Formal Verification of a Parameterized Data Aggregation Protocol

  • Sergio Feo-Arenis
  • Bernd Westphal
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7871)


We report on our experiences on the successful verification of a parameterized wireless fault-tolerant data aggregation protocol. We outline our verification method that involves automatic verification of a model of the node processing algorithm under system topology constraints. The presented work forms the basis for a generalization to verification rules for aggregation protocols that integrate automatic verification into an inductive framework.


Model Check Sink Node Proof Obligation Aggregation Algorithm Correctness 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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Apt, K.R., Kozen, D.: Limits for automatic verification of finite-state concurrent systems. Inf. Process. Lett. 22(6), 307–309 (1986)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Barnett, M., Chang, B.-Y.E., DeLine, R., Jacobs, B., Leino, K.R.M.: Boogie: A modular reusable verifier for object-oriented programs. In: de Boer, F.S., Bonsangue, M.M., Graf, S., de Roever, W.-P. (eds.) FMCO 2005. LNCS, vol. 4111, pp. 364–387. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Böhme, S., Moskal, M., Schulte, W., Wolff, B.: HOL-Boogie - an interactive prover-backend for the verifying C compiler. J. Autom. Reasoning 44(1-2), 111–144 (2010)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Brown, O., Eremenko, P.: The value proposition for Fractionated space architectures. In: AIAA Space 2006, No. 7506. AIAA (2006)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Feng, J., Eager, D.L., Makaroff, D.: Aggregation protocols for high rate, low delay data collection in sensor networks. In: Fratta, L., Schulzrinne, H., Takahashi, Y., Spaniol, O. (eds.) NETWORKING 2009. LNCS, vol. 5550, pp. 26–39. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gobriel, S., Khattab, S., Mossé, D., Brustoloni, J., Melhem, R.: Ridesharing: Fault tolerant aggregation in sensor networks using corrective actions. In: IEEE Communications Society Conference on Sensor, Mesh and Ad Hoc Communications and Networks, pp. 595–604 (2006)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Le Goues, C., Leino, K.R.M., Moskal, M.: The boogie verification debugger (tool paper). In: Barthe, G., Pardo, A., Schneider, G. (eds.) SEFM 2011. LNCS, vol. 7041, pp. 407–414. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wachter, B., Westphal, B.: The spotlight principle. On combining process-summarising state abstractions. In: Cook, B., Podelski, A. (eds.) VMCAI 2007. LNCS, vol. 4349, pp. 182–198. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wenzel, M., Paulson, L.C., Nipkow, T.: The isabelle framework. In: Mohamed, O.A., Muñoz, C., Tahar, S. (eds.) TPHOLs 2008. LNCS, vol. 5170, pp. 33–38. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sergio Feo-Arenis
    • 1
  • Bernd Westphal
    • 1
  1. 1.Albert-Ludwigs-Universität FreiburgGermany

Personalised recommendations