Advertisement

Robustness in the Presence of Liveness

  • Roderick Bloem
  • Krishnendu Chatterjee
  • Karin Greimel
  • Thomas A. Henzinger
  • Barbara Jobstmann
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6174)

Abstract

Systems ought to behave reasonably even in circumstances that are not anticipated in their specifications. We propose a definition of robustness for liveness specifications which prescribes, for any number of environment assumptions that are violated, a minimal number of system guarantees that must still be fulfilled. This notion of robustness can be formulated and realized using a Generalized Reactivity formula. We present an algorithm for synthesizing robust systems from such formulas. For the important special case of Generalized Reactivity formulas of rank 1, our algorithm improves the complexity of [PPS06] for large specifications with a small number of assumptions and guarantees.

Keywords

Generalize Reactivity Winning Strategy Acceptance Condition Satisfying Assignment Liveness Property 
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. [Aro93]
    Arora, A.: Closure and convergence: A foundation of fault-tolerant computing. IEEE Transatcions of Software Engineering 19, 1015–1027 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. [AS85]
    Alpern, B., Schneider, F.B.: Defining liveness. Information Processing Letters 21, 181–185 (1985)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  3. [BCHJ09]
    Bloem, R., Chatterjee, K., Henzinger, T., Jobstmann, B.: Better quality in synthesis through quantitative objectives. In: Bouajjani, A., Maler, O. (eds.) CAV 2009. LNCS, vol. 5643, pp. 140–156. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)Google Scholar
  4. [BGHJ09]
    Bloem, R., Greimel, K., Henzinger, T., Jobstmann, B.: Synthesizing robust systems. In: Proc. Formal Methods in Computer Aided Design (FMCAD), pp. 85–92 (2009)Google Scholar
  5. [BGJ+07]
    Bloem, R., Galler, S., Jobstmann, B., Piterman, N., Pnueli, A., Weiglhofer, M.: Automatic hardware synthesis from specifications: A case study. In: Proceedings of the Design, Automation and Test in Europe, pp. 1188–1193 (2007)Google Scholar
  6. [CHP07]
    Chatterjee, K., Henzinger, T.A., Piterman, N.: Generalized parity games. In: Seidl, H. (ed.) FOSSACS 2007. LNCS, vol. 4423, pp. 153–167. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. [dAF07]
    de Alfaro, L., Faella, M.: Accelerated algorithms for 3-color parity games with an application to timed games. In: Damm, W., Hermanns, H. (eds.) CAV 2007. LNCS, vol. 4590, pp. 108–120. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. [Dij68]
    Dijkstra, E.W.: Cooperating sequential processes. In: Genuys (ed.) Programming Languages, pp. 43–112. Academic Press, London (1968)Google Scholar
  9. [Dij74]
    Dijkstra, E.: Self-stabilizing systems in spite of distributed control. Communications of the ACM 17, 643–644 (1974)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. [EJ91]
    Emerson, E.A., Jutla, C.S.: Tree automata, mu-calculus and determinacy. In: Proc. 32nd IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, October 1991, pp. 368–377 (1991)Google Scholar
  11. [EKA08]
    Ebnenasir, A., Kulkarni, S.S., Arora, A.: Ftsyn: a framework for automatic synthesis of fault-tolerance. Software Tools for Technology Transfer 10, 455–471 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. [EL86]
    Emerson, E.A., Lei, C.-L.: Efficient model checking in fragments of the propositional mu-calculus. In: Proceedings of the First Annual Symposium of Logic in Computer Science, June 1986, pp. 267–278 (1986)Google Scholar
  13. [FD08]
    Fey, G., Drechsler, R.: A basis for formal robustness checking. In: ISQED, pp. 784–789 (2008)Google Scholar
  14. [GBJV08]
    Greimel, K., Bloem, R., Jobstmann, B., Vardi, M.: Open implication. In: Aceto, L., Damgård, I., Goldberg, L.A., Halldórsson, M.M., Ingólfsdóttir, A., Walukiewicz, I. (eds.) ICALP 2008, Part II. LNCS, vol. 5126, pp. 361–372. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. [JGWB07]
    Jobstmann, B., Galler, S., Weiglhofer, M., Bloem, R.: Anzu: A tool for property synthesis. In: Damm, W., Hermanns, H. (eds.) CAV 2007. LNCS, vol. 4590, pp. 258–262. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. [Jur00]
    Jurdziński, M.: Small progress measures for solving parity games. In: Reichel, H., Tison, S. (eds.) STACS 2000. LNCS, vol. 1770, pp. 290–301. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. [KE05]
    Kulkarni, S.S., Ebnnenasir, A.: Complexity issues in automated synthesis of failsafe fault-tolerance. IEEE Transactions on Dependable and Secure Computing 2, 1–15 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. [PP06]
    Piterman, N., Pnueli, A.: Faster solutions of Rabin and Streett games. In: Logic in Computer Science, pp. 275–284 (2006)Google Scholar
  19. [PPS06]
    Piterman, N., Pnueli, A., Saár, Y.: Synthesis of reactive(1) designs. In: Emerson, E.A., Namjoshi, K.S. (eds.) VMCAI 2006. LNCS, vol. 3855, pp. 364–380. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. [Zie98]
    Zielonka, W.: Infinite games on finitely coloured graphs with applications to automata on infinite trees. Theoretical Computer Science 200(1-2), 135–183 (1998)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Roderick Bloem
    • 1
  • Krishnendu Chatterjee
    • 2
  • Karin Greimel
    • 1
  • Thomas A. Henzinger
    • 2
  • Barbara Jobstmann
    • 3
  1. 1.Graz University of Technology 
  2. 2.IST Austria (Institute of Science and Technology Austria) 
  3. 3.CNRS/Verimag 

Personalised recommendations