Verification of large state/event systems using compositionality and dependency analysis

  • JØrn Lind-Nielsen
  • Henrik Reif Andersen
  • Gerd Behrmann
  • Henrik Hulgaard
  • Kåre Kristoifersen
  • Kim G. Larsen
Regular Sessions Fielded Applications
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1384)


A state/event model is a concurrent version of Mealy machines used for describing embedded reactive systems. This paper introduces a technique that uses compositionality and dependency analysis to significantly improve the efficiency of symbolic model checking of state/event models. This technique makes possible automated verification of large industrial designs with the use of only modest resources (less than one hour on a standard PC for a model with 1421 concurrent machines). The results of the paper are being implemented in the next version of the commercial tool visualSTATEℳ.


  1. 1.
    H. R. Andersen, J. Staunstrup, and N. Maretti. Partial model checking with ROBDDs. In E. Brinksma, editor, Proceedings of TACAS'97, volume 1217 of LNCS, pages 35–49. Springer-Verlag, April 1997.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    H.R. Andersen. Partial model checking (extended abstract). In Proceedings, Tenth Annual IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science, pages 398–407, La Jolla, San Diego, 26–29 July 1995. IEEE Computer Society Press.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    R.J. Anderson, P. Beame, S. M. Burns, W. Chan, F. Modugno, D. Notkin, and J.D. Reese. Model checking large software specifications. In D. Garlan, editor, SIGSOFT '96. Proceedings of the Fourth ACM SIGSOFT Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering, pages 156–66, San Francisco, 1996. ACM.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    F. Balarin and A.L. Sangiovanni-Vincentelli. An iterative approach to language containment. In C. Courcoubetis, editor, CAV'93. 5th International Conference on Computer Aided Verification, volume 697 of LNCS, pages 29–40, Berlin, 1993. Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    R.E. Bryant. Graph-based algorithms for Boolean function manipulation. IEEE Transactions on Computers, 8(C-35):677–691, 1986.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    J. R. Burch, E. M. Clarke, and D. E. Long. Symbolic model checking with partitioned transition relations. In A. Halaas and P. B. Denyer, editors, Proc. 1991 Int. Conf. on VLSI, August 1991.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    J. R. Burch, E. M. Clarke, K. L. McMillan, D. L. Dill, and L. J. Hwang. Symbolic model checking: 1020 states and beyond. In Proceedings, Fifth Annual IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science, pages 428–439. IEEE Computer Society Press, 1990.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    J.R. Burch, E.M. Clarke, D.E. Long, K.L. McMillan, and D.L. Dill. Symbolic model checking for sequential circuit verification. IEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems, 13(4):401–424, 1994.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    E.M. Clarke, E.A. Emerson, and A.P. Sistla. Automatic verification of finitestate concurrent systems using temporal logic specifications. A CM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems, 8(2):244–263, 1986.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    E.M. Clarke, O. Grumberg, and D.E. Long. Model checking and abstraction. ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems, 1994.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    E.M. Clarke, D.E. Long, and K.L. McMillan. Compositional model checking. In Proceedings, Fourth Annual Symposium on Logic in Computer Science, pages 353–362, Asilomar Conference Center, Pacific Grove, California, June 5–8 1989. IEEE Computer Society Press.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    O. Coudert, C. Berthet, and J. C. Madre. Verification of synchronous sequential machines based on symbolic execution. In J. Sifakis, editor, Automatic Verification Methods for Finite State Systems. Proceedings, volume 407 of LNCS, pages 365–373. Springer-Verlag, 1989.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    O. Coudert, J. C. Madre, and C. Berthet. Verifying temporal properties of sequential machines without building their state diagrams. In E.M. Clarke and R.P. Kurshan, editors, CAV'90. Workshop on Computer-Aided Verification., pages 75–84, Rutgers, New Jersey, 1990. American Mathematical Society.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    D. Geist and I. Beer. Efficient model checking by automated ordering of transition relation partitions. In D.L. Dill, editor, CAV'94-6th International Conference on Computer Aided Verification, volume 818 of LNCS, pages 299–310, Stanford, 1994. Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    David Harel. STATECHARTS: A visual formalism for complex systems. Science of Computer Programming, 8(3):231–274, June 1987.MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    K. J. Kristoffersen, F. Laroussinie, K. G. Larsen, P. Patterson, and W. Yi. A compositional proof of a read-time mutual exclusion protocol. In M. Bidoit and M. Dauchet, editors, Proceedings of TAPSOFT '97: Theory and Practice of Software Development, volume 1214 of LNCS, pages 565–579. Springer-Verlag, 1997.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    W. Lee, A. Pardo, J.-Y. Jang, G. Hachtel, and F. Somenzi. Tearing based automatic abstraction for CTL model checking. In 1996 IEEE/ACM International Conference on Computer-Aided Design, pages 76–81, San Jose, CA, 1996. IEEE Comput. Soc. Press.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Beologic® A/S. visualSTATEℳ 3.0 User's Guide, 1996.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    K.L. McMillan. Symbolic Model Checking. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Norwell Massachusetts, 1993.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    T. Sreemani and J.M. Atlee. Feasibility of model checking software requirements: a case study. In COMPASS '96. Proceedings of the Eleventh Annual Conference on Computer Assurance, pages 77–88, New York, USA, 1996. IEEE.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • JØrn Lind-Nielsen
    • 1
  • Henrik Reif Andersen
    • 1
  • Gerd Behrmann
    • 2
  • Henrik Hulgaard
    • 1
  • Kåre Kristoifersen
    • 2
  • Kim G. Larsen
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Information TechnologyTechnical University of DenmarkDenmark
  2. 2.BRICS Department of Computer ScienceAalborg UniversityDenmark

Personalised recommendations