On the Complexity of Computing Minimal Unsatisfiable LTL formulas

We show that (1) the Minimal False QCNF search-problem (MF-search) and the Minimal Unsatisfiable LTL formula search problem (MU-search) are FPSPACE complete because of the very expressive power of QBF/LTL, (2) we extend the PSPACE-hardness of the MF decision problem to the MU decision problem. As a consequence, we deduce a positive answer to the open question of PSPACE hardness of the inherent Vacuity Checking problem. We even show that the Inherent Non Vacuous formula search problem is also FPSPACE-complete.Comment: Minimal unsatisfiable cores For LTL causes inherent vacuity checking redundancy coverag

Towards a Unified Theory of Timed Automata

Timed automata are finite-state machines augmented with special clock variables that reflect the advancement of time. Able to both capture real-time behavior and be verified algorithmically (model-checked), timed automata are used to model real-time systems. These observations have led to the development of several timed-automata verification tools that have been successfully applied to the analysis of a number of different systems; however, the practical utility of timed automata is undermined by the theories underlying different tools differing in subtle but important ways. Since algorithmic results that hold for the variant used by one tool may not apply to another variant, this complicates the application of different tools to different models. The thesis of this dissertation is this: the theory of timed automata can be unified, and a practical unified approach to timed-automata model checking can be built around the paradigm of proof search. First, this dissertation establishes the mutual expressivity of timed automata variants, thereby providing precise characterizations of when theoretical results of one variant apply to other variants. Second, it proves powerful expressive properties about different logics for timed behavior, and as a result, enlarges the set of verifiable properties. Third, it discusses an implementation of a verification tool for an expressive fixpoint-based logic, demonstrating an application of this newly developed theory. The tool is based on a proof-search paradigm; verifying timed automata involves constructing proofs using proof rules that enable verification problems to be translated into subproblems that must be solved. The tool's performance is optimized by using derived proof rules, thereby providing a theoretically sound basis for faster model checking. Last, this dissertation utilizes the proofs generated during verification to gain additional information about the vacuous satisfaction of certain formulae: whether the automaton satisfied a formula by never satisfying certain premises of that specification. This extra information is often obtained without significantly decreasing the verifier's performance

Explicit or Symbolic Translation of Linear Temporal Logic to Automata

Formal verification techniques are growing increasingly vital for the development of safety-critical software and hardware in practice. Techniques such as requirements-based design and model checking for system verification have been successfully used to verify systems for air traffic control, airplane separation assurance, autopilots, CPU logic designs, life-support, medical equipment, and other functions that ensure human safety. Formal behavioral specifications written early in the system-design process and communicated across all design phases increase the efficiency, consistency, and quality of the system under development. We argue that to prevent introducing design or verification errors, it is crucial to test specifications for satisfiability. We advocate for the adaptation of a new sanity check via satisfiability checking for property assurance. Our focus here is on specifications expressed in Linear Temporal Logic (LTL). We demonstrate that LTL satisfiability checking reduces to model checking and satisfiability checking for the specification, its complement, and a conjunction of all properties should be performed as a first step to LTL model checking. We report on an experimental investigation of LTL satisfiability checking. We introduce a large set of rigorous benchmarks to enable objective evaluation of LTL-to-automaton algorithms in terms of scalability, performance, correctness, and size of the automata produced. For explicit model checking, we use the Spin model checker; we tested all LTL-to-explicit automaton translation tools that were publicly available when we conducted our study. For symbolic model checking, we use CadenceSMV, NuSMV, and SAL-SMC for both LTL-to-symbolic automaton translation and to perform the satisfiability check. Our experiments result in two major findings. First, scalability, correctness, and other debilitating performance issues afflict most LTL translation tools. Second, for LTL satisfiability checking, the symbolic approach is clearly superior to the explicit approach. Ironically, the explicit approach to LTL-to-automata had been heavily studied while only one algorithm existed for LTL-to-symbolic automata. Since 1994, there had been essentially no new progress in encoding symbolic automata for BDD-based analysis. Therefore, we introduce a set of 30 symbolic automata encodings. The set consists of novel combinations of existing constructs, such as different LTL formula normal forms, with a novel transition-labeled symbolic automaton form, a new way to encode transitions, and new BDD variable orders based on algorithms for tree decomposition of graphs. An extensive set of experiments demonstrates that these encodings translate to significant, sometimes exponential, improvement over the current standard encoding for symbolic LTL satisfiability checking. Building upon these ideas, we return to the explicit automata domain and focus on the most common type of specifications used in industrial practice: safety properties. We show that we can exploit the inherent determinism of safety properties to create a set of 26 explicit automata encodings comprised of novel aspects including: state numbers versus state labels versus a state look-up table, finite versus infinite acceptance conditions, forward-looking versus backward-looking transition encodings, assignment-based versus BDD-based alphabet representation, state and transition minimization, edge abbreviation, trap-state elimination, and determinization either on-the-fly or up-front using the subset construction. We conduct an extensive experimental evaluation and identify an encoding that offers the best performance in explicit LTL model checking time and is constantly faster than the previous best explicit automaton encoding algorithm

A constraint solver for software engineering : finding models and cores of large relational specifications

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Dept. of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, 2009.This electronic version was submitted by the student author. The certified thesis is available in the Institute Archives and Special Collections.Includes bibliographical references (p. 105-120).Relational logic is an attractive candidate for a software description language, because both the design and implementation of software often involve reasoning about relational structures: organizational hierarchies in the problem domain, architectural configurations in the high level design, or graphs and linked lists in low level code. Until recently, however, frameworks for solving relational constraints have had limited applicability. Designed to analyze small, hand-crafted models of software systems, current frameworks perform poorly on specifications that are large or that have partially known solutions. This thesis presents an efficient constraint solver for relational logic, with recent applications to design analysis, code checking, test-case generation, and declarative configuration. The solver provides analyses for both satisfiable and unsatisfiable specifications--a finite model finder for the former and a minimal unsatisfiable core extractor for the latter. It works by translating a relational problem to a boolean satisfiability problem; applying an off-the-shelf SAT solver to the resulting formula; and converting the SAT solver's output back to the relational domain. The idea of solving relational problems by reduction to SAT is not new. The core contributions of this work, instead, are new techniques for expanding the capacity and applicability of SAT-based engines. They include: a new interface to SAT that extends relational logic with a mechanism for specifying partial solutions; a new translation algorithm based on sparse matrices and auto-compacting circuits; a new symmetry detection technique that works in the presence of partial solutions; and a new core extraction algorithm that recycles inferences made at the boolean level to speed up core minimization at the specification level.by Emina Torlak.Ph.D

Computer Aided Verification

The open access two-volume set LNCS 11561 and 11562 constitutes the refereed proceedings of the 31st International Conference on Computer Aided Verification, CAV 2019, held in New York City, USA, in July 2019. The 52 full papers presented together with 13 tool papers and 2 case studies, were carefully reviewed and selected from 258 submissions. The papers were organized in the following topical sections: Part I: automata and timed systems; security and hyperproperties; synthesis; model checking; cyber-physical systems and machine learning; probabilistic systems, runtime techniques; dynamical, hybrid, and reactive systems; Part II: logics, decision procedures; and solvers; numerical programs; verification; distributed systems and networks; verification and invariants; and concurrency

Proceedings of the Second NASA Formal Methods Symposium

This publication contains the proceedings of the Second NASA Formal Methods Symposium sponsored by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration and held in Washington D.C. April 13-15, 2010. Topics covered include: Decision Engines for Software Analysis using Satisfiability Modulo Theories Solvers; Verification and Validation of Flight-Critical Systems; Formal Methods at Intel -- An Overview; Automatic Review of Abstract State Machines by Meta Property Verification; Hardware-independent Proofs of Numerical Programs; Slice-based Formal Specification Measures -- Mapping Coupling and Cohesion Measures to Formal Z; How Formal Methods Impels Discovery: A Short History of an Air Traffic Management Project; A Machine-Checked Proof of A State-Space Construction Algorithm; Automated Assume-Guarantee Reasoning for Omega-Regular Systems and Specifications; Modeling Regular Replacement for String Constraint Solving; Using Integer Clocks to Verify the Timing-Sync Sensor Network Protocol; Can Regulatory Bodies Expect Efficient Help from Formal Methods?; Synthesis of Greedy Algorithms Using Dominance Relations; A New Method for Incremental Testing of Finite State Machines; Verification of Faulty Message Passing Systems with Continuous State Space in PVS; Phase Two Feasibility Study for Software Safety Requirements Analysis Using Model Checking; A Prototype Embedding of Bluespec System Verilog in the PVS Theorem Prover; SimCheck: An Expressive Type System for Simulink; Coverage Metrics for Requirements-Based Testing: Evaluation of Effectiveness; Software Model Checking of ARINC-653 Flight Code with MCP; Evaluation of a Guideline by Formal Modelling of Cruise Control System in Event-B; Formal Verification of Large Software Systems; Symbolic Computation of Strongly Connected Components Using Saturation; Towards the Formal Verification of a Distributed Real-Time Automotive System; Slicing AADL Specifications for Model Checking; Model Checking with Edge-valued Decision Diagrams; and Data-flow based Model Analysis

Computer Aided Verification

The open access two-volume set LNCS 11561 and 11562 constitutes the refereed proceedings of the 31st International Conference on Computer Aided Verification, CAV 2019, held in New York City, USA, in July 2019. The 52 full papers presented together with 13 tool papers and 2 case studies, were carefully reviewed and selected from 258 submissions. The papers were organized in the following topical sections: Part I: automata and timed systems; security and hyperproperties; synthesis; model checking; cyber-physical systems and machine learning; probabilistic systems, runtime techniques; dynamical, hybrid, and reactive systems; Part II: logics, decision procedures; and solvers; numerical programs; verification; distributed systems and networks; verification and invariants; and concurrency

Computer Aided Verification

This open access two-volume set LNCS 11561 and 11562 constitutes the refereed proceedings of the 31st International Conference on Computer Aided Verification, CAV 2019, held in New York City, USA, in July 2019. The 52 full papers presented together with 13 tool papers and 2 case studies, were carefully reviewed and selected from 258 submissions. The papers were organized in the following topical sections: Part I: automata and timed systems; security and hyperproperties; synthesis; model checking; cyber-physical systems and machine learning; probabilistic systems, runtime techniques; dynamical, hybrid, and reactive systems; Part II: logics, decision procedures; and solvers; numerical programs; verification; distributed systems and networks; verification and invariants; and concurrency

Computer Aided Verification

This open access two-volume set LNCS 11561 and 11562 constitutes the refereed proceedings of the 31st International Conference on Computer Aided Verification, CAV 2019, held in New York City, USA, in July 2019. The 52 full papers presented together with 13 tool papers and 2 case studies, were carefully reviewed and selected from 258 submissions. The papers were organized in the following topical sections: Part I: automata and timed systems; security and hyperproperties; synthesis; model checking; cyber-physical systems and machine learning; probabilistic systems, runtime techniques; dynamical, hybrid, and reactive systems; Part II: logics, decision procedures; and solvers; numerical programs; verification; distributed systems and networks; verification and invariants; and concurrency