Abstract
When dealing with unrealizable specifications in reactive synthesis, finding the weakest environment assumptions that ensure realizability is often considered a desirable property. However, little effort has been dedicated to defining or evaluating the notion of weakness of assumptions formally. The question of whether one assumption is weaker than another is commonly interpreted by considering the implication relationship between the two or, equivalently, their language inclusion. This interpretation fails to provide any insight into the weakness of the assumptions when implication (or language inclusion) does not hold. To our knowledge, the only measure that is capable of comparing two formulae in this case is entropy, but even it cannot distinguish the weakness of assumptions expressed as fairness properties. In this paper, we propose a refined measure of weakness based on combining entropy with Hausdorff dimension, a concept that captures the notion of size of the \(\omega \)-language satisfying a linear temporal logic formula. We focus on a special subset of linear temporal logic formulae which is of particular interest in reactive synthesis, called GR(1). We identify the conditions under which this measure is guaranteed to distinguish between weaker and stronger GR(1) formulae, and propose a refined measure to cover cases when two formulae are strictly ordered by implication but have the same entropy and Hausdorff dimension. We prove the consistency between our weakness measure and logical implication, that is, if one formula implies another, the latter is weaker than the former according to our measure. We evaluate our proposed weakness measure in two contexts. The first is in computing GR(1) assumption refinements where our weakness measure is used as a heuristic to drive the refinement search towards weaker solutions. The second is in the context of quantitative model checking where it is used to measure the size of the language of a model violating a linear temporal logic formula.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Almagor, S., Avni, G., Kupferman, O.: Automatic generation of quality specifications. International conference on computer aided verification (CAV), pp. 479–494. Springer, Berlin (2013)
Asarin E, Blockelet M, Degorre A (2014) Entropy model checking. In: Workshop on Quantitative Aspects of Programming Languages (QAPL)—joint with european joint conference on theory and practice of software (ETAPS)
Asarin E, Blockelet M, Degorre A, Dima C, Mu C (2014) Asymptotic behaviour in temporal logic. In: Joint meeting of the annual conference on computer science logic and the annual symposium on logic in computer science (CSL/LICS). ACM Press, pp 1–9
Albarghouthi, A., Dillig, I., Gurfinkel, A.: Maximal specification synthesis. ACM SIGPLAN Notices 51(1), 789–801 (2016)
Alur, R., Moarref, S., Topcu, U.: Counter-strategy guided refinement of GR(1) temporal logic specifications. International conference on formal methods in computer-aided design (FMCAD), pp. 26–33. Springer, Berlin (2013)
Alur, R., Moarref, S., Topcu, U.: Pattern-based refinement of assume-guarantee specifications in reactive synthesis. International conference on tools and algorithms for the construction and analysis of systems (TACAS), pp. 501–516. Springer, Berlin (2015)
Bloem, R., Cimatti, A., Greimel, K., Hofferek, G., Könighofer, R., Roveri, M., Schuppan, V., Seeber, R.: RATSY: a new requirements analysis tool with synthesis. International conference on computer aided verification (CAV), pp. 425–429. Springer, Berlin (2010)
Bloem, R., Chatterjee, K., Greimel, K., Henzinger, T.A., Hofferek, G., Jobstmann, B., Könighofer, B., Könighofer, R.: Synthesizing robust systems. Acta Inf 51(3–4), 193–220 (2014)
Bloem, R., Chatterjee, K., Henzinger, T.A., Jobstmann, B.: Better quality in synthesis through quantitative objectives. International conference on computer aided verification (CAV), pp. 140–156. Springer, Berlin (2009)
Braberman V, D'Ippolito N, Piterman N, Sykes D, Uchitel S (2013) Controller synthesis: from modelling to enactment. In: International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE), pp 1347–1350. IEEE
Bloem, R., Jobstmann, B., Piterman, N., Pnueli, A., Sa'Ar, Y.: Synthesis of reactive(1) designs. J Comput Syst Sci 78(3), 911–938 (2012)
Babiak, T., Křetínský, M., Řehák, V., Strejček, J.: LTL to Büchi automata translation: fast and more deterministic. International conference and tools and algorithms for the construction and analysis of systems (TACAS), pp. 95–109. Springer, Berlin (2012)
Berman, A., Plemmons, R.: Nonnegative matrices in the mathematical sciences. Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, Philadelphia (1994)
Cavezza DG, Alrajeh D (2016) Interpolation-based GR(1) assumptions refinement. CoRR, arXiv:1611.07803
Cavezza, D.G., Alrajeh, D.: Interpolation-based GR(1) assumptions refinement. International conference on tools and algorithms for the construction and analysis of systems (TACAS), pp. 281–297. Springer, Berlin (2017)
Cavezza DG, Alrajeh D, György A (2018) A weakness measure for GR(1) formulae. In: International symposium on formal methods (FM), pp 110–128
Chatterjee, K., De Alfaro, L., Faella, M., Henzinger, T.A., Majumdar, R., Stoelinga, M.: Compositional quantitative reasoning. International conference on the quantitative evaluation of systems (QEST), pp. 179–188. Springer, Berlin (2006)
Cobleigh, J.M., Giannakopoulou, D., Păsăreanu, C.S.: Learning assumptions for compositional verification. International conference on tools and algorithms for the construction and analysis of systems (TACAS), pp. 331–346. Springer, Berlin (2003)
Chatterjee, K., Henzinger, T.A., Jobstmann, B.: Environment assumptions for synthesis. International conference on concurrency theory (CONCUR), pp. 147–161. Springer, Berlin (2008)
Calude, C.S., Jürgensen, H., Staiger, L.: Topology on words. Theor Comput Sci 410(24–25), 2323–2335 (2009)
Cassandras, C.G., Lafortune, S.: Introduction to discrete event systems. Springer, Berlin (2008)
Cimatti, A., Roveri, M., Schuppan, V., Tchaltsev, A.: Diagnostic information for realizability. International conference on verification, model checking, and abstract interpretation (VMCAI), pp. 52–67. Springer, Berlin (2008)
Cover, T.M., Thomas, J.A.: Elements of information theory, 2nd edn. Wiley, New York (2006)
Dwyer MB, Avrunin GS, Corbett JC (1999) Patterns in property specifications for finite-state verification. In: International conference on software engineering (ICSE). ACM, pp 411–420
D'Ippolito N, Braberman V, Kramer J, Magee J, Sykes D, Uchitel S (2014) Hope for the best, prepare for the worst: multi-tier control for adaptive systems. In: International conference on software engineering (ICSE), pp 688–699
D'Ippolito NR, Braberman V, Piterman N, Uchitel S (2010) Synthesis of live behaviour models. In: International symposium on foundations of software engineering (FSE). ACM Press, p 77
D'Ippolito N, Braberman V, Sykes D, Uchitel S (2015) Robust degradation and enhancement of robot mission behaviour in unpredictable environments. In: International workshop on control theory for software engineering (CTSE). ACM, pp 26–33
Degiovanni, R., Castro, P., Arroyo, M., Ruiz, M., Aguirre, N., Frias, M.: Goal-conflict likelihood assessment based on model counting. International conference on software engineering (ICSE), pp. 1125–1135. ACM Press, New York (2018)
Dimitrova R, Ghasemi M, Topcu U (2018) Maximum realizability for linear temporal logic specifications. In: International symposium on automated technology for verification and analysis (ATVA). Springer, Berlin, pp 458–475
Duret-Lutz A, Lewkowicz A, Fauchille A, Michaud T, Renault E, Xu L (2016) Spot 2.0—a framework for LTL and \(\omega \)-automata manipulation. In: International symposium on automated technology for verification and analysis (ATVA). Springer, Berlin, pp 122–129
Esparza, J., Ketínský, J., Sickert, S.: From LTL to deterministic automata: a safraless compositional approach. Formal Methods Syst Des 49(3), 219–271 (2016)
Falconer, K.: Fractal geometry: mathematical foundations and applications. Wiley, London (2004)
Giannakopoulou D, Lerda F (2002) From states to transitions: improving translation of LTL formulae to Büchi automata. In: International conference on formal techniques for networked and distributed sytems (FORTE), pp 308–326
Giannakopoulou D, Magee J (2003) Fluent model checking for event-based systems. In: European software engineering conference held jointly with international symposium on foundations of software engineering (ESEC/FSE). ACM, pp 257–266
Grädel, E., Thomas, W., Wilke, T.: Automata logics, and infinite games: a guide to current research. Springer, New York (2002)
Henzinger, T.: From boolean to quantitative notions of correctness. ACM SIGPLAN Notices 45(1), 157 (2010)
Horn, R.A., Johnson, C.R.: Matrix analysis. Cambridge University Press, New York (1986)
Hansson, H., Jonsson, B.: A logic for reasoning about time and reliability. Formal Asp Comput 6(5), 512–535 (1994)
Horn RA, Johnson CR (2012) Matrix analysis
Henzinger, T.A., Otop, J.: From model checking to model measuring. International conference on concurrency theory (CONCUR), pp. 273–287. Springer, Berlin (2013)
Kretínský, J., Esparza, J.: Deterministic automata for the (F, G)-fragment of LTL. International conference on computer aided verification (CAV), pp. 7–22. Springer, Berlin (2012)
Kress-Gazit, H., Fainekos, G.E., Pappas, G.J.: Temporal-logic-based reactive mission and motion planning. IEEE Trans Robot 25(6), 1370–1381 (2009)
Konighofer R, Hofferek G, Bloem R (2009) Debugging formal specifications using simple counterstrategies. In: International conference on formal methods in computer-aided design (FMCAD), pp 152–159
Kuvent, A., Maoz, S., Ringert, J.O.: A symbolic justice violations transition system for unrealizable GR(1) specifications. European software engineering conference held jointly with international symposium on foundations of software engineering (ESEC/FSE), number 1, pp. 362–372. ACM Press, New York (2017)
Kupferman, O.: Recent challenges and ideas in temporal synthesis. International conference on current trends in theory and practice of computer science (SOFSEM), pp. 88–98. Springer, Berlin (2012)
Kwiatkowska M (2007) Quantitative verification: models, techniques and tools. In: European software engineering conference held jointly with international symposium on foundations of software engineering (ESEC/FSE). ACM Press, p 449
Li W, Dworkin L, Seshia SA (2011) Mining assumptions for synthesis. In: International conference on formal methods and models for codesign (MEMOCODE). ACM/IEEE, pp 43–50
Lomuscio A, Strulo B, Walker N, Wu P (2010) Assume-guarantee reasoning with local specifications. In: International conference on formal engineering methods (ICFEM), pp 204–219
Lutz AD (2014) LTL translation improvements in spot 1.0. Int J Crit Comput Based Syst 5(1/2):31
Maoz, S., Ringert, J.O.: GR(1) synthesis for LTL specification patterns. European software engineering conference held jointly with international symposium on foundations of software engineering (ESEC/FSE), number 1, pp. 96–106. ACM Press, New York (2015)
Maoz S, Ringert JO, Shalom R (2019) Symbolic repairs for GR(1) specifications. In: Proceedings of the international conference on software engineering (ICSE)
Merzenich, W., Staiger, L.: Fractals, dimension, and formal languages. Inf Théor Appl 28(3–4), 361–386 (1994)
Nam W, Alur R (2006) Learning-based symbolic assume-guarantee reasoning with automatic decomposition. In: International symposium on automated technology for verification and analysis (ATVA), pp 170–185
Pnueli A (1977) The temporal logic of programs. In: Annual symposium on foundations of computer science, pp 46–57
Piterman, N., Pnueli, A., Sa'ar, Y.: Synthesis of reactive(1) designs. International conference on verification, model checking, and abstract interpretation (VMCAI), pp. 364–380. Springer, Berlin (2006)
Pnueli, A., Rosner, R.: On the synthesis of a reactive module. Principles of programming languages (POPL), pp. 179–190. ACM, New York (1989)
Renault, E., Duret-Lutz, A., Kordon, F., Poitrenaud, D.: Three SCC-based emptiness checks for generalized Büchi automata. International conference on logic for programming artificial intelligence and reasoning (LPAR), pp. 668–682. Springer, Berlin (2013)
Somenzi F, Bloem R (2000) Efficient Buchi automata from LTL formulae. In: International conference on computer aided verification (CAV), vol 1855, pp 1–17
Seneta, E.: Non-negative matrices and Markov chains. Springer, Berlin (2006)
Seshia, S.A.: Combining induction, deduction, and structure for verification and synthesis. Proc IEEE 103(11), 2036–2051 (2015)
Staiger L (1998) The Hausdorff measure of regular \(\omega \)-languages is computable. Technical Report August, Martin-Luther-Universität
Staiger, L.: On the Hausdorff measure of regular omega-languages in Cantor space. Discrete Math Theor Comput Sci 17(1), 357–368 (2015)
Tarjan, R.: Depth-first search and linear graph algorithms. SIAM J Comput 1(2), 146–160 (1972)
Tabuada P, Neider D (2016) Robust linear temporal logic. In: Annual conference on computer science logic (CSL), pp 10:1–10:21. Schloss Dagstuhl–Leibniz-Zentrum fuer Informatik
Tomita, T., Ueno, A., Shimakawa, M., Hagihara, S., Yonezaki, N.: Safraless LTL synthesis considering maximal realizability. Acta Inf 54(7), 655–692 (2017)
Vardi MY (1996) An automata-theoretic approach to linear temporal logic. Logics for concurrency, pp 238–266
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank the anonymous reviewers for their thoughtful comments which helped improve the presentation of the paper. This work was supported in part by the EPSRC HiPEDS CDT (EP/L016796/1) and the Imperial College Elsie Widdowson Fellowship.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Erik de Vink, Ana Cavalcanti, Jan Peleska and Bill Roscoe
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Cavezza, D.G., Alrajeh, D. & György, A. A Weakness Measure for GR(1) Formulae. Form Asp Comp 33, 27–63 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00165-020-00519-y
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00165-020-00519-y