Characterization of temporal property classes

  • Edward Chang
  • Zohar Manna
  • Amir Pnueli
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 623)


This paper presents two novel characterizations of the classes of properties of reactive systems in terms of their expression by temporal logic. The first family of characterizations concerns the safety-progress classification, which describes a hierarchy within the set of temporal properties. Previous characterizations of this hierarchy depended critically on the use of past temporal operators. The characterization presented here identifies the future formulas that belong to each class. This characterization is shown to be complete.

The second characterization concerns the safety-liveness classification, which partitions temporal properties into the classes of safety and liveness. While automata-theoretic and temporal logic characterizations of the safety class have been known for some time, a complete characterization of the liveness class by temporal logic remained open. This paper provides such a characterization.


Temporal Logic Separate Property Liveness Property Proof Rule Temporal Formula 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [AS85]
    B. Alpern and F.B. Schneider. Defining liveness. Info. Proc. Lett., 21:181–185, 1985.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  2. [AS87]
    B. Alpern and F.B. Schneider. Recognizing safety and liveness. Dist. Comp., 2:117–126, 1987.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. [Gab87]
    D. Gabbay. The declarative past and imperative future. In B. Banieqbal, H. Barringer, and A. Pnueli, editors, Temporal Logic in Specification, Lec. Notes in Comp. Sci. 398, pages 407–448. Springer-Verlag, 1987.Google Scholar
  4. [Lam77]
    L. Lamport. Proving the correctness of multiprocess programs. IEEE Trans. Software Engin., 3:125–143, 1977.Google Scholar
  5. [Lam83]
    L. Lamport. What good is temporal logic. In R.E.A. Mason, editor, Proc. IFIP 9th World Congress, pages 657–668. North-Holland, 1983.Google Scholar
  6. [Lam85]
    L. Lamport. Distributed Systems — Methods and Tools for Specification, chapter Basic Concepts, pages 19–30. Lec. Notes in Comp. Sci. 190. Springer-Verlag, 1985.Google Scholar
  7. [LPZ85]
    O. Lichtenstein, A. Pnueli, and L. Zuck. The glory of the past. In Proc. of the Workshop on Logics of Programs, Lec. Notes in Comp. Sci. 193, pages 196–218. Springer-Verlag, 1985.Google Scholar
  8. [MP89]
    Z. Manna and A. Pnueli. Completing the temporal picture. In Proc. 16th Int. Colloq. Aut. Lang. Prog., Lec. Notes in Comp. Sci. 372, pages 534–558. Springer-Verlag, 1989. To appear in Theoretical Computer Science.Google Scholar
  9. [MP90]
    Z. Manna and A. Pnueli. A hierarchy of temporal properties. In Proc. 9th ACM Symp. Princ. of Dist. Comp., pages 377–408, 1990.Google Scholar
  10. [Sis85]
    A.P. Sistla. On characterization of safety and liveness properties in temporal logic. In Proc. 4th ACM Symp. Princ. of Dist. Comp., pages 39–48, 1985.Google Scholar
  11. [SPH84]
    R. Sherman, A. Pnueli, and D. Harel. Is the interesting part of process logic uninteresting. SIAM J. Comp., 13:825–839, 1984.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. [Zuc86]
    L. Zuck. Past Temporal Logic. PhD thesis, Weizmann Institute, 1986.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • Edward Chang
    • 1
  • Zohar Manna
    • 1
  • Amir Pnueli
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceStanford UniversityStanford
  2. 2.Department of Computer ScienceWeizmann InstituteRehovotIsrael

Personalised recommendations