Skip to main content

Rewriting Approximations for Properties Verification over CCS Specifications

  • Conference paper

Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNPSE,volume 7141)

Abstract

This paper presents a way to verify CCS (without renaming) specifications using tree regular model checking. From a term rewriting system and a tree automaton representing the semantics of CCS and equations of a CCS specification to analyse, an over-approximation of the set of reachable terms is computed from an initial configuration. This set, in the framework of CCS, represents an over-approximation of all states (modulo bisimulation) and action sequences the CCS specification can reach. The approach described in this paper can be fully automated. It is illustrated with the Alternating Bit Protocol and with hardware components specifications.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (Canada)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   39.99
Price excludes VAT (Canada)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (Canada)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Baader, F., Nipkow, T.: Term Rewriting and All That. Cambridge University Press (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Balland, E., Boichut, Y., Genet, T., Moreau, P.-E.: Towards an Efficient Implementation of Tree Automata Completion. In: Bevilacqua, V., Roşu, G. (eds.) AMAST 2008. LNCS, vol. 5140, pp. 67–82. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  3. Boichut, Y.: Approximations pour la vérification automatique de protocoles de sécurité. Thèse de doctorat, Laboratoire Informatique de l’université de Franche-Comté, Université de Franche-Comté, Besançon, France (2006), http://www.irisa.fr/lande/boichut/publications.html

  4. Boichut, Y., Courbis, R., Héam, P.C., Kouchnarenko, O.: Finer is Better: Abstraction Refinement for Rewriting Approximations. In: Voronkov, A. (ed.) RTA 2008. LNCS, vol. 5117, pp. 48–62. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  5. Boichut, Y., Genet, T., Jensen, T., Le Roux, L.: Rewriting Approximations for Fast Prototyping of Static Analyzers. In: Baader, F. (ed.) RTA 2007. LNCS, vol. 4533, pp. 48–62. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  6. Boichut, Y., Héam, P.C., Kouchnarenko, O.: Approximation-based tree regular model-checking. Nordic Journal of Computing (2009) (to appear)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Busi, N., Gabbrielli, M., Zavattaro, G.: Replication vs. Recursive Definitions in Channel Based Calculi. In: Baeten, J.C.M., Lenstra, J.K., Parrow, J., Woeginger, G.J. (eds.) ICALP 2003. LNCS, vol. 2719, pp. 133–144. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  8. Clarke, E.M.: Counterexample-guided abstraction refinement. In: TIME-ICTL, p. 7. IEEE Computer Society (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Cleaveland, R., Sims, S.: The NCSU Concurrency Workbench. In: Alur, R., Henzinger, T.A. (eds.) CAV 1996. LNCS, vol. 1102, pp. 394–397. Springer, Heidelberg (1996)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  10. Comon, H., Dauchet, M., Gilleron, R., Jacquemard, F., Lugiez, D., Tison, S., Tommasi, M.: Tree Automata Techniques and Applications (2002), http://www.grappa.univ-lille3.fr/tata/

  11. De Nicola, R., Vaandrager, F.: Action Versus State Based Logics for Transition Systems. In: Guessarian, I. (ed.) LITP 1990. LNCS, vol. 469, pp. 407–419. Springer, Heidelberg (1990)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  12. Dershowitz, N., Jouannaud, J.P.: Handbook of Theoretical Computer Science. In: Rewrite Systems, vol. B, ch.6, pp. 244–320. Elsevier Science Publishers B. V (1990)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Feuillade, G., Genet, T., VietTriemTong, V.: Reachability analysis over term rewriting systems. Journal on Automated Reasoning 33 (3-4) (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Feuillade, G., Genet, T., Tong, V.V.T.: Reachability analysis over term rewriting systems. Journal of Automated Reasoning 33(3-4), 341–383 (2004)

    CrossRef  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. Francesco, N.D., Fantechi, A., Gnesi, S., Inverardi, P.: Model checking of non-finite state processes by finite approximations. In: Brinksma, E., Steffen, B., Cleaveland, W.R., Larsen, K.G., Margaria, T. (eds.) TACAS 1995. LNCS, vol. 1019, pp. 195–215. Springer, Heidelberg (1995)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  16. Genet, T., Klay, F.: Rewriting for Cryptographic Protocol Verification. In: McAllester, D. (ed.) CADE 2000. LNCS, vol. 1831, pp. 271–290. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  17. Gilleron, R., Tison, S.: Regular tree languages and rewrite systems. Fundamenta Informatica 24(1/2), 157–174 (1995)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  18. Gyenizse, P., Vágvölgyi, S.: Linear Generalized Semi-Monadic Rewrite Systems Effectively Preserve Recognizability. Theoretical Computer Science 194(1-2), 87–122 (1998)

    CrossRef  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  19. Jacquemard, F.: Decidable Approximations of Term Rewriting Systems. In: Ganzinger, H. (ed.) RTA 1996. LNCS, vol. 1103, pp. 362–376. Springer, Heidelberg (1996)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  20. Lamport, L.: A temporal logic of actions. ACM Transactions On Programming Languages And Systems, TOPLAS 16(3), 872–923 (1994)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  21. Manna, Z., Pnueli, A.: The Temporal Logic of Reactive and Concurrent Systems: Specification. SV (1992)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Milner, R.: Communication and Concurrency. Prentice Hall (1989)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Cleaveland, R., Parrow, J., Steffen, B.: The concurrency workbench: A semantics based tool for the verification of concurrent systems. ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems 15 (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Ramakrishna, Y.S., Ramakrishnan, C.R., Ramakrishnan, I.V., Smolka, S.A., Swift, T., Warren, D.S.: Efficient Model Checking Using Tabled Resolution. In: Grumberg, O. (ed.) CAV 1997. LNCS, vol. 1254, pp. 143–154. Springer, Heidelberg (1997)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  25. Stevens, K., Aldwinckle, J., Birtwistle, G., Liu, Y.: Designing parallel specifications in ccs. In: Proceedings of Canadian Conference on Electrical and Computer Engineering, pp. 983–986 (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Takai, T., Kaji, Y., Seki, H.: Right-Linear Finite-Path Overlapping Term Rewriting Systems Effectively Preserve Recognizability. In: Bachmair, L. (ed.) RTA 2000. LNCS, vol. 1833, pp. 246–260. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  27. Verdejo, A., Martí-Oliet, N.: Two case studies of semantics execution in Maude: CCS and LOTOS. Formal Methods in System Design 27, 113–172 (2005)

    CrossRef  MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

Copyright information

© 2012 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Courbis, R. (2012). Rewriting Approximations for Properties Verification over CCS Specifications. In: Arbab, F., Sirjani, M. (eds) Fundamentals of Software Engineering. FSEN 2011. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 7141. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-29320-7_20

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-29320-7_20

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-29319-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-29320-7

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)