A Strategy for Improving the Efficiency of Procedure Verification

  • Wenhui Zhang
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2434)

Abstract

Verification of operating procedures by model checking has been discussed in [11], [12]. As an execution of a procedure may affect or be affected by many processes, a model of the procedure with its related processes could be very large. We modify the procedure verification approach [11], [12] by introducing two strategies that make use of detail knowledge of procedures in order to reduce the complexity of model checking. A case study demonstrates the potential advantages of the strategies and shows that the strategies may improve the efficiency of procedure verification significantly and therefore scale up the applicability of the verification approach.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    S. Berezin and S. Campos and E. M. Clarke. Compositional Reasoning in Model Checking. Proceedings of COMPOS’97. Lecture Notes in Computer Science 1536: 81–102. 1998.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    E.M. Clarke, O. Grumberg and D.E. Long. Model Checking and Abstraction. ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems 16(5): 1512–1542, 1994.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. [3]
    E.A. Emerson. Temporal and Modal Logic. Handbook of Theoretical Computer Science (B):997–1072. 1990.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    J. Gregoire. Verification Model Reduction through Abstraction. Formal Design Techniques VII, 280–282, 1995.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    G. J. Holzmann. Design and Validation of Computer Protocols. Prentice Hall, New Jersey, 1991.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    G. J. Holzmann. The model checker Spin. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 23(5): 279–295. May 1997.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. [7]
    J.G. Kemeny. Report of the President’s Commission on the Accident at Three Mile Island. U. S. Government Accounting Office. 1979.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    N.G. Leveson. Software System Safety and Computers. Addison-Wesley Publishing Company. 1995.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    C. Loiseaux, S. Graf, J. Sifakis, A. Bouajjani and S. Bensalem. Property preserving abstractions for the verification of concurrent systems. Journal of Formal methods in System Design 6:1–35. 1995.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    V. Roy and R. de Simone. Auto/Autograph. In Computer Aided Verification. DIMACS series in Discrete Mathematics and Theoretical Computer Science 3: 235–250, June 1990.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    W. Zhang. Model checking operator procedures. Lecture Notes in Computer Science 1680:200–215. SPIN 1999. Toulouse, France.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    W. Zhang. Validation of control system specifications with abstract plant models. Lecture Notes in Computer Science 1943:53–62. SAFECOMP 2000. Rotterdam, The Netherlands.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Wenhui Zhang
    • 1
  1. 1.Laboratory of Computer ScienceInstitute of Software, Chinese Academy of SciencesBeijingChina

Personalised recommendations