Ant Colony Optimization for Model Checking

  • Enrique Alba
  • Francisco Chicano
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4739)


Model Checking is a well-known and fully automatic technique for checking software properties, usually given as temporal logic formulae on the program variables. Most model checkers found in the literature use exact deterministic algorithms to check the properties. These algorithms usually require huge amounts of computational resources if the checked model is large. We propose here the use of Ant Colony Optimization (ACO) to refute safety properties in concurrent systems. ACO algorithms are stochastic techniques belonging to the class of metaheuristic algorithms and inspired by the foraging behaviour of real ants. The results state that ACO algorithms find optimal or near optimal error trails in faulty concurrent systems with a reduced amount of resources, outperforming algorithms that are the state-of-the-art in model checking. This fact makes them suitable for checking safety properties in large concurrent systems, in which traditional techniques fail to find errors because of the model size.


Model Check Linear Temporal Logic Safety Property Depth First Search Concurrent System 
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. 1.
    Clarke, E.M., Grumberg, O., Peled, D.A.: Model Checking. The MIT Press, Cambridge (2000)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Holzmann, G.J.: The model checker SPIN. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 23(5), 1–17 (1997)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Holzmann, G.J.: The SPIN Model Checker. Addison-Wesley, Reading (2004)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Dorigo, M., Stützle, T.: Ant Colony Optimization. The MIT Press, Cambridge (2004)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Blum, C., Roli, A.: Metaheuristics in combinatorial optimization: Overview and conceptual comparison. ACM Computing Surveys 35(3), 268–308 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Manna, Z., Pnueli, A.: The temporal logic of reactive and concurrent systems. Springer, New York (1992)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Holzmann, G.J., Peled, D., Yannakakis, M.: On nested depth first search. In: Proc. Second SPIN Workshop, American Mathematical Society, pp. 23–32 (1996)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Edelkamp, S., Lafuente, A.L., Leue, S.: Directed Explicit Model Checking with HSF-SPIN. In: Dwyer, M.B. (ed.) Model Checking Software. LNCS, vol. 2057, pp. 57–79. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Alba, E., Troya, J.: Genetic Algorithms for Protocol Validation. In: Proceedings of the PPSN IV International Conference, pp. 870–879. Springer, Berlin (1996)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Godefroid, P., Khurshid, S.: Exploring very large state spaces using genetic algorithms. Intl. Jnl. on Software Tools for Technology Transfer 6(2), 117–127 (2004)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Leguizamón, G., Michalewicz, Z.: A new version of Ant System for subset problems. In: Angeline, P., Michalewicz, Z., Schoenauer, M., Yao, X., Zalzala, A. (eds.) Proceedings of the 1999 Congress on Evolutionary Computation, pp. 1459–1464. IEEE Computer Society Press, Piscataway, New Jersey (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Edelkamp, S., Leue, S., Lluch-Lafuente, A.: Directed explicit-state model checking in the validation of communication protocols. International Journal of Software Tools for Technology Transfer 5, 247–267 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Alba, E. (ed.): Parallel Metaheuristics. A New Class of Algorithms. Wiley, Chichester (2005)zbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Enrique Alba
    • 1
  • Francisco Chicano
    • 1
  1. 1.GISUM Group, Departamento de Lenguajes y Ciencias de la Computación, University of MálagaSpain

Personalised recommendations