Software Model Checking with Explicit Scheduler and Symbolic Threads

In many practical application domains, the software is organized into a set of threads, whose activation is exclusive and controlled by a cooperative scheduling policy: threads execute, without any interruption, until they either terminate or yield the control explicitly to the scheduler. The formal verification of such software poses significant challenges. On the one side, each thread may have infinite state space, and might call for abstraction. On the other side, the scheduling policy is often important for correctness, and an approach based on abstracting the scheduler may result in loss of precision and false positives. Unfortunately, the translation of the problem into a purely sequential software model checking problem turns out to be highly inefficient for the available technologies. We propose a software model checking technique that exploits the intrinsic structure of these programs. Each thread is translated into a separate sequential program and explored symbolically with lazy abstraction, while the overall verification is orchestrated by the direct execution of the scheduler. The approach is optimized by filtering the exploration of the scheduler with the integration of partial-order reduction. The technique, called ESST (Explicit Scheduler, Symbolic Threads) has been implemented and experimentally evaluated on a significant set of benchmarks. The results demonstrate that ESST technique is way more effective than software model checking applied to the sequentialized programs, and that partial-order reduction can lead to further performance improvements.Comment: 40 pages, 10 figures, accepted for publication in journal of logical methods in computer scienc

Bridging the Gap between Enumerative and Symbolic Model Checkers

We present a method to perform symbolic state space generation for languages with existing enumerative state generators. The method is largely independent from the chosen modelling language. We validated this on three different types of languages and tools: state-based languages (PROMELA), action-based process algebras (muCRL, mCRL2), and discrete abstractions of ODEs (Maple).\ud Only little information about the combinatorial structure of the\ud underlying model checking problem need to be provided. The key enabling data structure is the "PINS" dependency matrix. Moreover, it can be provided gradually (more precise information yield better results).\ud \ud Second, in addition to symbolic reachability, the same PINS matrix contains enough information to enable new optimizations in state space generation (transition caching), again independent from the chosen modelling language. We have also based existing optimizations, like (recursive) state collapsing, on top of PINS and hint at how to support partial order reduction techniques.\ud \ud Third, PINS allows interfacing of existing state generators to, e.g., distributed reachability tools. Thus, besides the stated novelties, the method we propose also significantly reduces the complexity of building modular yet still efficient model checking tools.\ud \ud Our experiments show that we can match or even outperform existing tools by reusing their own state generators, which we have linked into an implementation of our ideas

Taming Numbers and Durations in the Model Checking Integrated Planning System

The Model Checking Integrated Planning System (MIPS) is a temporal least commitment heuristic search planner based on a flexible object-oriented workbench architecture. Its design clearly separates explicit and symbolic directed exploration algorithms from the set of on-line and off-line computed estimates and associated data structures. MIPS has shown distinguished performance in the last two international planning competitions. In the last event the description language was extended from pure propositional planning to include numerical state variables, action durations, and plan quality objective functions. Plans were no longer sequences of actions but time-stamped schedules. As a participant of the fully automated track of the competition, MIPS has proven to be a general system; in each track and every benchmark domain it efficiently computed plans of remarkable quality. This article introduces and analyzes the most important algorithmic novelties that were necessary to tackle the new layers of expressiveness in the benchmark problems and to achieve a high level of performance. The extensions include critical path analysis of sequentially generated plans to generate corresponding optimal parallel plans. The linear time algorithm to compute the parallel plan bypasses known NP hardness results for partial ordering by scheduling plans with respect to the set of actions and the imposed precedence relations. The efficiency of this algorithm also allows us to improve the exploration guidance: for each encountered planning state the corresponding approximate sequential plan is scheduled. One major strength of MIPS is its static analysis phase that grounds and simplifies parameterized predicates, functions and operators, that infers knowledge to minimize the state description length, and that detects domain object symmetries. The latter aspect is analyzed in detail. MIPS has been developed to serve as a complete and optimal state space planner, with admissible estimates, exploration engines and branching cuts. In the competition version, however, certain performance compromises had to be made, including floating point arithmetic, weighted heuristic search exploration according to an inadmissible estimate and parameterized optimization

Symbolic Reachability Analysis of B through ProB and LTSmin

We present a symbolic reachability analysis approach for B that can provide a significant speedup over traditional explicit state model checking. The symbolic analysis is implemented by linking ProB to LTSmin, a high-performance language independent model checker. The link is achieved via LTSmin's PINS interface, allowing ProB to benefit from LTSmin's analysis algorithms, while only writing a few hundred lines of glue-code, along with a bridge between ProB and C using ZeroMQ. ProB supports model checking of several formal specification languages such as B, Event-B, Z and TLA. Our experiments are based on a wide variety of B-Method and Event-B models to demonstrate the efficiency of the new link. Among the tested categories are state space generation and deadlock detection; but action detection and invariant checking are also feasible in principle. In many cases we observe speedups of several orders of magnitude. We also compare the results with other approaches for improving model checking, such as partial order reduction or symmetry reduction. We thus provide a new scalable, symbolic analysis algorithm for the B-Method and Event-B, along with a platform to integrate other model checking improvements via LTSmin in the future

An Object-Oriented Framework for Explicit-State Model Checking

This paper presents a conceptual architecture for an object-oriented framework to support the development of formal verification tools (i.e. model checkers). The objective of the architecture is to support the reuse of algorithms and to encourage a modular design of tools. The conceptual framework is accompanied by a C++ implementation which provides reusable algorithms for the simulation and verification of explicit-state models as well as a model representation for simple models based on guard-based process descriptions. The framework has been successfully used to develop a model checker for a subset of PROMELA