On-the-Fly Emptiness Checks for Generalized Büchi Automata

Couvreur, Jean‐Michel; Duret-Lutz, Alexandre; Poitrenaud, Denis

doi:10.1007/11537328_15

Cited by 45 publications

(54 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The core algorithm has also been adapted for use with generalized Büchi automata [32] and heuristic search [2,11]. Recent work has looked again at the use of strongly connected component (SCC) algorithms for both standard and generalized Büchi automata [7,8,17,27]; the algorithm we describe in Section 4.2 is based on one such.…”

Section: Verification With Büchi Automatamentioning

confidence: 99%

Larger Automata and Less Work for LTL Model Checking

Geldenhuys

Hansen

2006

Model Checking Software

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Many different automata and algorithms have been investigated in the context of automata-theoretic LTL model checking. This article compares the behaviour of two variations on the widely used Büchi automaton, namely (i) a Büchi automaton where states are labelled with atomic propositions and transitions are unlabelled, and (ii) a form of testing automaton that can only observe changes in state propositions and makes use of special livelock acceptance states. We describe how these variations can be generated from standard Büchi automata, and outline an SCC-based algorithm for verification with testing automata.The variations are compared to standard automata in experiments with both random and human-generated Kripke structures and LTL X formulas, using SCC-based algorithms as well as a recent, improved version of the classic nested search algorithm. The results show that SCCbased algorithms outperform their nested search counterpart, but that the biggest improvements come from using the variant automata.Much work has been done on the generation of small automata, but small automata do not necessarily lead to small products when combined with the system being verified. We investigate the underlying factors for the superior performance of the new variations.

show abstract

Section: Verification With Büchi Automatamentioning

confidence: 99%

Larger Automata and Less Work for LTL Model Checking

Geldenhuys

Hansen

2006

Model Checking Software

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This can be done in different ways~ [5]. We are using Couvreur's SCC-based emptiness check algorithm~ [4] because it needs to traverse the state-space only once, and its complexity does not depend on the number of acceptance conditions.…”

Section: Transition-based Generalized Büchi Automatamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It can be done in two different ways: either with a variation of Tarjan or Dijkstra algorithm~ [4] or using several nested depth-first searches to save memory~ [26]. The latter proved to be slower~ [5], so we are using Couvreur's SCC-based emptiness check algorithm~ [4]. Another advantage of the SCC-based algorithm is that their complexity does not depend on the number of acceptance conditions.…”

Section: B Model Checking Using Tgbamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Any algorithm that translates LTL into a Büchi automaton has to deal with generalized Büchi acceptance conditions at some point, and the process of degeneralizing the Büchi automaton often increases its size. Several emptiness-check algorithms can deal with generalized Büchi acceptance conditions, making such an a degeneralization unnecessary and even costly~ [5]. Moving the acceptance conditions from the states to the transitions also reduces the size of the property automaton~ [4,13].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Model Checking Using Generalized Testing Automata

Salem

Duret-Lutz

Kordon

2012

Transactions on Petri Nets and Other Models of Concurrency VI

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Geldenhuys and Hansen showed that a kind of ω-automata known as Testing Automata (TA) can, in the case of stuttering-insensitive properties, outperform the Büchi automata traditionally used in the automata-theoretic approach to model checking~ [10]. In previous work~[23], we compared TA against Transition-based Generalized Büchi Automata (TGBA), and concluded that TA were more interesting when counterexamples were expected, otherwise TGBA were more efficient. In this work we introduce a new kind of automata, dubbed Transition-based Generalized Testing Automata (TGTA), that combine ideas from TA and TGBA. Implementation and experimentation of TGTA show that they outperform other approaches in most of the cases.

show abstract

“…Another possible improvement is to use an emptiness check algorithm tailored to the property automaton used. For instance generalized emptiness checks [19,9] can be used when the property requires generalized acceptance conditions. Also, simplified procedures can be performed when the strength of the property automaton is weak or terminal [2,6], improving the worst-case complexity by a constant factor.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Strength-Based Decomposition of the Property Büchi Automaton for Faster Model Checking

Renault

Duret-Lutz

Kordon

et al. 2013

Tools and Algorithms for the Construction and Analysis of Systems

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. The automata-theoretic approach for model checking of lineartime temporal properties involves the emptiness check of a large Büchi automaton. Specialized emptiness-check algorithms have been proposed for the cases where the property is represented by a weak or terminal automaton. When the property automaton does not fall into these categories, a general emptiness check is required. This paper focuses on this class of properties. We refine previous approaches by classifying strongly-connected components rather than automata, and suggest a decomposition of the property automaton into three smaller automata capturing the terminal, weak, and the remaining strong behaviors of the property. The three corresponding emptiness checks can be performed independently, using the most appropriate algorithm. Such a decomposition approach can be used with any automata-based model checker. We illustrate the interest of this new approach using explicit and symbolic LTL model checkers.

show abstract

On-the-Fly Emptiness Checks for Generalized Büchi Automata

Cited by 45 publications

References 19 publications

Larger Automata and Less Work for LTL Model Checking

Larger Automata and Less Work for LTL Model Checking

Model Checking Using Generalized Testing Automata

Strength-Based Decomposition of the Property Büchi Automaton for Faster Model Checking

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About