Timing assumptions and verification of finite-state concurrent systems

  • David L. Dill
Timed Specifications
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 407)

Abstract

We have described a scheme that allows timing assumptions to be incorporated into automatic proofs of arbitrary finite-state temporal properties. The obvious extension is to be able to prove timing properties, not just assume them. This would provide a verification framework for finite-state hard real-time systems. We conjecture that the method presented can, in fact, be extended in this way.

Another major question is practicality. We believe that, with some simple program optimizations, the proposed method can be useful for certain small but tricky systems, such as asynchronous control circuits. For larger systems, approximate and heuristic methods will be needed.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    S. Aggarwal and R.P. Kurshan. Modelling elapsed time in protocol specification. In H. Rudin and C.H. West, editors, Protocol Specification, Testing and Verification, III, pages 51–62. Elsevier Science Publisers B.V., 1983.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    S. Aggarwal, R.P. Kurshan, and K. Sabnani. A calculus for protocol specification and validation. In Protocol Specification, Testing, and Verification, III, pages 19–34. Elsevier Science Publishers B.V. (North-Holland), 1983.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    R.C. Backhouse and B.A. Carre. Regular algebra applied to path-finding problems. Journal of the Institute of Mathematics and its Applications, 15:161–186, 1975.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    J. R. Burch. Combining ctl, trace theory, and timing models. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Automatic Verification Methods for Finite State Systems (participants version), June 1989.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    Yaacov Choueka. Theories of automata on ω-tapes: A simplified approach. Journal of Computer and System Sciences, 8(2):117–141, April 1974.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    Samuel Eilenberg. Automata, Languages, and Machines, Vol. A. Academic Press, 1974.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    E. Allen Emerson, A.K. Mok, A.P.Sistla, and Jai Srinivasan. Quantitative temporal reasoning. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Automatic Verification Methods for Finite State Systems (participants version), June 1989.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    N. Halbwachs, D. Pilaud, F. Ouabodessalam, and A-C. Glory. Specifying, programming and verifying real-time systems using a synchronous declarative language. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Automatic Verification Methods for Finite State Systems (participants version), June 1989.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    C.A.R. Hoare. A model for communicating sequential processes. Technical Report PRG-22, Programming Research Group, Oxford University Computing Laboratory, 1981.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    Ron Koymans, Jan Vytopil, and Willem P. de Roever. Real-time programming and asynchronous message passing. In Proceedings of the 2nd ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing, pages 187–197, 1983.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    Harry R. Lewis. Finite-state analysis of asynchronous circuits with bounded temporal uncertainty. Technical Report TR-15-89, Aiken Computation Laboratory, Harvard University, July 1989.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    J.S. Ostroff. Automatic verification of timed transition models. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Automatic Verification Methods for Finite State Systems (participants version), June 1989.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    Amir Pnueli. In transition from global to modular temporal reasoning about programs. In Kzysztof Apt, editor, Logics and Models of Concurrent Systems, volume 13 of NATO ASI Series F: Computer and System Sciences, pages 123–144. Springer-Verlag, 1985.Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    Michael O. Rabin. Weakly definable relations and special automata. In Yehoshua Bar-Hillel, editor, Mathematical Logic and Foundations of Set Theory, pages 1–23. North-Holland Publishing Company, 1970.Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    Shmuel Safra. On the complexity of ω-automata. In ??, editor, Proceedings of the 29th IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, pages 319–327. IEEE ??, October 1988.Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    A.P. Sistla, M.Y. Vardi, and P. Wolper. The complementation problem for buchi automata with applications to temporal logic. In W. Brauer, editor, Automata, Languages, and Programming, volume 194 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 465–474. Springer-Verlag, 1985.Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    M.Y. Vardi and P. Wolper. Automata theoretic techniques for modal logics of programs. Technical report, IBM Research, October 1984.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1990

Authors and Affiliations

  • David L. Dill
    • 1
  1. 1.Computer Systems LaboratoryStanford UniversityStanford

Personalised recommendations