Parallel symbolic state-space exploration is difficult, but what is the alternative?

State-space exploration is an essential step in many modeling and analysis problems. Its goal is to find the states reachable from the initial state of a discrete-state model described. The state space can used to answer important questions, e.g., "Is there a dead state?" and "Can N become negative?", or as a starting point for sophisticated investigations expressed in temporal logic. Unfortunately, the state space is often so large that ordinary explicit data structures and sequential algorithms cannot cope, prompting the exploration of (1) parallel approaches using multiple processors, from simple workstation networks to shared-memory supercomputers, to satisfy large memory and runtime requirements and (2) symbolic approaches using decision diagrams to encode the large structured sets and relations manipulated during state-space generation. Both approaches have merits and limitations. Parallel explicit state-space generation is challenging, but almost linear speedup can be achieved; however, the analysis is ultimately limited by the memory and processors available. Symbolic methods are a heuristic that can efficiently encode many, but not all, functions over a structured and exponentially large domain; here the pitfalls are subtler: their performance varies widely depending on the class of decision diagram chosen, the state variable order, and obscure algorithmic parameters. As symbolic approaches are often much more efficient than explicit ones for many practical models, we argue for the need to parallelize symbolic state-space generation algorithms, so that we can realize the advantage of both approaches. This is a challenging endeavor, as the most efficient symbolic algorithm, Saturation, is inherently sequential. We conclude by discussing challenges, efforts, and promising directions toward this goal

Multi-core Decision Diagrams

Decision diagrams are fundamental data structures that revolutionized fields such as model checking, automated reasoning and decision processes. As performance gains in the current era mostly come from parallel processing, an ongoing challenge is to develop data structures and algorithms for modern multicore architectures. This chapter describes the parallelization of decision diagram operations as implemented in the parallel decision diagram package Sylvan, which allows sequential algorithms that use decision diagrams to exploit the power of multi-core machines

Parallelizing Deadlock Resolution in Symbolic Synthesis of Distributed Programs

Previous work has shown that there are two major complexity barriers in the synthesis of fault-tolerant distributed programs: (1) generation of fault-span, the set of states reachable in the presence of faults, and (2) resolving deadlock states, from where the program has no outgoing transitions. Of these, the former closely resembles with model checking and, hence, techniques for efficient verification are directly applicable to it. Hence, we focus on expediting the latter with the use of multi-core technology. We present two approaches for parallelization by considering different design choices. The first approach is based on the computation of equivalence classes of program transitions (called group computation) that are needed due to the issue of distribution (i.e., inability of processes to atomically read and write all program variables). We show that in most cases the speedup of this approach is close to the ideal speedup and in some cases it is superlinear. The second approach uses traditional technique of partitioning deadlock states among multiple threads. However, our experiments show that the speedup for this approach is small. Consequently, our analysis demonstrates that a simple approach of parallelizing the group computation is likely to be the effective method for using multi-core computing in the context of deadlock resolution

Multi-core and/or Symbolic Model Checking

We review our progress in high-performance model checking. Our multi-core model checker is based on a scalable hash-table design and parallel random-walk traversal. Our symbolic model checker is based on Multiway Decision Diagrams and the saturation strategy. The LTSmin tool is based on the PINS architecture, decoupling model checking algorithms from the input specification language. Consequently, users can stay in their own specification language and postpone the choice between parallel or symbolic model checking. We support widely different specification languages including those of SPIN (Promela), mCRL2 and UPPAAL (timed automata). So far, multi-core and symbolic algorithms had very little in common, forcing the user in the end to make a wise trade-off between memory or speed. Recently, however, we designed a novel multi-core BDD package called Sylvan. This forms an excellent basis for scalable parallel symbolic model checking

Implementation and scalability analysis of balancing domain decomposition methods

Manuscript submitted for publication in SIAM Journal of Scientific Computing. Under Review.Preprin

Compositional Performance Modelling with the TIPPtool

Stochastic process algebras have been proposed as compositional specification formalisms for performance models. In this paper, we describe a tool which aims at realising all beneficial aspects of compositional performance modelling, the TIPPtool. It incorporates methods for compositional specification as well as solution, based on state-of-the-art techniques, and wrapped in a user-friendly graphical front end. Apart from highlighting the general benefits of the tool, we also discuss some lessons learned during development and application of the TIPPtool. A non-trivial model of a real life communication system serves as a case study to illustrate benefits and limitations