Constraints for Continuous Reachability in the Verification of Hybrid Systems

  • Stefan Ratschan
  • Zhikun She
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4120)


The method for verification of hybrid systems by constraint propagation based abstraction refinement that we introduced in an earlier paper is based on an over-approximation of continuous reachability information of ordinary differential equations using constraints that do not contain differentiation symbols. The method uses an interval constraint propagation based solver to solve these constraints. This has the advantage that—without complicated algorithmic changes—the method can be improved by just changing these constraints. In this paper, we discuss various possibilities of such changes, we prove some properties about the amount of over-approximations introduced by the new constraints, and provide some timings that document the resulting improvement.


Hybrid System Constraint Propagation Interval Arithmetic Constraint Solver Hybrid Automaton 
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.
    Anai, H., Weispfenning, V.: Reach set computation using real quantifier elimination. In: Di Benedetto, M.D., Sangiovanni-Vincentelli, A.L. (eds.) HSCC 2001. LNCS, vol. 2034, pp. 63–76. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Belta, C., Schug, J., Dang, T., Kumar, V., Pappas, G., Rubin, H., Dunlap, P.: Stability and reachability analysis of a hybrid model of luminescence in the marine bacterium vibrio fisheri. In: CDC 2001 - Conference on Decision and Control, Florida, USA (2001)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Benhamou, F., Older, W.J.: Applying interval arithmetic to real, integer and Boolean constraints. Journal of Logic Programming 32(1), 1–24 (1997)CrossRefMathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Clarke, E., Grumberg, O., Jha, S., Lu, Y., Veith, H.: Counterexample-guided abstraction refinement for symbolic model checking. Journal of the ACM 50(5), 752–794 (2003)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Davis, E.: Constraint propagation with interval labels. Artif. Intell. 32(3), 281–331 (1987)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Frehse, G.: PHAVer: Algorithmic verification of hybrid systems past HyTech. In: Morari, Thiele, [10]Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hickey, T., Wittenberg, D.: Rigorous modeling of hybrid systems using interval arithmetic constraints. In: Alur, R., Pappas, G.J. (eds.) HSCC 2004. LNCS, vol. 2993, pp. 402–416. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hickey, T.J.: Analytic constraint solving and interval arithmetic. In: Proceedings of the 27th Annual ACM SIGACT-SIGPLAN Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages, pp. 338–351. ACM Press, New York (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hickey, T.J.: Metalevel interval arithmetic and verifiable constraint solving. Journal of Functional and Logic Programming 2001(7) (October 2001)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Morari, M., Thiele, L. (eds.): HSCC 2005. LNCS, vol. 3414. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Puri, A., Varaiya, P.: Driving safely in smart cars. In: Proc. of the 1995 American Control Conference, pp. 3597–3599 (1995)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ratschan, S.: RSolver. Software package (2004),
  13. 13.
    Ratschan, S.: Efficient solving of quantified inequality constraints over the real numbers. ACM Transactions on Computational Logic (to appear, 2005)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ratschan, S., She, Z.: Safety verification of hybrid systems by constraint propagation based abstraction refinement. ACM Journal in Embedded Computing Systems (to appear)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ratschan, S., She, Z.: HSolver. Software package (2004),
  16. 16.
    Ratschan, S., She, Z.: Safety verification of hybrid systems by constraint propagation based abstraction refinement. In: Morari, Thiele, [10]Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Stursberg, O., Kowalewski, S., Engell, S.: On the generation of timed discrete approximations for continuous systems. Mathematical and Computer Models of Dynamical Systems 6, 51–70 (2000)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Stursberg, O., Kowalewski, S., Hoffmann, I., Preußig, J.: Comparing timed and hybrid automata as approximations of continuous systems. In: Antsaklis, P.J., Kohn, W., Nerode, A., Sastry, S.S. (eds.) HS 1996. LNCS, vol. 1273, pp. 361–377. Springer, Heidelberg (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Tiwari, A.: Approximate reachability for linear systems. In: Maler, O., Pnueli, A. (eds.) HSCC 2003. LNCS, vol. 2623, pp. 514–525. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Stefan Ratschan
    • 1
  • Zhikun She
    • 2
  1. 1.Institute of Computer ScienceCzech Academy of SciencesPragueCzech Republic
  2. 2.Max-Planck-Institut für InformatikSaarbrückenGermany

Personalised recommendations