Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Optimising the ProB model checker for B using partial order reduction

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Formal Aspects of Computing

Abstract

Partial order reduction has been very successful at combatting the state explosion problem for lower-level formalisms, but has thus far made hardly any impact for model checking higher-level formalisms such as B, Z or TLA+. This paper attempts to remedy this issue in the context of Event-B, with its much more fine-grained events and thus increased potential for event-independence and partial order reduction. In this work, we provide a detailed description of a partial order reduction for explicit state model checking in ProB. The technique is evaluated on a variety of models. The implementation of the method is discussed, which is based on new constraint-based analyses. Further, we give a comprehensive description for elaborating the implementation into the LTL model checker of ProB for checking LTL−X formulae.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Abrial J-R (1996) The B-book: assigning programs to meanings. Cambridge University Press, New York

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. Abrial J-R (2010) Modeling in Event-B: system and software engineering, 1st edn. Cambridge University Press, New York

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  3. Ait-Sadoune I, Ait-Ameur Y (2009) A proof based approach for modelling and verifying web services compositions. In: ICECCS ’09, Washington, DC, USA. IEEE Computer Society, pp 1–10

  4. Abrial J-R, Butler M, Hallertede S, Voisin L (2006) An open extensible tool environment for Event-B. In: ICFEM 2006. LNCS, vol 4260. Springer, pp 588–605

  5. Bene N, Brim L, Černá I, Sochor J, Vařeková P, Zimmerova B (2009) Partial order reduction for state/event LTL. In: iFM 2009. LNCS, vol 5423. Springer, Berlin, pp 307–321

  6. Barnat J, Brim L, Havel V, Havlíček J, Kriho J, Lenčo M, Ročkai P, Štill V, Weiser J (2013) DiVinE 3.0—an explicit-state model checker for multithreaded C & C++ programs. In: CAV. LNCS, vol 8044. Springer, Berlin, pp 863–868

  7. Barnat J, Brim L, Rockai P (2010) Parallel partial order reduction with topological sort proviso. In: SEFM. IEEE Computer Society, pp 222–231

  8. Boström P, Degerlund F, Sere K, Waldén M (2014) Derivation of concurrent programs by stepwise scheduling of Event-B models. Form Asp Comput 26(2): 281–303

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  9. Bendisposto J, Leuschel M (2009) Proof assisted model checking for B. In: ICFEM. LNCS, vol 5885, pp 504–520, Springer, Berlin

  10. Bendisposto J, Leuschel M (2011) Automatic flow analysis for Event-B. In: FASE. LNCS, vol 6603. Springer, Berlin, pp 50–64

  11. Baier C, Katoen J-P (2008) Principles of model checking. The MIT Press, Boston

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. Bosnacki D, Leue S, Lluch-Lafuente A (2009) Partial-order reduction for general state exploring algorithms. STTT 11(1): 39–51

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. Chaki S, Clarke EM, Ouaknine J, Sharygina N, Sinha N (2004) State/event based software model checking. In: iFM. LNCS, vol 2999, pp 128–147

  14. Clarke Jr, Edmund M, Grumberg O, Peled DA (1999) Model checking. MIT Press, Cambridge

  15. Clarke EM, Grumberg O, Minea M, Peled D (1999) State space reduction using partial order techniques. Int J STTT 2(3):279–287

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  16. Dobrikov I, Leuschel M (2014) Optimising the ProB model checker for B using partial order reduction. In: SEFM LNCS, vol 8702, pp 220–234

  17. Esparza J, Lammich P, Neumann R, Nipkow T, Schimpf A, Smaus J-G (2013) A fully verified executable LTL model checker. In: CAV. LNCS, vol 8044. Springer, Berlin pp 463–478

  18. Godefroid P (1996) Partial-order methods for the verification of concurrent systems—an approach to the state-explosion problem. LNCS, vol 1032. Springer, Berlin

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  19. Godefroid P, Pirottin D (993) Refining dependencies improves partial-order verification methods. In: CAV. LNCS, vol 697. Springer, Berlin

  20. Godefroid P, Wolper P (1991) Using partial orders for the efficient verification of deadlock freedom and safety properties. In: CAV. LNCS, vol 575, pp 332–342. Springer, Berlin

  21. Holzmann G (2003) Spin model checker, the: primer and reference manual, 1st edn. Addison-Wesley Professional, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  22. Holzmann G, Peled D (1994) An improvement in formal verification. In: Proceedings FORTE, pp 197–211

  23. Kant G, Laarman A, Meijer J, van de Pol J, Blom S, van Dijk T (2015) LTSmin: high-performance language-independent model checking. In: TACAS. LNCS, vol 9035. Springer, Berlin, pp 692–707

  24. Leuschel M (2008) The high road to formal validation: model checking high-level versus low-level specifications. In: ABZ. LNCS, vol 5238. Springer, Berlin, pp 4–23

  25. Leuschel M, Butler M, Spermann C, Turner E (2007) Symmetry reduction for B by permutation flooding. In: Proceedings B’2007. LNCS, vol 4355. Springer, Berlin, pp 79–93

  26. Leuschel M, Butler M (2008) ProB: an automated analysis toolset for the B method. STTT 10(2): 185–203

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Leuschel M, Bendisposto J (2010) Directed model checking for B: an evaluation and new techniques. In: SBMF’ 2010. LNCS, vol 6527. Springer, Berlin, pp 1–16

  28. Leuschel M, Massart T (2007) Efficient approximative verification for B via symmetry markers. In: Proceedings international symmetry conference, pp 71–85, January

  29. Lichtenstein O, Pnueli A (1985) Checking that finite state concurrent programs satisfy their linear specifications. In: POPL’85, New York, NY, USA, ACM, pp 97–107

  30. Laarman A, Wijs A (2014) Partial-order reduction for multi-core LTL model checking. In: HVC 2014. LNCS, vol 8855. Springer, Berlin, pp 267–283

  31. Nipkow T, Wenzel M, Paulson LC (2002) Isabelle/HOL-A proof assistant for Higher-Order Logic. Springer, Berlin

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  32. Pnueli A (1977) The temporal logic of programs. In: Proceedings of 18th IEEE symposium on foundations of computer science (SFCS ’77). IEEE Computer Society Press, pp 46–57

  33. Peled D (1994) Combining partial order reduction with on-the-fly model-checking. In: Proceedings of the sixth workshop on CAV. LNCS, vol 818. Springer, Berlin, pp 377–390

  34. Plagge D, Leuschel M (2010) Seven at one stroke: LTL model checking for high-level specifications in B, Z, CSP, and more. STTT 12(1): 9–21

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Peled D, Wilke T (1997) Stutter-invariant temporal properties are expressible without the next-time operator. Inf Process Lett. 63(5): 243–246

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  36. Rosa CD, Merz S, Quinson M (2010) A simple model of communication APIs—application to dynamic partial-order reduction. ECEASST 35

  37. Sun J, Liu Y, Dong JS (2008) Model checking CSP revisited: introducing a process analysis toolkit. In: Proceedings of ISoLA. Springer, Berlin, pp 307–322

  38. Tarjan R (1972) Depth first search and linear graph algorithms. SIAM J Comput 1(2): 146–160

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  39. Turner E, Leuschel M, Spermann C, Butler M (2007) Symmetry reduced model checking for B. In: TASE. IEEE, pp 25–34

  40. Valmari A (1989) Stubborn sets for reduced state space generation. In: Applications and theory of petri nets, pp 491–515

  41. Valmari A (1989) Eliminating redundant interleavings during concurrent program verification. In: PARLE. LNCS, vol 366, Springer, Berlin, pp 89–103

  42. Valmari A (1990) A stubborn attack on state explosion. In: CAV, pp 156–165

  43. Valmari A (1996) Stubborn set methods for process algebras. In: DIMACS, vol 29, pp 213–231

  44. Wehrheim H (1999) Partial order reductions for failures refinement. In: Proceedings of the 6th international workshop on expressiveness in concurrency, Electronic notes in theoretical computer science, vol 27, pp 71–84

  45. Zheng M, Sanán D, Sun J, Liu Y, Dong JS, Gu Y (2013) State space reduction for sensor networks using two-level partial order reduction. In: VMCAI, pp 515–535

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institut für Informatik, Heinrich-Heine Universität Düsseldorf, Universitätstr. 1, 40225, Düsseldorf, Germany

    Ivaylo Dobrikov & Michael Leuschel

Authors
  1. Ivaylo Dobrikov
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Michael Leuschel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ivaylo Dobrikov.

Additional information

Communicated by Dimitra Giannakopoulou, Gwen Salaün, and Michael Butler

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Dobrikov, I., Leuschel, M. Optimising the ProB model checker for B using partial order reduction. Form Asp Comp 28, 295–323 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00165-015-0351-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00165-015-0351-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation