Synchronized Generation of Directed Tests

  • Mingsong Chen
  • Xiaoke Qin
  • Heon-Mo Koo
  • Prabhat Mishra


Existing directed test generation techniques have explored two directions to accelerate the SAT solving process: learning during solving of one property with different bounds, or solving multiple properties with known bounds. This chapter combines the advantages of both approaches by introducing a novel SAT-solving technique which exploits the similarities among SAT instances for multiple properties and bounds on the same design. The proposed technique ensures that the knowledge obtained in previous solving iterations be shared across different bounds as well as between different properties


  1. 1.
    Prasad M, Biere A, Gupta A (2005) A survey of recent advances in SAT-based formal verification. Int J Softw Tools Technol Transf (STTT) 7(2):156–173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Strichman O. (2001) Pruning techniques for the SAT-based bounded model checking problem. In: Proceedings of IFIP WG 10.5 advanced research working conference on correct hardware design and verification, methods, pp 58–70Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Strichman O (2004) Accelerating bounded model checking of safety properties. Formal Methods Syst Des 24(1):5–24MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Mishra P, Chen M (2009) Efficient techniques for directed test generation using incremental satisfiability. In: Proceedings of international conference on VLSI design, pp 65–70Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Qin X, Chen M, Mishra P (2010) Synchronized generation of directed tests using satisfiability solving. In: Proceedings of international conference on VLSI design, pp 351–356Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Khasidashvili Z, Nadel A, Palti A, Hanna Z (2005) Simultaneous SAT-based model checking of safety properties. In: Proceedings of haifa verification conference, pp 56–75Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hooker JN (1993) Solving the incremental satisfiability problem. J Log Progr 15(1–2):177–186MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Whittemore J, Kim J, Sakallah K (2001) SATIRE: a new incremental satisfiability engine. In: Proceedings of design automation conference, pp 542–545Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Koo HM, Mishra P (2006) Functional test generation using property decompositions for validation of pipelined processors. In: Proceedings of the conference on design, automation and test in Europe, pp 1240–1245Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Chen M, Mishra P (2010) Functional test generation using efficient property clustering and learning techniques. IEEE Trans Comput-Aided Des Integr Circuits Syst 29(3):396–404CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fu Z, Mahajan Y, Malik S (2001) zChaff, Princeton University.
  12. 12.
    Cavada R, Cimatti A, Jochim CA, Keighren G, Olivetti E, Pistore M, Roveri M, Tchaltse A (2010) NuSMV. ITC-Irst.
  13. 13.
    Hennessy J, Patterson D (2003) Computer architecture: a quantitative approach. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Mishra P, Dutt N (2004) Graph-based functional test program generation for pipelined processors. In: Proceedings of the conference on design, automation and test in Europe, pp 182–187Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mingsong Chen
    • 1
  • Xiaoke Qin
    • 2
  • Heon-Mo Koo
    • 3
  • Prabhat Mishra
    • 2
  1. 1.Software Engineering InstituteEast China Normal UniversityShanghaiPeople’s Republic of China
  2. 2.Department of Computer and Information Science and EngineeringUniversity of FloridaGainsvilleUSA
  3. 3.Intel corporationSantaUSA

Personalised recommendations