How vital is liveness? Verifying timing properties of reactive and hybrid systems
This extended abstract discusses the importance of the notion of liveness properties and their verification. The main observation is that they provide a most useful abstraction on the qualitative (non-quantitative) level of modeling. As we construct more refined models that take real-time into account, the importance of liveness and fairness decrease, and many important properties move to the safety class.
In the talk to be presented, we propose a framework for the formal specification and verification of timed and hybrid systems. For timed systems we propose a specification language that refers to time only through age functions which measure the length of the most recent time interval in which a given formula has been continuously true.
We then consider hybrid systems, which are systems consisting of a non-trivial mixture of discrete and continuous components, such as a digital controller that controls a continuous environment. The proposed framework extends the temporal logic approach which has proven useful for the formal analysis of discrete systems such as reactive programs. The new framework consists of a semantic model for hybrid time, the notion of phase transition systems, which extends the formalism of discrete transition systems, an extended version of Statecharts for the specification of hybrid behaviors, and an extended version of temporal logic that enables reasoning about continuous change.
The talk is based on extensive collaboration with Z. Manna, T. Henzinger, O. Maler, and Y. Kesten, whose results are reported in [HMP91], [MMP92], and [KP92].
KeywordsLiveness fairness justice Real-time timed transitions system hybrid systems discrete and continuous systems Statecharts
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- [BKP85]H. Barringer, R. Kuiper, and A. Pnueli. A compositional temporal approach to a csp-like language. In E.J. Neuhold and G. Chroust, editors, Formal Models of Programming, pages 207–227. IFIP, North Holland, 1985.Google Scholar
- [Dij68]E.W. Dijkstra. Cooperating sequential processes. In F. Genuys, editor, Programming Languages, pages 43–112, New York, 1968. Academic Press.Google Scholar
- [Fra86]N. Francez. Fairness. Springer-Verlag, 1986.Google Scholar
- [HMP91]T. Henzinger, Z. Manna, and A. Pnueli. Temporal proof methodologies for real-time systems. In Proc. 18th ACM Symp. Princ. of Prog. Lang., pages 353–366, 1991.Google Scholar
- [KP92]Y. Kesten and A. Pnueli. Timed and hybrid statecharts and their textual representation. In J. Vytopil, editor, Formal Techniques in Real-Time and Fault-Tolerant Systems, pages 591–619. Lec. Notes in Comp. Sci. 571, Springer-Verlag, 1992.Google Scholar
- [LPS81]D. Lehmann, A. Pnueli, and J. Stavi. Impartiality, justice and fairness: The ethics of concurrent termination. In Proc. 8th Int. Colloq. Aut. Lang. Prog., pages 264–277. Lec. Notes in Comp. Sci. 115, Springer-Verlag, 1981.Google Scholar
- [MMP92]O. Maler, Z. Manna, and A. Pnueli. From timed to hybrid systems. In J.W. de Bakker, C. Huizing, W.P. de Roever, and G. Rozenberg, editors, Proceedings of the REX Workshop ”Real-Time: Theory in Practice“, volume 600 of LNCS, Berlin, 1992. Springer Verlag.Google Scholar
- [MP91b]Z. Manna and A. Pnueli. The Temporal Logic of Reactive and Concurrent Systems: Specification. Springer Verlag, New York, 1991.Google Scholar
- [Par80]D. Park. On the semantics of fair parallelism. In Abstract Software Specification, pages 504–524, Berlin, 1980. Lec. Notes in Comp. Sci. 86, Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
- [Par83]D. Park. The fairness problem and nondeterministic computing netrworks. In J.W. de Bakker and J. Van Leeuwen, editors, Foundations of Computer Science IV, Distributed Systems, pages 133–161. Mathematical Centre Tracts 159, Center for Mathematics and Computer Science (CWI), Amsterdam, 1983.Google Scholar