Parameterized model checking of rendezvous systems

BIP is a component-based framework for system design that has important industrial applications. BIP is built on three pillars: behavior, interaction, and priority. In this paper, we introduce first-order interaction logic (FOIL) that extends BIP to systems parameterized in the number of components. We show that FOIL captures classical parameterized architectures such as token-passing rings, cliques of identical components communicating with rendezvous or broadcast, and client-server systems. Although the BIP framework includes efficient verification tools for statically-defined systems, none are available for parameterized systems with an unbounded number of components. The parameterized model checking literature contains a wealth of techniques for systems of classical architectures. However, application of these results requires a deep understanding of parameterized model checking techniques and their underlying mathematical models. To overcome these difficulties, we introduce a framework that automatically identifies parameterized model checking techniques applicable to a BIP design. To our knowledge, it is the first framework that allows one to apply prominent parameterized model checking results in a systematic way.

Model Checking Temporal Aspects of Inconsistent Concurrent Systems Based on Paraconsistent Logic

A Compositional Automata-based Approach for Model Checking Multi-Agent Systems

Model checking is a powerful technique for analyzing large, finite-state systems. In an infinite state system, however, many basic properties are undecidable. In this article, we present a new symbolic model checker which conservatively evaluates safety and liveness properties on programs with unbounded integer variables. We use Presburger formulas to symbolically encode a program's transition system, as well as its model-checking computations. All fixpoint calculations are executed symbolically, and their convergence is guaranteed by using approximation techniques. We demonstrate the promise of this technology on some well-known infinite-state concurrency problems.

In temporal-logic model checking, we verify the correctness of a program with respect to a desired behavior by checking whether a structure that models the program satisfies a temporal-logic formula that specifies the behavior. The model-checking problem for the branching-time temporal logic CTL can be solved in linear running time, and model-checking tools for CTL are used successfully in industrial applications. The development of programs that must meet rigid real-time constraints has brought with it a need for real-time temporal logics that enable quantitative reference to time. Early research on real-time temporal logics uses the discrete domain of the integers to model time. Present research on real-time temporal logics focuses on continuous time and uses the dense domain of the reals to model time. There, model checking becomes significantly more complicated. For example, the model-checking problem for TCTL, a continuous-time extension of the logic CTL, is PSPACE-complete.In this paper we suggest a reduction from TCTL model checking to CTL model checking. The contribution of such a reduction is twofold. Theoretically, while it has long been known that model-checking methods for untimed temporal logics can be extended quite easily to handle discrete time, it was not clear whether and how untimed methods can handle the reset quantifier of TCTL, which resets a realvalued clock. Practically, our reduction enables anyone who has a tool for CTL model checking to use it for TCTL model checking. The TCTL model-checking algorithm that follows from our reduction is in PSPACE, matching the known bound for this problem. In addition, it enjoys the wide distribution of CTL model-checking tools and the extensive and fruitful research efforts and heuristics that have been put into these tools.KeywordsModel CheckTemporal LogicAtomic PropositionKripke StructureTemporal ReasoningThese keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

In this book we focused on established decidability results in parameterized model checking. As this topic is a lively field, we cannot make any claim about completeness of our survey. In particular, we left out the large body of research that includes invariant-based techniques, regular model checking, symbolic methods, techniques for counter automata, and abstraction-based methods. In this chapter we give a brief overview of these methods and give further references to the interested reader. Our classification of the techniques is unavoidably subjective, as except for several cornerstone papers, many techniques adopted multiple different ideas.

The state explosion problem is the central challenge in automatic verification using model checking. In many cases, representing the state space of a system as a lattice is an effective way of representing very large state spaces. The partial order of the lattice represents an information ordering between states, which can be used as an abstraction mechanism to reduce the computational cost of model checking. The 'traditional' logical framework for model checking finite state systems has serious deficiencies when applied to information-ordered state spaces. Interpreting the truth of a proposition about a state or a sequence of states in a four-valved truth domain is better from a modelling point of view, allowing us to reason about partial and contradictory information. Moreover, it overcomes a serious technical difficulty encountered when using a two-valued truth domain. The paper defines the syntax and semantics of a four-valued temporal logic that can be used for specifying properties of a computer system. This framework has particular relevance to hardware verification. It could be used by several model checking algorithms. Symbolic trajectory evaluation (STE) [33] is a model checking algorithm that has had success in model checking using information orderings to reduce computational cost. Previous work used a two-valued logic though, which limited the expressiveness of the logic. Using the framework presented here, the STE algorithm can be generalised, and then applied in practice to a richer logic. Some examples are shown in this paper. Keywords:Symbolic trajectory evaluation, quarternary logic, model checking, temporal logic, bilattices.

Model checking as an approach to the automatic verification of finite state systems has focussed predominantly on system specifications expressed in temporal logic. In the distributed systems community, logics of knowledge (epistemic logics) have been advocated for expressing desirable properties of protocols and systems. A range of logics combining temporal and epistemic components have been developed for this purpose. However, the model checking problem for temporal logics of knowledge has received (comparatively) little attention. In this paper, we address ourselves to this problem. Following a brief survey of the relevant issues and literature, we introduce a temporal logic of knowledge (Halpern and Vardi’s logic CKL n). We then develop an approach to CKL n model checking that combines ideas from the interpreted systems semantics for knowledge with the logic of local propositions developed by Engelhardt et al. With our approach, local propositions provide a means to reduce CKL n model checking to linear temporal logic model checking. After introducing and exploring the ideas underpinning our approach, we present a case study (the bit transmission problem) in which spin was used to establish temporal epistemic properties of a system implemented in PROMELA.

Directed model checking is a well-established technique to efficiently tackle the state explosion problem when the aim is to find error states in concurrent systems. Although directed model checking has proved to be very successful in the past, additional search techniques provide much potential to efficiently handle larger and larger systems. In this work, we propose a novel technique for traversing the state space based on interference contexts. The basic idea is to preferably explore transitions that interfere with previously applied transitions, whereas other transitions are deferred accordingly. Our approach is orthogonal to the model checking process and can be applied to a wide range of search methods. We have implemented our method and empirically evaluated its potential on a range of non-trivial case studies. Compared to standard model checking techniques, we are able to detect subtle bugs with shorter error traces, consuming less memory and time.

Formal methods apply algorithms based on mathematical principles to enhance the reliability of systems. It would only be natural to try to progress from verification, model checking or testing a system against its formal specification into constructing it automatically. Classical algorithmic syn-thesis theory provides interesting algorithms but also alarming high complexity and undecidability results. The use of genetic programming, in combination of model checking and testing, provides a powerful heuristic to synthesize programs. The method is not completely automatic, as it is fine tuned by a user that sets up the specification and parameters. It also does not guarantee to always suc-ceed and converge towards a solution that satisfies all the required properties. However, we applied it successfully on quite nontrivial examples and managed to find solutions to hard programming chal-lenges, as well as to improve and to correct code. We describe here several versions of our method for synthesizing sequential and concurrent systems. 1

In consideration of public security and common wealth, functional correctness and immediacy measures of concurrent systems must be verified. Compared to functional verification, performance evaluation aims at obtaining quantitative measures of the system to test whether reliability-related properties are promised in all conditions. In this paper, concurrent systems are formalized and expressed in the form of IMC, a mixed model for describing both action or state based systems, and properties of these systems are converted into aCSL formulae. Equipped with an improved numerical algorithm and graphics user interface, the model checker GMC can be used for handling a variety of performance evaluation problems. The paper also analyzes the data structure and architecture of GMC in detail. The efficiency of GMC is discussed and some future improving methods are also given in this paper.

Model checking (Baier and Katoen in Principles of model checking, MIT Press, Cambridge, 2008; Clarke et al. in Model checking, MIT Press, Cambridge, 2001) is an automatic technique to formally verify that a given specification of a concurrent system meets given functional properties. Its use has been demonstrated many times over the years. Key characteristics that make the method so appealing are its level of automaticity, its ability to determine the absence of errors in the system (contrary to testing techniques) and the fact that it produces counter-examples when errors are detected, that clearly demonstrate not only that an error is present, but also how the error can be produced. The main drawback of model checking is its limited scalability, and for this reason, research on reducing the computational effort has received much attention over the last decades. Besides the verification of qualitative functional properties, the model checking technique can also be applied for other types of analyses, such as planning and the verification of quantitative properties. We briefly discuss several contributions in the model checking field that address both its scalability and its applicability to perform planning and quantitative analysis. In particular, we introduce six papers selected from the 23rd International SPIN Symposium on Model Checking Software (SPIN 2016).

In temporal-logic model checking, we verify the correctness of a program with respect to a desired behavior by checking whether a structure that models the program satisfies a temporal-logic formula that specifies the behavior. The main practical limitation of model checking is caused by the size of the state space of the program, which grows exponentially with the number of concurrent components. This problem, known as the state-explosion problem, becomes more difficult when we consider real-time model checking, where the program and the specification involve quantitative references to time. In particular, when use timed automata to describe real-time programs and we specify timed behaviors in the logic TCTL, a real-time extension of the temporal logic CTL with clock variables, then the state space under consideration grows exponentially not only with the number of concurrent components, but also with the number of clocks and the length of the clock constraints used in the program and the specification. Two powerful methods for coping with the state-explosion problem are on-the-fly and space-efficient model checking. In on-the-fly model checking, we explore only the portion of the state space of the program whose exploration is essential for determining the satisfaction of the specification. In space-efficient model checking, we store in memory the minimal information required, preferring to spend time on reconstructing information rather than spend space on storing it. In this work we develop an automata-theoretic approach to TCTL model checking that combines both methods. We suggest, for the first time, a PSPACE on-the-fly model-checking algorithm for TCTL.KeywordsModel CheckTemporal LogicLinear Temporal LogicRegion PositionTree AutomatonThese keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

We develop a logic-based framework for formal specification and algorithmic verification of homogeneous and dynamic concurrent multi-agent transition systems. Homogeneity means that all agents have the same available actions at any given state and the actions have the same effects regardless of which agents perform them. The state transitions are therefore determined only by the vector of numbers of agents performing each action and are specified symbolically, by means of conditions on these numbers definable in Presburger arithmetic. The agents are divided into controllable (by the system supervisor/controller) and uncontrollable, representing the environment or adversary. Dynamicity means that the numbers of controllable and uncontrollable agents may vary throughout the system evolution, possibly at every transition. As a language for formal specification we use a suitably extended version of Alternating-time Temporal Logic, where one can specify properties of the type “a coalition of (at least) n controllable agents can ensure against (at most) m uncontrollable agents that any possible evolution of the system satisfies a given objective gamma″, where gamma is specified again as a formula of that language and each of n and m is either a fixed number or a variable that can be quantified over. We provide formal semantics to our logic {mathcal {L}}_{textsc {hdmas}} and define normal form of its formulae. We then prove that every formula in {mathcal {L}}_{textsc {hdmas}} is equivalent in the finite to one in a normal form and develop an algorithm for global model checking of formulae in normal form in finite HDMAS models, which invokes model checking truth of Presburger formulae. We establish worst case complexity estimates for the model checking algorithm and illustrate it on a running example.

This paper introduces a technique for localizing model checking of concurrent state-based systems. The technique, called partial model checking, is fully automatic and performs model checking by gradually specializing the specification with respect to the concurrent components one by one, computing a “concurrent weakest precondition.” Specifications are invariance properties and the concurrent components axe sets of transitions. Both are expressed as predicates represented by Reduced Ordered Binary Decision Diagrams (ROBDDs). The self-reducing properties of ROBDDs are important for the success of the technique.