Abstract
In addition to rigorously checking whether a system conforms to a specification, model checking can provide valuable feedback in the form of succinct and understandable counterexamples. In the context of probabilistic systems, path- and subsystem-based counterexamples at the state-space level can be of limited use in debugging. As many probabilistic systems are described in a guarded command language like the one used by the popular model checker Prism, a technique identifying a subset of critical commands has recently been proposed. Based on repeatedly solving MaxSat instances, our novel approach to computing a minimal critical command set achieves a speed-up of up to five orders of magnitude over the previously existing technique.
This work is partly supported by the Excellence Initiative of the German federal and state governments, the EU-FP7 projects CARP and SENSATION, the EU FP7-IRSES project MEALS, and by the German Research Council (DFG) as part of the Transregional Collaborative Research Center AVACS (SFB/TR 14).
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Aljazzar, H., Leue, S.: Directed explicit state-space search in the generation of counterexamples for stochastic model checking. IEEE Trans. on Software Engineering 36(1), 37–60 (2010)
Alur, R., Henzinger, T.A.: Reactive modules. Formal Methods in System Design 15(1), 7–48 (1999)
Aspnes, J., Herlihy, M.: Fast randomized consensus using shared memory. Journal of Algorithms 11(3), 441–461 (1990)
Baier, C., Katoen, J.-P.: Principles of Model Checking. MIT Press (2008)
Bellman, R.: Dynamic Programming, 1st edn. Princeton University Press, Princeton (1957)
Gheorghiu Bobaru, M., Păsăreanu, C.S., Giannakopoulou, D.: Automated assume-guarantee reasoning by abstraction refinement. In: Gupta, A., Malik, S. (eds.) CAV 2008. LNCS, vol. 5123, pp. 135–148. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)
Bulychev, P., David, A., Guldstrand Larsen, K., Legay, A., Mikučionis, M., Bøgsted Poulsen, D.: Checking and distributing statistical model checking. In: Goodloe, A.E., Person, S. (eds.) NFM 2012. LNCS, vol. 7226, pp. 449–463. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)
Canetti, R., Cheung, L., Kaynar, D.K., Liskov, M., Lynch, N.A., Pereira, O., Segala, R.: Analyzing security protocols using time-bounded task-PIOAs. Discrete Event Dynamic Systems 18(1), 111–159 (2008)
Chatterjee, K., Chmelík, M., Daca, P.: CEGAR for qualitative analysis of probabilistic systems. In: Biere, A., Bloem, R. (eds.) CAV 2014. LNCS, vol. 8559, pp. 473–490. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)
Clarke, E.M., Grumberg, O., Jha, S., Lu, Y., Veith, H.: Counterexample-guided abstraction refinement. In: Emerson, E.A., Sistla, A.P. (eds.) CAV 2000. LNCS, vol. 1855, pp. 154–169. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)
Clarke, E.M., Veith, H.: Counterexamples revisited: Principles, algorithms, applications. In: Dershowitz, N. (ed.) Verification: Theory and Practice. LNCS, vol. 2772, pp. 208–224. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)
de Moura, L.M., Bjørner, N.: Z3: An efficient SMT solver. In: Ramakrishnan, C.R., Rehof, J. (eds.) TACAS 2008. LNCS, vol. 4963, pp. 337–340. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)
Fu, Z., Malik, S.: On solving the partial MAX-SAT problem. In: Biere, A., Gomes, C.P. (eds.) SAT 2006. LNCS, vol. 4121, pp. 252–265. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)
Gastin, P., Moro, P.: Minimal counterexample generation for SPIN. In: Bošnački, D., Edelkamp, S. (eds.) SPIN 2007. LNCS, vol. 4595, pp. 24–38. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)
Gurobi optimization, inc.: Gurobi optimizer reference manual version 5.6 (2014), http://www.gurobi.com/resources/documentation
Han, T., Katoen, J.-P., Damman, B.: Counterexample generation in probabilistic model checking. IEEE Trans. on Software Engineering 35(2), 241–257 (2009)
Hansen, H., Geldenhuys, J.: Cheap and small counterexamples. In: Proc. of SEFM, pp. 53–62. IEEE Computer Society (2008)
Hermanns, H., Wachter, B., Zhang, L.: Probabilistic CEGAR. In: Gupta, A., Malik, S. (eds.) CAV 2008. LNCS, vol. 5123, pp. 162–175. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)
Jansen, N., Wimmer, R., Ábrahám, E., Zajzon, B., Katoen, J.-P., Becker, B.: Symbolic counterexample generation for large discrete-time Markov chains. Science of Computer Programming 91(A), 90–114 (2014)
Katoen, J.-P., van de Pol, J., Stoelinga, M., Timmer, M.: A linear process-algebraic format with data for probabilistic automata. Theoretical Computer Science 413(1), 36–57 (2012)
Katoen, J.-P., Zapreev, I.S., Hahn, E.M., Hermanns, H., Jansen, D.N.: The ins and outs of the probabilistic model checker MRMC. Performance Evaluation 68(2), 90–104 (2011)
Kwiatkowska, M., Norman, G., Parker, D.: PRISM 4.0: Verification of probabilistic real-time systems. In: Gopalakrishnan, G., Qadeer, S. (eds.) CAV 2011. LNCS, vol. 6806, pp. 585–591. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)
Leitner-Fischer, F., Leue, S.: Probabilistic fault tree synthesis using causality computation. IJCCBS 4(2), 119–143 (2013)
Nielson, F., Nielson, H.R., Hankin, C.: Principles of program analysis (2. corr. print). Springer (2005)
Puterman, M.L.: Markov Decision Processes: Discrete Stochastic Dynamic Programming, 1st edn. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York (1994)
Schuppan, V., Biere, A.: Shortest counterexamples for symbolic model checking of LTL with past. In: Halbwachs, N., Zuck, L.D. (eds.) TACAS 2005. LNCS, vol. 3440, pp. 493–509. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)
Segala, R., Lynch, N.A.: Probabilistic simulations for probabilistic processes. Nordic Journal of Computing 2(2), 250–273 (1995)
Stoelinga, M.: Fun with firewire: A comparative study of formal verification methods applied to the IEEE 1394 root contention protocol. Formal Aspects of Computing 14(3), 328–337 (2003)
Wimmer, R., Braitling, B., Becker, B.: Counterexample generation for discrete-time Markov chains using bounded model checking. In: Jones, N.D., Müller-Olm, M. (eds.) VMCAI 2009. LNCS, vol. 5403, pp. 366–380. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)
Wimmer, R., Jansen, N., Ábrahám, E., Becker, B., Katoen, J.-P.: Minimal critical subsystems for discrete-time Markov models. In: Flanagan, C., König, B. (eds.) TACAS 2012. LNCS, vol. 7214, pp. 299–314. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)
Wimmer, R., Jansen, N., Ábrahám, E., Katoen, J.-P., Becker, B.: Minimal counterexamples for linear-time probabilistic verification. Theoretical Computer Science (2014), doi:10.1016/j.tcs.2014.06.020 (accepted for publication)
Wimmer, R., Jansen, N., Vorpahl, A., Ábrahám, E., Katoen, J.-P., Becker, B.: High-level counterexamples for probabilistic automata. In: Joshi, K., Siegle, M., Stoelinga, M., D’Argenio, P.R. (eds.) QEST 2013. LNCS, vol. 8054, pp. 18–33. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this paper
Cite this paper
Dehnert, C., Jansen, N., Wimmer, R., Ábrahám, E., Katoen, JP. (2014). Fast Debugging of PRISM Models. In: Cassez, F., Raskin, JF. (eds) Automated Technology for Verification and Analysis. ATVA 2014. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 8837. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-11936-6_11
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-11936-6_11
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-11935-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-11936-6
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)