based Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The algorithm we propose here is inspired by the weak process fairness algorithm used in Spin [15,2], which is a combination of the Nested Depth First Search (NDFS) algorithm [7] and Choueka's flag algorithm [5]. In the automatatheoretic approach, to verify a property expressed by an LTL formula, the negation of the formula is translated into a Büchi automaton, which is combined with the transition system representing the state space of the system.…”

Section: Incorporating T-fairness Into the Verification Algorithmmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Whenever Procedure 8 detects an accepting state, it starts Procedure 9, which is again a DFS, that reports an accepting state if the seed state is matched within the cycle-check. Here we omit a detailed description of the NDFS algorithm and refer the interested reader to [7]. The correctness of the algorithm is given by the following claim: erty to check and generate the pan verifier for this property; (5) Transform the pan verifier with pan2tfpan to the new pan verifier, which will check the property under the t-fairness condition.…”

Section: Lemma 7 Given An Lts T Let T Be a System Produced From Symentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Using Fairness to Make Abstractions Work

Bošnački

Ioustinova

Sidorova

2004

Model Checking Software

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Dragan Bo˘na˘ki C e n t r u m v o o r W i s k u n d e e n I n f o r m a t i c a Software ENgineeringUsing Fairness To Make Abstractions Work Dragan Bosnacki, Natalia Ioustinova, Natalia Sidorova Using Fairness To Make Abstractions Work ABSTRACT Abstractions often introduce infinite traces which have no corresponding traces at the concrete level and can lead to the failure of the verification. Refinement does not always help to eliminate those traces. In this paper, we consider a timer abstraction that introduces a cyclic behaviour on abstract timers and we show how one can exclude cycles by imposing a strong fairness constraint on the abstract model. By employing the fact that the loop on the abstract timer is a self-loop, we render the strong fairness constraint into a weak fairness constraint and embed it into the verification algorithm. We implemented the algorithm in the DTSpin model checker and showed its efficiency on case studies. The same approach can be used for other data abstractions that introduce self-loops. Abstract. Abstractions often introduce infinite traces which have no corresponding traces at the concrete level and can lead to the failure of the verification. Refinement does not always help to eliminate those traces. In this paper, we consider a timer abstraction that introduces a cyclic behaviour on abstract timers and we show how one can exclude cycles by imposing a strong fairness constraint on the abstract model. By employing the fact that the loop on the abstract timer is a self-loop, we render the strong fairness constraint into a weak fairness constraint and embed it into the verification algorithm. We implemented the algorithm in the DT Spin model checker and showed its efficiency on case studies. The same approach can be used for other data abstractions that introduce self-loops. REPORT SEN-E0313 DECEMBER 16, 2003 SEN

show abstract

“…However, the computation of the product automaton A Φ × A S usually yields in very large state spaces the number of states of the system is multiplied with the number of states of the ω-automaton. For this reason, sophisticated techniques as on-the-fly methods [12,13] and partial-order reductions [14,15,16] have been developed.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Model Checking on Product Structures

Schneider

1998

Formal Methods in Computer-Aided Design

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We present an algorithm for checking CTL formulas in Kripke structures with side conditions, where the side conditions define new variables in terms of path formulas. Given any CTL formula where the defined variables may occur, the presented algorithm will determine the set of states where the CTL * formula holds that is obtained by replacing each new variable defined by a side condition by its definition. The basic idea of our algorithm is to translate each side condition to a Kripke structure that encodes precisely the definition of the new variable. After that, we compute the products of these structures with the given structure and use a generalization of the well-known CTL model checking procedure. The presented model checking procedure can still be implemented as a symbolic model checking procedure (e.g. with BDDs). We moreover show how each CTL * model checking problem can be translated efficiently to a CTL model checking problem with side conditions, and hence show that the method can be used to construct efficient CTL * and LTL model checking procedures. Moreover, it is shown that for LTL model checking, we can still use standard CTL model checking procedures instead of our generalized version.

show abstract

Memory-efficient algorithms for the verification of temporal properties

Cited by 364 publications

References 22 publications

Model checking communicative agent-based systems

Model checking communicative agent-based systems

Using Fairness to Make Abstractions Work

Model Checking on Product Structures

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About