950 research outputs found
Model Checking CTL is Almost Always Inherently Sequential
The model checking problem for CTL is known to be P-complete (Clarke,
Emerson, and Sistla (1986), see Schnoebelen (2002)). We consider fragments of
CTL obtained by restricting the use of temporal modalities or the use of
negations---restrictions already studied for LTL by Sistla and Clarke (1985)
and Markey (2004). For all these fragments, except for the trivial case without
any temporal operator, we systematically prove model checking to be either
inherently sequential (P-complete) or very efficiently parallelizable
(LOGCFL-complete). For most fragments, however, model checking for CTL is
already P-complete. Hence our results indicate that, in cases where the
combined complexity is of relevance, approaching CTL model checking by
parallelism cannot be expected to result in any significant speedup. We also
completely determine the complexity of the model checking problem for all
fragments of the extensions ECTL, CTL+, and ECTL+
Discounting in LTL
In recent years, there is growing need and interest in formalizing and
reasoning about the quality of software and hardware systems. As opposed to
traditional verification, where one handles the question of whether a system
satisfies, or not, a given specification, reasoning about quality addresses the
question of \emph{how well} the system satisfies the specification. One
direction in this effort is to refine the "eventually" operators of temporal
logic to {\em discounting operators}: the satisfaction value of a specification
is a value in , where the longer it takes to fulfill eventuality
requirements, the smaller the satisfaction value is.
In this paper we introduce an augmentation by discounting of Linear Temporal
Logic (LTL), and study it, as well as its combination with propositional
quality operators. We show that one can augment LTL with an arbitrary set of
discounting functions, while preserving the decidability of the model-checking
problem. Further augmenting the logic with unary propositional quality
operators preserves decidability, whereas adding an average-operator makes some
problems undecidable. We also discuss the complexity of the problem, as well as
various extensions
Comparing BDD and SAT based techniques for model checking Chaum's Dining Cryptographers Protocol
We analyse different versions of the Dining Cryptographers protocol by means of automatic verification via model checking. Specifically we model the protocol in terms of a network of communicating automata and verify that the protocol meets the anonymity requirements specified. Two different model checking techniques (ordered binary decision diagrams and SAT-based bounded model checking) are evaluated and compared to verify the protocols
Linear Encodings of Bounded LTL Model Checking
We consider the problem of bounded model checking (BMC) for linear temporal
logic (LTL). We present several efficient encodings that have size linear in
the bound. Furthermore, we show how the encodings can be extended to LTL with
past operators (PLTL). The generalised encoding is still of linear size, but
cannot detect minimal length counterexamples. By using the virtual unrolling
technique minimal length counterexamples can be captured, however, the size of
the encoding is quadratic in the specification. We also extend virtual
unrolling to Buchi automata, enabling them to accept minimal length
counterexamples.
Our BMC encodings can be made incremental in order to benefit from
incremental SAT technology. With fairly small modifications the incremental
encoding can be further enhanced with a termination check, allowing us to prove
properties with BMC. Experiments clearly show that our new encodings improve
performance of BMC considerably, particularly in the case of the incremental
encoding, and that they are very competitive for finding bugs. An analysis of
the liveness-to-safety transformation reveals many similarities to the BMC
encodings in this paper. Using the liveness-to-safety translation with
BDD-based invariant checking results in an efficient method to find shortest
counterexamples that complements the BMC-based approach.Comment: Final version for Logical Methods in Computer Science CAV 2005
special issu
Rich Counter-Examples for Temporal-Epistemic Logic Model Checking
Model checking verifies that a model of a system satisfies a given property,
and otherwise produces a counter-example explaining the violation. The verified
properties are formally expressed in temporal logics. Some temporal logics,
such as CTL, are branching: they allow to express facts about the whole
computation tree of the model, rather than on each single linear computation.
This branching aspect is even more critical when dealing with multi-modal
logics, i.e. logics expressing facts about systems with several transition
relations. A prominent example is CTLK, a logic that reasons about temporal and
epistemic properties of multi-agent systems. In general, model checkers produce
linear counter-examples for failed properties, composed of a single computation
path of the model. But some branching properties are only poorly and partially
explained by a linear counter-example.
This paper proposes richer counter-example structures called tree-like
annotated counter-examples (TLACEs), for properties in Action-Restricted CTL
(ARCTL), an extension of CTL quantifying paths restricted in terms of actions
labeling transitions of the model. These counter-examples have a branching
structure that supports more complete description of property violations.
Elements of these counter-examples are annotated with parts of the property to
give a better understanding of their structure. Visualization and browsing of
these richer counter-examples become a critical issue, as the number of
branches and states can grow exponentially for deeply-nested properties.
This paper formally defines the structure of TLACEs, characterizes adequate
counter-examples w.r.t. models and failed properties, and gives a generation
algorithm for ARCTL properties. It also illustrates the approach with examples
in CTLK, using a reduction of CTLK to ARCTL. The proposed approach has been
implemented, first by extending the NuSMV model checker to generate and export
branching counter-examples, secondly by providing an interactive graphical
interface to visualize and browse them.Comment: In Proceedings IWIGP 2012, arXiv:1202.422
Constraint LTL Satisfiability Checking without Automata
This paper introduces a novel technique to decide the satisfiability of
formulae written in the language of Linear Temporal Logic with Both future and
past operators and atomic formulae belonging to constraint system D (CLTLB(D)
for short). The technique is based on the concept of bounded satisfiability,
and hinges on an encoding of CLTLB(D) formulae into QF-EUD, the theory of
quantifier-free equality and uninterpreted functions combined with D. Similarly
to standard LTL, where bounded model-checking and SAT-solvers can be used as an
alternative to automata-theoretic approaches to model-checking, our approach
allows users to solve the satisfiability problem for CLTLB(D) formulae through
SMT-solving techniques, rather than by checking the emptiness of the language
of a suitable automaton A_{\phi}. The technique is effective, and it has been
implemented in our Zot formal verification tool.Comment: 39 page
- ā¦