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

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

Parameterized Synthesis with Safety Properties

Parameterized synthesis offers a solution to the problem of constructing correct and verified controllers for parameterized systems. Such systems occur naturally in practice (e.g., in the form of distributed protocols where the amount of processes is often unknown at design time and the protocol must work regardless of the number of processes). In this paper, we present a novel learning based approach to the synthesis of reactive controllers for parameterized systems from safety specifications. We use the framework of regular model checking to model the synthesis problem as an infinite-duration two-player game and show how one can utilize Angluin's well-known L* algorithm to learn correct-by-design controllers. This approach results in a synthesis procedure that is conceptually simpler than existing synthesis methods with a completeness guarantee, whenever a winning strategy can be expressed by a regular set. We have implemented our algorithm in a tool called L*-PSynth and have demonstrated its performance on a range of benchmarks, including robotic motion planning and distributed protocols. Despite the simplicity of L*-PSynth it competes well against (and in many cases even outperforms) the state-of-the-art tools for synthesizing parameterized systems.Comment: 18 page

Abstract Regular Tree Model Checking

International audienceRegular (tree) model checking (RMC) is a promising generic method for formal verification of infinite-state systems. It encodes configurations of systems as words or trees over a suitable alphabet, possibly infinite sets of configurations as finite word or tree automata, and operations of the systems being examined as finite word or tree transducers. The reachability set is then computed by a repeated application of the transducers on the automata representing the currently known set of reachable configurations. In order to facilitate termination of RMC, various acceleration schemas have been proposed. One of them is a combination of RMC with the abstract-check-refine paradigm yielding the so-called abstract regular model checking (ARMC). ARMC has originally been proposed for word automata and transducers only and thus for dealing with systems with linear (or easily linearisable) structure. In this paper, we propose a generalisation of ARMC to the case of dealing with trees which arise naturally in a lot of modelling and verification contexts. In particular, we first propose abstractions of tree automata based on collapsing their states having an equal language of trees up to some bounded height. Then, we propose an abstraction based on collapsing states having a non-empty intersection (and thus "satisfying") the same bottom-up tree "predicate" languages. Finally, we show on several examples that the methods we propose give us very encouraging verification results