Abstract
A traditional counterexample to a linear-time safety property shows the values of all signals at all times prior to the error. However, some signals may not be critical to causing the failure. A succinct explanation may help human understanding as well as speed up algorithms that have to analyze many such traces. In Bounded Model Checking (BMC), a counterexample is constructed from a satisfying assignment to a Boolean formula, typically in CNF. Modern SAT solvers usually assign values to all variables when the input formula is satisfiable. Deriving minimal satisfying assignments from such complete assignments does not lead to concise explanations of counterexamples because of how CNF formulae are derived from the models. Hence, we formulate the extraction of a succinct counterexample as the problem of finding a minimal assignment that, together with the Boolean formula describing the model, implies an objective. We present a two-stage algorithm for this problem, such that the result of each stage contributes to identify the “interesting” events that cause the failure. We demonstrate the effectiveness of our approach with an example and with experimental results.
This work was supported in part by SRC contract 2003-TJ-920.
Chapter PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Keywords
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
Biere, A., Cimatti, A., Clarke, E., Zhu, Y.: Symbolic model checking without BDDs. In: Cleaveland, W.R. (ed.) TACAS 1999. LNCS, vol. 1579, pp. 193–207. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)
Brayton, R.K., et al.: VIS:Asystem for verification and synthesis. Technical Report UCB/ERL M95/104, Electronics Research Lab, Univ. of California (December 1995)
Brayton, R.K., Somenzi, F.: An exact minimizer for Boolean relations. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Computer Aided Design, Santa Clara, CA, November 1989, pp. 316–319 (1989)
Clarke, E., Gupta, A., Kukula, J., Strichman, O.: SAT based abstraction-refinement using ILP and machine learning. In: Brinksma, E., Larsen, K.G. (eds.) CAV 2002. LNCS, vol. 2404, pp. 265–279. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)
Davis, M., Logemann, G., Loveland, D.: A machine program for theorem proving. Communications of the ACM 5, 394–397 (1962)
Davis, M., Putnam, H.: A computing procedure for quantification theory. Journal of the Association for Computing Machinery 7(3), 201–215 (1960)
Goldberg, E., Novikov, Y.: BerkMin:A fast and robust SAT-solver. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Design, Automation and Test in Europe, Paris, France, March 2002, pp. 142–149 (2002)
Jin, H., Ravi, K., Somenzi, F.: Fate and free will in error traces. In: Katoen, J.-P., Stevens, P. (eds.) TACAS 2002. LNCS, vol. 2280, pp. 445–459. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)
McMillan, K.L.: Applying SAT methods in unbounded symbolic model checking. In: Brinksma, E., Larsen, K.G. (eds.) CAV 2002. LNCS, vol. 2404, pp. 250–264. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)
Moskewicz, M., Madigan, C.F., Zhao, Y., Zhang, L., Malik, S.: Chaff: Engineering an efficient SAT solver. In: Proceedings of the Design Automation Conference, Las Vegas, NV, June 2001, pp. 530–535 (2001)
Nemhauser, G.L., Wolsey, L.A.: Integer and Combinatorial Optimization. Wiley, New York (1988)
Silva, J.P.M., Sakallah, K.A.: Grasp—a new search algorithm for satisfiability. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Computer-Aided Design, San Jose, CA, November 1996, pp. 220–227 (1996)
Wang, C., Li, B., Jin, H., Hachtel, G.D., Somenzi, F.: Improving Ariadne’s bundle by following multiple threads in abstraction refinement. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Computer-Aided Design, November 2003, pp. 408–415 (2003)
Zhang, H.: SATO: An efficient propositional prover. In: McCune, W. (ed.) CADE 1997. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 1249, pp. 272–275. Springer, Heidelberg (1997)
Zhang, L., Malik, S.: The quest for efficient Boolean satisfiability solvers. In: Brinksma, E., Larsen, K.G. (eds.) CAV 2002. LNCS, vol. 2404, pp. 17–36. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2004 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Ravi, K., Somenzi, F. (2004). Minimal Assignments for Bounded Model Checking. In: Jensen, K., Podelski, A. (eds) Tools and Algorithms for the Construction and Analysis of Systems. TACAS 2004. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 2988. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-24730-2_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-24730-2_3
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-21299-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-24730-2
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive