Advertisement

Regular Model Checking Without Transducers (On Efficient Verification of Parameterized Systems)

  • Parosh Aziz Abdulla
  • Giorgio Delzanno
  • Noomene Ben Henda
  • Ahmed Rezine
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4424)

Abstract

We give a simple and efficient method to prove safety properties for parameterized systems with linear topologies. A process in the system is a finite-state automaton, where the transitions are guarded by both local and global conditions. Processes may communicate via broadcast, rendez-vous and shared variables. The method derives an over-approximation of the induced transition system, which allows the use of a simple class of regular expressions as a symbolic representation. Compared to traditional regular model checking methods, the analysis does not require the manipulation of transducers, and hence its simplicity and efficiency. We have implemented a prototype which works well on several mutual exclusion algorithms and cache coherence protocols.

Keywords

Model Check Transition Rule Mutual Exclusion Safety Property Reachability Analysis 
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.
    Abdulla, P.A., et al.: General decidability theorems for infinite-state systems. In: Proc. LICS ’96, pp. 313–321 (1996)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Abdulla, P.A., et al.: Regular model checking without transducers. Technical Report 2006-052, Uppsala University (Dec. 2006)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Abdulla, P.A., et al.: Regular model checking made simple and efficient. In: Brim, L., et al. (eds.) CONCUR 2002. LNCS, vol. 2421, pp. 116–130. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Arons, T., et al.: Parameterized verification with automatically computed inductive assertions. In: Berry, G., Comon, H., Finkel, A. (eds.) CAV 2001. LNCS, vol. 2102, pp. 221–234. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Baukus, K., Lakhnech, Y., Stahl, K.: Parameterized verification of a cache coherence protocol: Safety and liveness. In: Cortesi, A. (ed.) VMCAI 2002. LNCS, vol. 2294, pp. 317–330. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Boigelot, B., Legay, A., Wolper, P.: Iterating transducers in the large. In: Hunt Jr., W.A., Somenzi, F. (eds.) CAV 2003. LNCS, vol. 2725, pp. 223–235. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bouajjani, A., Habermehl, P., Vojnar, T.: Abstract regular model checking. In: Alur, R., Peled, D.A. (eds.) CAV 2004. LNCS, vol. 3114, pp. 372–386. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Clarke, E., Talupur, M., Veith, H.: Environment abstraction for parameterized verification. In: Emerson, E.A., Namjoshi, K.S. (eds.) VMCAI 2006. LNCS, vol. 3855, pp. 126–141. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dams, D.R., Lakhnech, Y., Steffen, M.: Iterating Transducers. In: Berry, G., Comon, H., Finkel, A. (eds.) CAV 2001. LNCS, vol. 2102, p. 286. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Delzanno, G.: Automatic verification of cache coherence protocols. In: Emerson, E.A., Sistla, A.P. (eds.) CAV 2000. LNCS, vol. 1855, pp. 53–68. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Delzanno, G.: Verification of consistency protocols via infinite-state symbolic model checking. In: Proc. FORTE/PSTV 2000, pp. 171–186 (2000)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Emerson, E., Kahlon, V.: Exact and efficient verification of parameterized cache coherence protocols. In: Geist, D., Tronci, E. (eds.) CHARME 2003. LNCS, vol. 2860, pp. 247–262. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Emerson, E., Kahlon, V.: Model checking guarded protocols. In: Proc. LICS ’03, pp. 361–370 (2003)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Esparza, J., Finkel, A., Mayr, R.: On the verification of broadcast protocols. In: Proc. LICS ’99, pp. 352–359 (1999)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    German, S.M., Sistla, A.P.: Reasoning about systems with many processes. Journal of the ACM 39(3), 675–735 (1992)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Godefroid, P., Wolper, P.: Using partial orders for the efficient verification of deadlock freedom and safety properties. FMSD 2(2), 149–164 (1993)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Higman, G.: Ordering by divisibility in abstract algebras. Proc. London Math. Soc. 2, 326–336 (1952)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kelb, P., et al.: MOSEL: A flexible toolset for monadic second-order logic. In: Brinksma, E. (ed.) TACAS 1997. LNCS, vol. 1217, pp. 183–202. Springer, Heidelberg (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kesten, Y., et al.: Symbolic model checking with rich assertional languages. TCS 256, 93–112 (2001)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lahiri, S.K., Bryant, R.E.: Indexed predicate discovery for unbounded system verification. In: Alur, R., Peled, D.A. (eds.) CAV 2004. LNCS, vol. 3114, pp. 135–147. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Maidl, M.: A unifying model checking approach for safety properties of parameterized systems. In: Berry, G., Comon, H., Finkel, A. (eds.) CAV 2001. LNCS, vol. 2102, pp. 324–336. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Mayr, R.: Undecidable problems in unreliable computations. Theoretical Computer Science 297, 337–354 (2003)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Pnueli, A., Ruah, S., Zuck, L.: Automatic deductive verification with invisible invariants. In: Margaria, T., Yi, W. (eds.) ETAPS 2001 and TACAS 2001. LNCS, vol. 2031, pp. 82–97. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Pnueli, A., Xu, J., Zuck, L.: Liveness with (0,1,infinity)-counter abstraction. In: Brinksma, E., Larsen, K.G. (eds.) CAV 2002. LNCS, vol. 2404, Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Roychoudhury, A., Ramakrishnan, I.: Automated inductive verification of parameterized protocols. In: Berry, G., Comon, H., Finkel, A. (eds.) CAV 2001. LNCS, vol. 2102, pp. 25–37. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Topnik, C., et al.: jMosel: A Stand-Alone Tool and jABC Plugin for M2L(Str). In: Valmari, A. (ed.) SPIN 2006. LNCS, vol. 3925, pp. 293–298. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Touili, T.: Regular Model Checking using Widening Techniques. ETCS (Proc. VEPAS’01) 50(4) (2001)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Vardi, M.Y., Wolper, P.: An automata-theoretic approach to automatic program verification. In: Proc. LICS ’86, June 1986, pp. 332–344 (1986)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Parosh Aziz Abdulla
    • 1
  • Giorgio Delzanno
    • 2
  • Noomene Ben Henda
    • 1
  • Ahmed Rezine
    • 1
  1. 1.Uppsala UniversitySweden
  2. 2.Università di GenovaItaly

Personalised recommendations