Scaling up Uppaal

Automatic Verification of Real-Time Systems using Compositionality and Abstraction
  • Henrik Ejersbo Jensen
  • Kim Guldstrand Larsen
  • Arne Skou
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1926)

Abstract

To combat the state-explosion problem in automatic verification, we present a method for scaling up the real-time verification tool Uppaal by complementing it with methods for abstraction and compositionality. We identify a notion of timed ready simulation which we show is a sound condition for preservation of safety properties between real- time systems, and in addition is a precongruence with respect to parallel composition. Thus, it supports both abstraction and compositionality. We furthermore present a method for automatically testing for the existence of a timed ready simulation between real-time systems using the Uppaal tool.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Luca Aceto, Augusto Burgueno, and Kim G. Larsen. Model checking via reachability testing for timed automata. In Bernhard Steffen, editor, Proc. 4th Int. Conference on Tools and Algorithms for the Construction and Analysis of Systems (TACAS’98), volume 1384 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 263–280. Springer, 1998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    R. Alur, C. Courcoubetis, and D. Dill. Model-checking for Real-Time Systems. In Proc. of Logic in Computer Science, pages 414–425. IEEE Computer Society Press, 1990.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    R. Alur and D. Dill. Automata for Modelling Real-Time Systems. In Proc. of ICALP’90, volume 443, 1990.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    R. Alur and D. Dill. A theory of timed automata. Theoretical Computer Science, 126:183–236, 1994.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    R. Alur, T. A. Henzinger, F. Y. C. Mang, S. Qadeer, S. K. Rajamani, and S. Tasiran. Mocha Modularity in Model Checking. In Computer Aided Verification, Proc. 10th Int. Conference, volume 1427 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 521–525. Springer Verlag, 1998.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    R. Alur, T.A. Henzinger, and P.-H. Ho. Automatic symbolic verification of embedded systems. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, pages 22:181–201, 1996.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Johan Bengtsson, David Griffioen, Kåre Kristoffersen, Kim G. Larsen, Fredrik Larsson, Paul Pettersson, and Wang Yi. Verification of an Audio Protocol with Bus Collision Using Uppaal. In Proceedings of CAV’96, volume 1102 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer Verlag, 1996.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    D. Dams. Abstract Interpretation and Partition Refinement for Model Checking. PhD thesis, Eindhoven University of Technology, 1996.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    C. Daws, A. Olivero, S. Tripakis, and S. Yovine. The tool kronos. In Hybrid Systems III, Verification and Control, volume 1066 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Spinger Verlag, 1996.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    C. Daws and S. Yovine. Two examples of verification of multirate timed automata with Kronos. In Proc. of the 16th IEEE Real-Time Systems Symposium, pages 66–75, December 1995.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Willem-Paul de Roever. The need for compositional proof systems: A survey. In Willem-Paul de Roever, Hans Langmaack, and Amir Pnueli, editors, Compositionality: The Significant Difference, International Symposium, COMPOS’97, volume 1536 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 1–22. Springer-Verlag, 1997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    K. Havelund, K. Larsen, and A. Skou. Formal Verification of a Power Controller Using the Real-Time Model Checker Uppaal. In Joost-Pieter Katoen, editor, Formal Methods for Real-Time and Probabilistic Systems, 5th International AMAST Workshop, ARTS’99, volume 1601 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 277–298. Springer Verlag, 1999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Pei-Hsin Ho and Howard Wong-Toi. Automated Analysis of an Audio Control Protocol. In Proc. of CAV’95, volume 939 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer Verlag, 1995.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Henrik Ejersbo Jensen. Abstraction-Based Verification of Distributed Systems. PhD thesis, Aalborg University, Institute for Computer Science, Aalborg, Denmark, 1999.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Henrik Ejersbo Jensen, Kim G. Larsen, and Arne Skou. Modelling and Analysis of a Collision Avoidance Protocol Using SPIN and UPAAL. In J-C. Gregoire, G.J. Holzmann, and D.A. Peled, editors, Proceedings Second Workshop on the SPIN Verification System, American Mathematical Society, DIMACS/39, 1996.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kåre Jelling Kristoffersen. Compositional Verification of Concurrent Systems. PhD thesis, Aalborg University, Department of Computer Science, Institute for Electronic Systems, Aalborg, Denmark, August 1998.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    K.G. Larsen. Context-Dependent Bisimulation Between Processes. PhD thesis, University of Edinburgh, Mayfield Road, Edinburgh, Scotland, 1986.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    K.G. Larsen. A context dependent bisimulation between processes. Theoretical Computer Science, 49, 1987.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kim G. Larsen, Paul Pettersson, and Wang Yi. Uppaal in a Nutshell. Int. Journal on Software Tools for Technology Transfer, 1(1-2):134–152, October 1997.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    C. Loiseaux, S. Graf, J. Sifakis, A. Bouajjani, and S. Bensalem. Property Preserving Abstractions for the Verification of Concurrent Systems. Formal Methods in System Design, pages 6:11–44, 1995.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    K. L. McMillan. Verification of an Implementation of Tomasulo’s Algorithm by Compositional Model Checking. In Computer Aided Verification, Proc. 10th Int. Conference, volume 1427 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 110–121. Springer Verlag, 1998.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Henrik Ejersbo Jensen
    • 1
  • Kim Guldstrand Larsen
    • 1
  • Arne Skou
    • 1
  1. 1.BRICSAalborg UniversityDenmark

Personalised recommendations