The Modal Transition System Control Problem

  • Nicolás D’Ippolito
  • Victor Braberman
  • Nir Piterman
  • Sebastián Uchitel
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7436)


Controller synthesis is a well studied problem that attempts to automatically generate an operational behaviour model of the systemto- be such that when deployed in a given domain model that behaves according to specified assumptions satisfies a given goal. A limitation of known controller synthesis techniques is that they require complete descriptions of the problem domain. This is limiting in the context of modern incremental development processes when a fully described problem domain is unavailable, undesirable or uneconomical. In this paper we study the controller synthesis problem when there is partial behaviour information about the problem domain. More specifically, we define and study the controller realisability problem for domains described as Modal Transition Systems (MTS). An MTS is a partial behaviour model that compactly represents a set of complete behaviour models in the form of Labelled Transition Systems (LTS). Given an MTS we ask if all, none or some of the LTS it describes admit an LTS controller that guarantees a given property. We show a technique that solves effectively the MTS realisability problem and is in the same complexity class as the corresponding LTS problem.


Control Problem Model Check Domain Model Requirement Engineering Imperfect Information 
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.
    Asarin, E., Maler, O., Pnueli, A., Sifakis, J.: Controller synthesis for timed automata. In: SSC (1998)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bertolino, A., Inverardi, P., Pelliccione, P., Tivoli, M.: Automatic synthesis of behavior protocols for composable web-services. In: FSE. ACM (2009)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bruns, G., Godefroid, P.: Model Checking Partial State Spaces with 3-Valued Temporal Logics. In: Halbwachs, N., Peled, D.A. (eds.) CAV 1999. LNCS, vol. 1633, pp. 274–287. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bruns, G., Godefroid, P.: Generalized Model Checking: Reasoning about Partial State Spaces. In: Palamidessi, C. (ed.) CONCUR 2000. LNCS, vol. 1877, pp. 168–182. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dalpiaz, F., Giorgini, P., Mylopoulos, J.: An Architecture for Requirements-Driven Self-reconfiguration. In: van Eck, P., Gordijn, J., Wieringa, R. (eds.) CAiSE 2009. LNCS, vol. 5565, pp. 246–260. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Damas, C., Lambeau, B., van Lamsweerde, A.: Scenarios, goals, and state machines: a win-win partnership for model synthesis. In: FSE. ACM (2006)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    D’Ippolito, N.: Technical Report,
  8. 8.
    D’Ippolito, N., Braberman, V., Piterman, N., Uchitel, S.: Synthesising non-anomalous event-based controllers for liveness goals. ACM TOSEM 22(1) (to appear, 2013)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    D’Ippolito, N., Braberman, V.A., Piterman, N., Uchitel, S.: Synthesis of live behaviour models for fallible domains. In: ICSE. ACM (2011)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    D’Ippolito, N., Fischbein, D., Chechik, M., Uchitel, S.: Mtsa: The modal transition system analyser. In: ASE. IEEE (2008)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Giannakopoulou, D., Magee, J.: Fluent model checking for event-based systems. In: FSE. ACM (2003)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Godefroid, P., Piterman, N.: LTL Generalized Model Checking Revisited. In: Jones, N.D., Müller-Olm, M. (eds.) VMCAI 2009. LNCS, vol. 5403, pp. 89–104. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Henzinger, T.A., Jhala, R., Majumdar, R.: Counterexample-Guided Control. In: Baeten, J.C.M., Lenstra, J.K., Parrow, J., Woeginger, G.J., et al. (eds.) ICALP 2003. LNCS, vol. 2719, pp. 886–902. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Inverardi, P., Tivoli, M.: A reuse-based approach to the correct and automatic composition of web-services. In: ESSPE. ACM (2007)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Jackson, M.: The world and the machine. In: ICSE. ACM (1995)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kazhamiakin, R., Pistore, M., Roveri, M.: Formal verification of requirements using spin: A case study on web services. In: SEFM. IEEE (2004)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Keller, R.M.: Formal verification of parallel programs. CACM 19 (1976)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    van Lamsweerde, A.: Requirements Engineering - From System Goals to UML Models to Software Specifications. Wiley (2009)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Larsen, K., Thomsen, B.: A Modal Process Logic. In: LICS. IEEE (1988)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Larsen, K.G., Xinxin, L.: Equation solving using modal transition systems. In: LICS. IEEE (1990)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Letier, E., van Lamsweerde, A.: Agent-based tactics for goal-oriented requirements elaboration. In: ICSE. ACM (2002)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Piterman, N., Pnueli, A., Sa’ar, Y.: Synthesis of Reactive(1) Designs. In: Emerson, E.A., Namjoshi, K.S. (eds.) VMCAI 2006. LNCS, vol. 3855, pp. 364–380. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Pnueli, A.: The temporal logic of programs. In: FOCS. IEEE (1977)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Pnueli, A., Rosner, R.: On the synthesis of a reactive module. In: POPL. ACM (1989)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Raskin, J.F., Chatterjee, K., Doyen, L., Henzinger, T.A.: Algorithms for omega-regular games with imperfect information. LMCS 3(3) (2007)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Sykes, D., Heaven, W., Magee, J., Kramer, J.: Plan-directed architectural change for autonomous systems. In: SAVCBS (2007)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Uchitel, S., Brunet, G., Chechik, M.: Synthesis of partial behavior models from properties and scenarios. TOSEM 35 (2009)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nicolás D’Ippolito
    • 1
  • Victor Braberman
    • 2
  • Nir Piterman
    • 3
  • Sebastián Uchitel
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Computing DepartmentImperial College LondonLondonUK
  2. 2.Departamento de Computatión, FCEyNUniversidad de Buenos AiresArgentina
  3. 3.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of LeicesterLeicesterUK

Personalised recommendations