Liveness of Randomised Parameterised Systems under Arbitrary Schedulers (Technical Report)

We consider the problem of verifying liveness for systems with a finite, but unbounded, number of processes, commonly known as parameterised systems. Typical examples of such systems include distributed protocols (e.g. for the dining philosopher problem). Unlike the case of verifying safety, proving liveness is still considered extremely challenging, especially in the presence of randomness in the system. In this paper we consider liveness under arbitrary (including unfair) schedulers, which is often considered a desirable property in the literature of self-stabilising systems. We introduce an automatic method of proving liveness for randomised parameterised systems under arbitrary schedulers. Viewing liveness as a two-player reachability game (between Scheduler and Process), our method is a CEGAR approach that synthesises a progress relation for Process that can be symbolically represented as a finite-state automaton. The method is incremental and exploits both Angluin-style L*-learning and SAT-solvers. Our experiments show that our algorithm is able to prove liveness automatically for well-known randomised distributed protocols, including Lehmann-Rabin Randomised Dining Philosopher Protocol and randomised self-stabilising protocols (such as the Israeli-Jalfon Protocol). To the best of our knowledge, this is the first fully-automatic method that can prove liveness for randomised protocols.Comment: Full version of CAV'16 pape

Learning to Prove Safety over Parameterised Concurrent Systems (Full Version)

We revisit the classic problem of proving safety over parameterised concurrent systems, i.e., an infinite family of finite-state concurrent systems that are represented by some finite (symbolic) means. An example of such an infinite family is a dining philosopher protocol with any number n of processes (n being the parameter that defines the infinite family). Regular model checking is a well-known generic framework for modelling parameterised concurrent systems, where an infinite set of configurations (resp. transitions) is represented by a regular set (resp. regular transducer). Although verifying safety properties in the regular model checking framework is undecidable in general, many sophisticated semi-algorithms have been developed in the past fifteen years that can successfully prove safety in many practical instances. In this paper, we propose a simple solution to synthesise regular inductive invariants that makes use of Angluin's classic L* algorithm (and its variants). We provide a termination guarantee when the set of configurations reachable from a given set of initial configurations is regular. We have tested L* algorithm on standard (as well as new) examples in regular model checking including the dining philosopher protocol, the dining cryptographer protocol, and several mutual exclusion protocols (e.g. Bakery, Burns, Szymanski, and German). Our experiments show that, despite the simplicity of our solution, it can perform at least as well as existing semi-algorithms.Comment: Full version of FMCAD'17 pape

BeSpaceD: Towards a Tool Framework and Methodology for the Specification and Verification of Spatial Behavior of Distributed Software Component Systems

In this report, we present work towards a framework for modeling and checking behavior of spatially distributed component systems. Design goals of our framework are the ability to model spatial behavior in a component oriented, simple and intuitive way, the possibility to automatically analyse and verify systems and integration possibilities with other modeling and verification tools. We present examples and the verification steps necessary to prove properties such as range coverage or the absence of collisions between components and technical details

Rapid Recovery for Systems with Scarce Faults

Our goal is to achieve a high degree of fault tolerance through the control of a safety critical systems. This reduces to solving a game between a malicious environment that injects failures and a controller who tries to establish a correct behavior. We suggest a new control objective for such systems that offers a better balance between complexity and precision: we seek systems that are k-resilient. In order to be k-resilient, a system needs to be able to rapidly recover from a small number, up to k, of local faults infinitely many times, provided that blocks of up to k faults are separated by short recovery periods in which no fault occurs. k-resilience is a simple but powerful abstraction from the precise distribution of local faults, but much more refined than the traditional objective to maximize the number of local faults. We argue why we believe this to be the right level of abstraction for safety critical systems when local faults are few and far between. We show that the computational complexity of constructing optimal control with respect to resilience is low and demonstrate the feasibility through an implementation and experimental results.Comment: In Proceedings GandALF 2012, arXiv:1210.202