Advertisement

On-the-fly Verification of Linear Temporal Logic

  • Jean-Michel Couvreur
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1708)

Abstract

In this paper we present two new practical and pragmatic algorithms for solving the two key on-the-fly model-checking problems for linear temporal logic: on demand construction of an automaton for a temporal logic formula; and on-the-fly checking for whether the automata resulting from the product of the program and the property is empty.

Keywords

Temporal Logic Boolean Variable Linear Temporal Logic Atomic Proposition Check Algorithm 
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.

References

  1. [1]
    B. Akers. Binary decision diagrams. IEEE Transactions on Computers, 27(6):509–516, 1978.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. [2]
    A. Arnold. Finite transition systems. Semantics of communicating systems. Prentice-Hall, 1994.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    K. S. Brace, R. L. Rudell, and R. E. Bryant. Efficient Implementation of a BDD Package. In 27th ACM/IEEE Design Automation Conference, pages 40–45, Orlando, Florida, June 1990. ACM/IEEE, IEEE Computer Society Press.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    R. Bryant. Graph based algorithms for boolean function manipulation. IEEE Transactions on Computers, 35(8):677–691, 1986.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. [5]
    E. Clarke, O. Grumberg, and D. Long. Verification tools for finite-state concurrent systems. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 803, 1994.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    O. Coudert and J. C. Madre. Implicit and incremental computation of primes and essential implicant primes of boolean functions. In Proceedings of the 29th ACM/IEEE Design Automation Conference, pages 36–39, 1992.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    C. Courcoubetis, M. Y. Vardi, P. Wolper, and M. Yannakakis. Memory efficient algorithms for the verification of temporal properties. Formal Methods in System Design, 1:275–288, 1992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. [8]
    Y. Dutuit and A. Rauzy. Exact and truncated computations of prime implicants of coherent and non-coherent fault trees within aralia. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 58:127–144, 1997. On-the-fly Verification of Linear Temporal Logic 271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. [9]
    R. Gerth, D. Peled, M. Y. Vardi, and P. Wolper. Simple on-the-fly automatic verification of linear temporal logic. In Proc. 15th Work. Protocol Specification, Testing, and Verification, Warsaw, June 1995. North-Holland.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    P. Godefroid. Partial-Order Methods for the Verification of Concurrent Systems. Springer, Berlin, 1996.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    P. Godefroid and G. J. Holzmann. On the verification of temporal properties. In Proc. 13th Int. Conf on Protocol Specification, Testing, and Verification, INWG/IFIP, pages 109–124, Liege, Belgium, May 1993.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    G. J. Holzmann. An improved protocol reach ability analysis technique. Software, Practice & Experience, 18(2):137–161, February 1988.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. [13]
    G. J. Holzmann. Design and Validation of Computer Protocols. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 1991.Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    G. J. Holzmann, D. Peled, and M. Yannakakis. On nested depth first search. In The Spin Verification System, pages 23–32. American Mathematical Society, 1996. Proc. of the Second Spin Workshop.Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    B. Lessaec. Etude de la reconnaissabilité des langages de mots infinis. PhD thesis, Université Bordeaux I, 1986.Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    O. Lichtenstein and A. Pnueli. Checking the finite-state concurrent programs satisfy their linear specifications. In popl85, pages 97–107, 1985.Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    D. Peled. All from one, one from all: on model checking using representatives. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Computer Aided Verification, Greece, number 697 in Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 409–423, Berlin-Heidelberg-New York, 1993. Springer.Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    A.P. Sistla and E. M. Clarke. The complexity of propositional linear temporal logic. Journal of the Association for Computing Machinery, 32(3):733–749, July 1985.zbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  19. [19]
    R. E. Tarjan. Depth-first search and linear algorithms. SIAM J. Computing, 1(2):146–160, 1972.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  20. [20]
    W. Thomas. Automata on infinite objects. In Handbook of theoretical computer science, Volume B: Formal models and semantics, pages 165–191. Elsevier Science Publishers, 1990.Google Scholar
  21. [21]
    J. D. Ullman, A. V. Aho, and J. E. Hopcroft. The Design and Analysis of Computer Algorithms. Addison-Wesley, 1974.Google Scholar
  22. [22]
    A. Valmari. Stubborn sets for reduced state space generation. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 483:491–515, 1990.Google Scholar
  23. [23]
    A. Valmari. On-the-fly verification with stubborn sets representatives.In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Computer Aided Verification, Greece, number 697 in Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 397–408, Berlin-Heidelberg-New York, 1993. Springer.Google Scholar
  24. [24]
    M. Y. Vardi and P. Wolper. An automata-theoretic approach to automatic program verification. In Proceedings of the First Symposium on Logic in Computer Science, pages 322–331, Cambridge, June 1986.Google Scholar
  25. [25]
    P. Wolper. Temporal logic can be more expressive. Information and Control, 56(1-2):72–99, 1983.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  26. [26]
    P. Wolper. The tableau method for temporal logic: An overview. Logique et Analyse, (110-111):119–136, 1985.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jean-Michel Couvreur
    • 1
  1. 1.LaBRI, Université de Bordeaux ITalenceFrance

Personalised recommendations