Abstraction Refinement for Bounded Model Checking

  • Anubhav Gupta
  • Ofer Strichman
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3576)


Counterexample-Guided Abstraction Refinement (cegar) techniques have been very successful in model checking large systems. While most previous work has focused on model checking, this paper presents a Counterexample-Guided abstraction refinement technique for Bounded Model Checking (bmc). Our technique makes bmc much faster, as indicated by our experiments. bmc is also used for generating refinements in the Proof-Based Refinement (pbr) framework. We show that our technique unifies pbr and cegar into an abstraction-refinement framework that can balance the model checking and refinement efforts.


Model Check Abstract Model Choice Function Concrete Model Propositional Formula 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. [AM04]
    Amla, N., McMillan, K.L.: A hybrid of counterexample-based and proof-based abstraction. In: Hu, A.J., Martin, A.K. (eds.) FMCAD 2004. LNCS, vol. 3312, pp. 260–274. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. [BCCZ99]
    Biere, A., Cimatti, A., Clarke, E., Zhu, Y.: Symbolic model checking without BDDs. In: Cleaveland, W.R. (ed.) TACAS 1999. LNCS, vol. 1579, p. 193. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. [BGA02]
    Barner, S., Geist, D., Gringauze, A.: Symbolic localization reduction with reconstruction layering and backtracking. In: Brinksma, E., Larsen, K.G. (eds.) CAV 2002. LNCS, vol. 2404, p. 65. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. [CA93]
    Crawford, J.M., Anton, L.D.: Experimental results on the crossover point in satisfiability problems. In: Proceedings of the Eleventh National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 21–27. AAAI Press, Menlo Park (1993)Google Scholar
  5. [CCK+02]
    Chauhan, P., Clarke, E., Kukula, J., Sapra, S., Veith, H., Wang, D.: Automated abstraction refinement for model checking large state spaces using SAT based conflict analysis. In: Aagaard, M.D., O’Leary, J.W. (eds.) FMCAD 2002. LNCS, vol. 2517. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. [CGKS02]
    Clarke, E., Gupta, A., Kukula, J., Strichman, O.: SAT based abstraction-refinement using ILP and machine learning techniques. In: Brinksma, E., Larsen, K.G. (eds.) CAV 2002. LNCS, vol. 2404, pp. 265–279. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. [DP60]
    Davis, M., Putnam, H.: A computing procedure for quantification theory. J. ACM 7, 201–215 (1960)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  8. [GGYA03]
    Gupta, A., Ganai, M.K., Yang, Z., Ashar, P.: Iterative abstraction using SAT-based bmc with proof analysis. In: ICCAD, pp. 416–423 (2003)Google Scholar
  9. [GKMH+03]
    Glusman, M., Kamhi, G., Mador-Haim, S., Fraer, R., Vardi, M.Y.: Multiple-counterexample guided iterative abstraction refinement: An industrial evaluation. In: Garavel, H., Hatcliff, J. (eds.) TACAS 2003. LNCS, vol. 2619, pp. 176–191. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. [Kur94]
    Kurshan, R.: Computer aided verification of coordinating processes. Princeton University Press, Princeton (1994)Google Scholar
  11. [MA03]
    McMillan, K., Amla, N.: Automatic abstraction without counterexamples. In: Garavel, H., Hatcliff, J. (eds.) TACAS 2003. LNCS, vol. 2619, pp. 2–17. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. [McM03]
    McMillan, K.: From bounded to unbounded model checking (2003)Google Scholar
  13. [MMZ+01]
    Moskewicz, M., Madigan, C., Zhao, Y., Zhang, L., Malik, S.: Chaff: Engineering an efficient SAT solver. In: Proc. Design Automation Conference 2001, DAC 2001 (2001)Google Scholar
  14. [Sil99]
    Silva, J.P.M.: The impact of branching heuristics in propositional satisfiability algorithms. In: Barahona, P., Alferes, J.J. (eds.) EPIA 1999. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 1695, pp. 62–74. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. [WJHS04]
    Wang, C., Jin, H., Hachtel, G.D., Somenzi, F.: Refining the SAT decision ordering for bounded model checking. In: ACM/IEEE 41th Design Automation Conference (DAC 2004), pp. 535–538 (2004)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Anubhav Gupta
    • 1
  • Ofer Strichman
    • 2
  1. 1.School of Computer ScienceCarnegie Mellon UniversityUSA
  2. 2.Information Systems EngineeringTechnionIsrael

Personalised recommendations