Model-Checking of Specifications Integrating Processes, Data and Time

  • Jochen Hoenicke
  • Patrick Maier
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3582)

Abstract

We present a new model-checking technique for CSP-OZ-DC, a combination of CSP, Object-Z and Duration Calculus, that allows reasoning about systems exhibiting communication, data and real-time aspects. As intermediate layer we will use a new kind of timed automata that preserve events and data variables of the specification. These automata have a simple operational semantics that is amenable to verification by a constraint-based abstraction-refinement model checker. By means of a case study, a simple elevator parameterised by the number of floors, we show that this approach admits model-checking parameterised and infinite state real-time systems.

Keywords

Model Checker Operational Semantic Parallel Composition Reachable State Reachability Analysis 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Abadi, M., Lamport, L.: An old-fashioned recipe for real time. In: Huizing, C., de Bakker, J.W., Rozenberg, G., de Roever, W.-P. (eds.) REX 1991. LNCS, vol. 600, pp. 1–27. Springer, Heidelberg (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Alur, R., Henzinger, T.A., Ho, P.-H.: Automatic symbolic verification of embedded systems. IEEE Trans. Software Engineering 22, 181–201 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ball, T., Rajamani, S.K.: The SLAM toolkit. In: Berry, G., Comon, H., Finkel, A. (eds.) CAV 2001. LNCS, vol. 2102, pp. 260–264. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chaki, S., Clarke, E., Groce, A., Jha, S., Veith, H.: Modular verification of software components in C. In: ICSE 2003, pp. 385–395 (2003)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Delzanno, G., Podelski, A.: Model checking in CLP. In: Cleaveland, W.R. (ed.) TACAS 1999. LNCS, vol. 1579, pp. 223–239. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dierks, H., Lettrari, M.: Constructing test automata from graphical real-time requirements. In: Damm, W., Olderog, E.-R. (eds.) FTRTFT 2002. LNCS, vol. 2469, pp. 433–454. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dong, J.S., Hao, P., Qin, S.C., Sun, J., Yi, W.: Timed patterns: TCOZ to timed automata. In: Davies, J., Schulte, W., Barnett, M. (eds.) ICFEM 2004. LNCS, vol. 3308, pp. 483–498. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fränzle, M.: Take it NP-easy: Bounded model construction for duration calculus. In: Damm, W., Olderog, E.-R. (eds.) FTRTFT 2002. LNCS, vol. 2469, pp. 245–264. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Graf, S., Saïdi, H.: Construction of abstract state graphs with PVS. In: Grumberg, O. (ed.) CAV 1997. LNCS, vol. 1254, pp. 72–83. Springer, Heidelberg (1997)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Henzinger, T.A., Jhala, R., Majumdar, R., Sutre, G.: Lazy abstraction. In: POPL 2002, pp. 58–70. ACM Press, New York (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hoare, C.A.R.: Communicating Sequential Processes. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs (1985)MATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hoenicke, J., Maier, P.: Model-checking of specifications integrating processes, data and time. Technical Report 5, SFB/TR 14 AVACS (2005), http://www.avacs.org/
  13. 13.
    Hoenicke, J., Olderog, E.-R.: Combining specification techniques for processes data and time. In: Butler, M., Petre, L., Sere, K. (eds.) IFM 2002. LNCS, vol. 2335, p. 245. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hoenicke, J., Olderog, E.-R.: CSP-OZ-DC: A combination of specification techniques for processes, data and time. Nordic Journal of Computing 9(4) (2002)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lamport, L.: The temporal logic of actions. ACM TOPLAS 16, 872–973 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Podelski, A., Rybalchenko, A.: Transition predicate abstraction and fair termination. In: POPL 2005, pp. 132–144. ACM Press, New York (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Roscoe, A.W.: The Theory and Practice of Concurrency. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs (1998)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Rybalchenko, A.: A model checker based on abstraction refinement. Master’s thesis, Universität des Saarlandes, Saarbrücken, Saarland (September 2002)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Sharma, B., Pandya, P.K., Chakraborty, S.: Bounded validity checking of interval duration logic. In: Halbwachs, N., Zuck, L.D. (eds.) TACAS 2005. LNCS, vol. 3440, pp. 301–316. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Skakkebæk, J.U.: Liveness and fairness in duration calculus. In: Jonsson, B., Parrow, J. (eds.) CONCUR 1994. LNCS, vol. 836, pp. 283–298. Springer, Heidelberg (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Smith, G.: The Object-Z Specification Language. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (2000)MATHGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Spivey, J.M.: The Z Notation: A Reference Manual, 2nd edn. Prentice-Hall International Series in Computer Science. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs (1992)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Tapken, J.: Model-Checking of Duration Calculus Specifications. PhD thesis, University of Oldenburg (June 2001)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Yovine, S.: Kronos: A verification tool for real-time systems. International Journal of Software Tools for Technology Transfer 1(1+2) (1997)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Zhou, C., Hansen, M.R.: Duration Calculus: A Formal Approach to Real-Time Systems. EATCS: Monographs in Theoretical Computer Science. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)MATHGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Zhou, C., Hoare, C.A.R., Ravn, A.P.: A calculus of durations. Information Processing Letters 40(5), 269–276 (1991)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jochen Hoenicke
    • 1
  • Patrick Maier
    • 2
  1. 1.Department für InformatikUniversität OldenburgOldenburgGermany
  2. 2.Programming Logics GroupMPI für InformatikSaarbrückenGermany

Personalised recommendations