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

LTLf satisfiability checking

We consider here Linear Temporal Logic (LTL) formulas interpreted over \emph{finite} traces. We denote this logic by LTLf. The existing approach for LTLf satisfiability checking is based on a reduction to standard LTL satisfiability checking. We describe here a novel direct approach to LTLf satisfiability checking, where we take advantage of the difference in the semantics between LTL and LTLf. While LTL satisfiability checking requires finding a \emph{fair cycle} in an appropriate transition system, here we need to search only for a finite trace. This enables us to introduce specialized heuristics, where we also exploit recent progress in Boolean SAT solving. We have implemented our approach in a prototype tool and experiments show that our approach outperforms existing approaches

Fast LTL Satisfiability Checking by SAT Solvers

Satisfiability checking for Linear Temporal Logic (LTL) is a fundamental step in checking for possible errors in LTL assertions. Extant LTL satisfiability checkers use a variety of different search procedures. With the sole exception of LTL satisfiability checking based on bounded model checking, which does not provide a complete decision procedure, LTL satisfiability checkers have not taken advantage of the remarkable progress over the past 20 years in Boolean satisfiability solving. In this paper, we propose a new LTL satisfiability-checking framework that is accelerated using a Boolean SAT solver. Our approach is based on the variant of the \emph{obligation-set method}, which we proposed in earlier work. We describe here heuristics that allow the use of a Boolean SAT solver to analyze the obligations for a given LTL formula. The experimental evaluation indicates that the new approach provides a a significant performance advantage

SAT-based Explicit LTL Reasoning

We present here a new explicit reasoning framework for linear temporal logic (LTL), which is built on top of propositional satisfiability (SAT) solving. As a proof-of-concept of this framework, we describe a new LTL satisfiability tool, Aalta\_v2.0, which is built on top of the MiniSAT SAT solver. We test the effectiveness of this approach by demonnstrating that Aalta\_v2.0 significantly outperforms all existing LTL satisfiability solvers. Furthermore, we show that the framework can be extended from propositional LTL to assertional LTL (where we allow theory atoms), by replacing MiniSAT with the Z3 SMT solver, and demonstrating that this can yield an exponential improvement in performance

Leviathan: A New LTL Satisfiability Checking Tool Based on a One-Pass Tree-Shaped Tableau

The paper presents Leviathan, an LTL satisfiability checking tool based on a novel one-pass, tree-like tableau system, which is way simpler than existing solutions. Despite the simplicity of the algorithm, the tool has performance comparable in speed and memory consumption with other tools on a number of standard benchmark sets, and, in various cases, it outperforms the other tableau-based tools

Formal Specification and Verification of a Coordination Protocol for an Automated Air Traffic Control System

Safe separation between aircraft is the primary consideration in air trafficcontrol. To achieve the required level of assurance for this safety-critical application,the Automated Airspace Concept (AAC) proposes three levels of conflict detectionand resolution. Recently, a high-level operational concept was proposed to definethe cooperation between components in the AAC. However, the proposed coordinationprotocol has not been formally studied. We use formal verification techniquesto ensure there are no potentially catastrophic design flaws remaining in the AACdesign before the next stage of production.We formalize the high-level operational concept, which was previously describedonly in natural language, in NuSMV and perform model validation by checkingagainst LTL/CTL specifications we derive from the system description. We writeLTL specifications describing safe system operations and use model checking forsystem verification. We employ specification debugging to ensure correctness ofboth sets of formal specifications and model abstraction to reduce model checkingtime and enable fast, design-time checking. We analyze two counterexamplesrevealing unexpected emergent behaviors in the operational concept that triggereddesign changes by system engineers to meet safety standards. Our experience reportilluminates the application of formal methods in real safety-critical system developmentby detailing a complete end-to-end design-time verification process includingall models and specifications