Compositional Abstraction in Real-Time Model Checking

  • Jasper Berendsen
  • Frits Vaandrager
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5215)


The idea to use simulations (or refinements) as a compositional abstraction device is well-known, both in untimed and timed settings, and has already been studied theoretically and practically in many papers during the last three decades. Nevertheless, existing approaches do not handle two fundamental modeling concepts which, for instance, are frequently used in the popular Uppaal model checker: (1) a parallel composition operator that supports communication via shared variables as well as synchronization of actions, and (2) committed locations. We describe a framework for compositional abstraction based on simulation relations that does support both concepts, and that is suitable for Uppaal. Our approach is very general and the only essential restriction is that the guards of input transitions do not depend on external variables. We have applied our compositional framework to verify the Zeroconf protocol for an arbitrary number of hosts.


Shared Variable Input Transition Internal Transition External Variable Parallel Composition 
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.
    Behrmann, G., David, A., Larsen, K.: A tutorial on Uppaal. In: Bernardo, M., Corradini, F. (eds.) SFM-RT 2004. LNCS, vol. 3185, pp. 200–236. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Milner, R.: An algebraic definition of simulation between programs. In: Proceedings 2nd Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 481–489. British Computer Society Press, London (1971)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Lynch, N., Tuttle, M.: Hierarchical correctness proofs for distributed algorithms. In: Proceedings of the 6th Annual ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing, August 1987, pp. 137–151 (1987); A full version is available as MIT Technical Report MIT/LCS/TR-387Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Jonsson, B.: Simulations between specifications of distributed systems. In: Baeten, J., Groote, J. (eds.) CONCUR 1991. LNCS, vol. 527, pp. 346–360. Springer, Heidelberg (1991)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Abadi, M., Lamport, L.: The existence of refinement mappings. Theoretical Computer Science 82(2), 253–284 (1991)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lynch, N., Vaandrager, F.: Forward and backward simulations, I: Untimed systems. Information and Computation 121(2), 214–233 (1995)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jensen, H.: Abstraction-Based Verification of Distributed Systems. PhD thesis, Department of Computer Science, Aalborg University, Denmark (June 1999)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Jensen, H., Larsen, K., Skou, A.: Scaling up Uppaal: Automatic verification of real-time systems using compositionality and abstraction. In: Joseph, M. (ed.) FTRTFT 2000. LNCS, vol. 1926, Springer, Heidelberg (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Griffioen, W., Vaandrager, F.: A theory of normed simulations. ACM Transactions on Computational Logic 5(4), 577–610 (2004)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Frehse, G.: Compositional Verification of Hybrid Systems using Simulation Relations. PhD thesis, Radboud University Nijmegen (October 2005)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kaynar, D., Lynch, N., Segala, R., Vaandrager, F.: The Theory of Timed I/O Automata. Synthesis Lecture on Computer Science, p. 101. Morgan & Claypool Publishers (2006) ISBN 159829010XGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gebremichael, B., Vaandrager, F., Zhang, M.: Analysis of the Zeroconf protocol using Uppaal. In: Proceedings 6th Annual ACM & IEEE Conference on Embedded Software (EMSOFT 2006), Seoul, South Korea, October 22-25, 2006, pp. 242–251. ACM Press, New York (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lamport, L.: The temporal logic of actions. ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems 16(3), 872–923 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Alur, R., Henzinger, T.: Reactive Modules. Formal Methods in System Design 15(1), 7–48 (1999)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Milner, R.: Communication and Concurrency. Prentice-Hall International, Englewood Cliffs (1989)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lynch, N., Segala, R., Vaandrager, F., Weinberg, H.: Hybrid I/O automata. In: Alur, R., Henzinger, T., Sontag, E. (eds.) Hybrid Systems III. LNCS, vol. 1066, pp. 496–510. Springer, Heidelberg (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Groote, J., Ponse, A.: Process algebra with guards. Combining Hoare logic with process algebra. Formal Aspects of Computing 6, 115–164 (1994)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    de Alfaro, L., da Silva, L.D., Faella, M., Legay, A., Roy, P., Sorea, M.: Sociable interfaces. In: Gramlich, B. (ed.) FroCos 2005. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3717, pp. 81–105. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    van Beek, D.A., Reniers, M.A., Schiffelers, R.R.H., Rooda, J.E.: Foundations of a compositional interchange format for hybrid systems. In: Bemporad, A., Bicchi, A., Buttazzo, G. (eds.) HSCC 2007. LNCS, vol. 4416, pp. 587–600. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Berendsen, J., Vaandrager, F.: Parallel composition in a paper of Jensen, Larsen and Skou is not associative. Technical note (September 2007),
  21. 21.
    Berendsen, J., Vaandrager, F.: Parallel composition in a paper by De Alfaro e.a. is not associative. Technical note available electronically (May 2008),
  22. 22.
    Bhat, G., Cleaveland, R., Lüttgen, G.: Dynamic priorities for modeling real-time. In: Togashi, A., Mizuno, T., Shiratori, N., Higashino, T. (eds.) FORTE. IFIP Conference Proceedings, vol. 107, pp. 321–336. Chapman & Hall, Boca Raton (1997)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Cleaveland, R., Lüttgen, G., Natarajan, V.: A process algebra with distributed priorities. Theor. Comput. Sci. 195(2), 227–258 (1998)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Phillips, I.: CCS with priority guards. In: Larsen, K.G., Nielsen, M. (eds.) CONCUR 2001. LNCS, vol. 2154, pp. 305–320. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Aceto, L., Bloom, B., Vaandrager, F.: Turning SOS rules into equations. LICS 1992 Special Issue of Information and Computation 111(1), 1–52 (1994)zbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Berendsen, J., Gebremichael, B., Vaandrager, F., Zhang, M.: Formal specification and analysis of zeroconf using Uppaal. Report ICIS-R07032, Institute for Computing and Information Sciences, Radboud University Nijmegen (December 2007)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Berendsen, J., Vaandrager, F.: Compositional abstraction in real-time model checking. Technical Report ICIS–R07027, Institute for Computing and Information Sciences, Radboud University Nijmegen (2007),
  28. 28.
    Sifakis, J.: The compositional specification of timed systems - a tutorial. In: Halbwachs, N., Peled, D.A. (eds.) CAV 1999. LNCS, vol. 1633, pp. 2–7. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Bowman, H.: Modelling timeouts without timelocks. In: Katoen, J.-P. (ed.) AMAST-ARTS 1999, ARTS 1999, and AMAST-WS 1999. LNCS, vol. 1601, p. 20. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Grumberg, O., Long, D.: Model checking and modular verification. ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst. 16(3), 843–871 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Wachter, B., Westphal, B.: The Spotlight Principle: On Process-Summarizing State Abstractions. In: Podelski, A., Cook, B. (eds.) VMCAI 2007. LNCS, vol. 4349. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Cassez, F., David, A., Fleury, E., Larsen, K., Lime, D.: Efficient on-the-fly algorithms for the analysis of timed games. In: Abadi, M., de Alfaro, L. (eds.) CONCUR 2005. LNCS, vol. 3653, pp. 66–80. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jasper Berendsen
    • 1
  • Frits Vaandrager
    • 1
  1. 1.ICISRadboud University NijmegenNijmegenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations