Modal and Temporal Logics
|
|
- Ralph Dawson
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Modal and Temporal Logics Colin Stirling School of Informatics University of Edinburgh July 23, 2003
2 Why modal and temporal logics? 1 Computational System Modal and temporal logics Operational semantics models of labelled transition system (Kripke structure)
3 Example: Crossing 2 Road Rail Signal def = car.up.ccross.down.road def = train.green.tcross.red.rail def = green.red.signal + up.down.signal Crossing (Road Rail Signal)\K K = {green, red, up, down}
4 Transition System (Graph) 3 τ ccross E E E E E ccross E E 1 train τ E E τ τ train 10 car train train Crossing τ car car tcross τ E E car 11 τ tcross τ Crucial Properties It is never the case that a train and a car can cross at the same time Mutual exclusion problem
5 Example: Mutual Exclusion 4 Mutual Exclusion Protocol
6 5 Crucial Properties Mutual exclusion Absence of deadlock Absence of starvation Various algorithms: example, Peterson s solution
7 6 B1f = b1rf.b1f + b1wf.b1f + b1wt.b1t B1t = b1rt.b1t + b1wt.b1t + b1wf.b1f B2f = b2rf.b2f + b2wf.b2f + b2wt.b2t B2t = b2rt.b2t + b2wt.b2t + b2wf.b2f K1 = kr1.k1 + kw1.k1 + kw2.k2 K2 = kr2.k2 + kw2.k2 + kw1.k1 P1 = b1wt.req1.kw2.p11 P11 = b2rt.p11 + b2rf.p12 + kr2.p11 + kr1.p12 P12 = enter1.exit1.b1wf.p1 P2 = b2wt.req2.kw1.p21 P21 = b1rf.p22 + b1rt.p21 + kr1.p21 + kr2.p22 P22 = enter2.exit2.b2wf.p2 Peterson = (P1 P2 K1 B1f B2f) \ L
8 Formalising Properties in a Temporal Logic Mutex = AG ([exit1]ff [exit2] ff) NoDeadlock = AG tt NoStarvation = AG([req1] AF exit1 tt) AG([req2] AF exit2 tt) 7 Checking Temporal Properties The Edinburgh Concurrency Workbench (CWB) A tool for simulating and verifying CCS agents
9 8 Within CWB: Proving Peterson s solution correct Command: checkprop(peterson,mutex); true Command: checkprop(peterson,nodeadlock); true Command: checkprop(peterson,nostarvation); true
10 A Scheduler Problem: assume n tasks when n > 1. a i initiates the ith task and b i signals its completion The scheduler plans the order of task initiation, ensuring 9 1. actions a 1... a n carried out cyclically 2. tasks may terminate in any order 3. but a task can not be restarted until its previous operation has finished. (a i and b i happen alternately for each i. ) More complex temporal properties ( not first order but are regular )
11 A solution 10 Cy def = a.c.(b.d.cy + d.b.cy) Cy 1 Cy [a 1 /a, c 1 /c, b 1 /b, c n /d] Cy i (d.cy )[a i /a, c i /c, b i /b, c i 1 /d] 1 < i n
12 Case when n = 4 _ c a 1 2 c Cy _ c a Cy 1 2 c 11 b 1 b 2 _ c 3 a 4 a 3 Cy 4 c 4 _ c 2 Cy 3 c 3 b 4 b 3
13 State of the Art: An Example Verification of PathStar call processing code Part of a telephone switch designed by AT&T About 1600 lines of code, changing almost daily (300 versions) About 80 properties System support: Trailblazer, designed at Bell Labs, running on 16 PCs 75 errors found, 5 very serious 12
14 13 MODAL LOGIC
15 14 Transition Systems I a set of states S a set of action labels A a set of transitions: s a s where s, s S, a A Cl tick Here: S = {Cl}, A = {tick}, and Cl tick Cl
16 Variants: Kripke Structures Labels appear at states ( colours ) often instead of on transitions 15 s p, q r s s q
17 Finite State Transition Systems 16 Ven collect b 2p 1p collect l big Ven b Ven l little collect b.ven collect.ven l
18 Infinite State Transition Systems 17 a a a a a, c c c c px pyx pyyx pyyyx... b b b b p ε rx ryx ryyx ε ε ε ε... Generated by a (deterministic) pushdown automaton: finitely generable
19 Modal Logic: Syntax Φ ::= tt ff Φ 1 Φ 2 Φ 1 Φ 2 [K]Φ K Φ A formula can be 18 the constant true formula tt, the constant false formula ff, a conjunction of formulas Φ 1 Φ 2, a disjunction of formulas Φ 1 Φ 2, a formula [K]Φ, where K is any set of actions, read as box K Φ, or for all K-derivatives Φ, a formula K Φ, where K is any set of actions, read as diamond K Φ, or for some K-derivative Φ.
20 Modal Logic: Semantics We define when a state E of a transition system satisfies a formula Φ. Either E satisfies Φ, E = Φ, or it doesn t, E = Φ. 19 E = tt E = ff E = Φ Ψ iff E = Φ and E = Ψ E = Φ Ψ iff E = Φ or E = Ψ E = [K]Φ iff F {E : E a E and a K}. F = Φ E = K Φ iff F {E : E a E and a K}. F = Φ
21 Examples 20 E = tick tt: from E there is a tick transition. E = tick tock tt: E = {tick, tock} tt: from E there is a tick and then a tock transition. from E there is a tick or a tock transition. E = [tick]ff: there is not a tick transition from E. E = tick ff: this is equivalent to ff! E = [tick]tt: this is equivalent to true!
22 21 Checking satisfaction Cl tick Does Cl have the property [tick]( tick tt [tock]ff)?
23 22 iff iff iff iff iff iff iff iff Cl = [tick]( tick tt [tock]ff) F {E : Cl tick E}. F = tick tt [tock]ff Cl = tick tt [tock]ff Cl = tick tt and Cl = [tock]ff F {E : Cl tick E} and Cl = [tock]ff F {Cl} and Cl = [tock]ff Cl = [tock]ff {E : Cl tock E} = =
24 Syntactic sugar for sets of actions Let A be a universal set of actions. We write a 1,..., a n for {a 1,..., a n } for the set A K for the set A K a 1,..., a n for A {a 1,..., a n } 23
25 More examples 24 E = [ ]ff : E is deadlocked E = tt : some action can be executed from E E = tt [ a]ff : a must happen next from E (Something can happen, and nothing but a can happen.) E = tt [ ]Φ : Φ holds after one step E = tt [ ]( tt [ ]( tt [ a]ff)) :?
26 Negation Modal logic can be extended with a negation operator E = Φ iff E = Φ Negation is redundant: For every Φ there is Φ c such that for any E E = Φ c iff E = Φ Φ c is inductively defined as follows: 25 tt c = ff ff c = tt (Φ 1 Φ 2 ) c = Φ c 1 Φ c 2 (Φ 1 Φ 2 ) c = Φ c 1 Φ c 2 ([K]Φ) c = K Φ c ( K Φ) c = [K]Φ c
27 Proposition: For every state F and formula Φ: F = Φ c iff F = Φ Proof: By induction on the structure of Φ. Basis: Φ = tt and Φ = ff. Trivial. Induction step: Case Φ = Φ 1 Φ F = (Φ 1 Φ 2 ) c iff F = Φ c 1 Φ c 2 iff F = Φ c 1 or F = Φ c 2 (by clause for ) iff F = Φ 1 or F = Φ 2 (by i.h.) iff F = Φ 1 Φ 2 (by clause for )
28 Case Φ = [K]Φ F = ([K]Φ 1 ) c iff F = K Φ1 c iff G. a K. F a G and G = Φ c 1 iff G. a K. F a G and G = Φ 1 iff F = [K]Φ 1 (by i.h.)
29 Satisfiability, validity, equivalence A formula is satisfiable if some state of a transition system satisfies it. A formula is unsatisfiable if no state of any transition system satisfies it. A formula is valid if all states of all transition systems satisfy it. Two formulas are equivalent if they are satisfied by exactly the same states of any transition system. 28
30 29 Are the following statements true? Exercise If Φ valid then Φ satisfiable If Φ satisfiable then Φ c unsatisfiable If Φ valid then Φ c unsatisfiable If Φ unsatisfiable then Φ c valid Y/N
31 30 Exercise Let be the implies connective whose definition is Φ Ψ def = Φ c Ψ. Are the following statements true? If (Φ Ψ) valid and Φ valid then Ψ valid If (Φ Ψ) satisfiable and Φ satisfiable then Ψ satisfiable If (Φ Ψ) valid and Φ satisfiable then Ψ satisfiable Y/N
32 31 Exercise Which of the following are valid and which are unsatisfiable when Φ and Ψ are arbitrary modal formulas?
33 V U N Φ Φ Φ Φ Φ (Ψ Φ) Φ (Φ Ψ) a tt [a]ff a [b]( a tt [a]ff) a [b]( a tt [a]ff) [ ] b tt a [b]( a tt [a]ff) [ ] tt a (Φ Ψ) ( a Φ a Ψ) ( a Φ a Ψ) a (Φ Ψ) [a](φ Ψ) ([a]φ [a]ψ) ([a]φ [a]ψ) [a](φ Ψ) 32
34 33 Exercise Which of the following are equivalent when Φ 1 and Φ 2 are arbitrary modal formulas? Y/N tick (Φ 1 Φ 2 ) tick Φ 1 tick Φ 2 tick (Φ 1 Φ 2 ) tick Φ 1 tick Φ 2 [tick](φ 1 Φ 2 ) [tick]φ 1 [tick]φ 2 [tick](φ 1 Φ 2 ) [tick]φ 1 [tick]φ 2 [tick]φ 1 tick Φ 1
35 Bisimulation Invariance A binary relation B between states of a transition system is a bisimulation provided that, whenever (E, F ) B and a A, 34 if E a E then F a F for some F such that (E, F ) B, and if F a F then E a E for some E such that (E, F ) B Two states E and F are bisimulation equivalent, E F, if there is a bisimulation relation B such that (E, F ) B.
36 More Definitions 35 E F if for all modal Φ, E = Φ iff F = Φ. (E and F have the same modal properties.) A transition system is finitely branching if for each a A and state E, the set {F : E a F } is finite.
37 Bisimulation Invariance II Two bisimulation equivalent states have the same modal properties. Proposition If E F then E F. Proof By induction on modal formulas Φ: for any G and H, if G H, then G = Φ iff H = Φ. The base case: Φ is tt or ff is clear. The inductive step proceeds by case analysis. Let Φ be Ψ 1 Ψ 2 and assume the result for Ψ 1 and Ψ 2. By definition G = Φ iff G = Ψ 1 and G = Ψ 2 iff by the induction hypothesis H = Ψ 1 and H = Ψ 2, and therefore iff H = Φ. Similarly for Ψ 1 Ψ 2. Next, let Φ be [K]Ψ and G = Φ. Therefore, for any G such that G a G and a K, G = Ψ. To show that H = Φ, let H a H (with a K). However, for some G, G a G and G H, so by the induction hypothesis H = Ψ, and therefore H = Φ. The other modal case is similar. 36
38 Bisimulation invariance III Proposition If E and F belong to a finitely branching transition system and E F then E F. Proof We show that the following is a bisimulation. {(E, F ) : E F and E, F belong to finitely branching transition system} Assume not. Without loss of generality G H for some G and H, and G G for some a and G, but G H for all H such that H a H. There are two possibilities. First, the set {H : H a H } is empty. But G = a tt because G a G and H = a tt, which contradicts that G H. Next, the set {H : H a H } is non-empty. However it is finite because of finite branching, and therefore assume it is {H 1,..., H n }. Assume G H i for each i : 1 i n, meaning there are formulas Φ 1,..., Φ n such that G = Φ i and H i = Φ i. (Here we use the fact that modal formulas are closed under complement.) Let Ψ be 37 a
39 the formula Φ 1... Φ n. Clearly G = Ψ and H i = Ψ for each i, as it fails the ith component of the conjunction. Therefore, G = a Ψ because G a G, and H = a Ψ because each H i fails to have property Ψ. But this contradicts that G H. 38
40 Exercises 39 Consider the following three vending machines, Ven i, 1 i 3. Ven Ven 1 2 1p 1p tea coffee tea coffee 1p 1p 1p tea 1p Ven 3 1p coffee 1p 1p Provide 3 modal formulas Φ i, such that Ven i = Φ i and Ven i = Φ j i = j. when
41 Prove the following 40 Proposition If E or F belongs to a finitely branching transition system and E F then E F.
42 Variants Take Kripke structures where labels appear at states ( colours ) instead of on transitions. Kripke model is a Kripke structure + a labelling function L : Colours S. (S are states). Assume p ranges over colours Modal Logic: Syntax 41 Semantics Φ ::= p p Φ 1 Φ 2 Φ 1 Φ 2 [ ]Φ Φ We define when a state E of a Kripke model satisfies a formula Φ.
43 E = p iff E L(p) E = p iff E L(p) E = Φ Ψ iff E = Φ and E = Ψ E = Φ Ψ iff E = Φ or E = Ψ E = [ ]Φ iff F {E : E E }. F = Φ E = Φ iff F {E : E a E }. F = Φ 42
44 Bisimulation A binary relation B between states of a Kripke model is a bisimulation provided that, whenever (E, F ) B for all colours p, E L(p) iff F L(p) if E E then F F for some F such that (E, F ) B, and if F F then E E for some E such that (E, F ) B Two states E and F are bisimulation equivalent, E F, if there is a bisimulation relation B such that (E, F ) B. 43
45 Bisimulation Invariance 44 Proposition if E F then E F Proposition if E and F belongs to a finitely branching Kripke model and E F then E F.
46 Exercise 45 s p, q r s s q Which of these are true? s = [ ]( q [ ] r) s = [ ](q q) s = [ ] [ ]q s = [ ](q [ ] q)
47 46 Unfolding A transition system/kripke model can be unfolded into a (bisimulation equivalent) possibly infinite tree s p, q r s s q becomes
48 s 47 s... s s... s s...
49 Computational Properties 48 Satisfiability Problem Given a modal formula Φ, is Φ satisfiable (realisable)? is NP-complete. Finite Tree Property If Φ is satisfiable then Φ is satisfiable in a transition system/kripke model that is a finite tree. (Hence, also Finite Model Property: if Φ is satisfiable then Φ is satisfiable in a finite transition system/kripke model.) Model Checking Problem Given a finite transition system/kripke model, a state E of it, and a modal formula, does E = Φ? is P-complete.
50 Example: Mutual Exclusion 49 Mutual Exclusion Protocol
51 Crucial Properties 50 Mutual exclusion Absence of deadlocks Absence of starvation PROBLEM: None of these properties is expressible in modal logic! Modal depth of a formula: maximum embedding of modal operators. instance, the following has modal depth 3: tt [ ]( tt [ ]( tt [ a]ff)) For
52 Proposition If Φ has modal depth n and E and F have the same transition structure to depth n, then E = Φ iff F = Φ. E F 51 a b a b a c d a c d E and F have the same transition structure to depth 2, and so for any modal formula Φ of modal depth 2, E = Φ iff F = Φ. Modal logic cant express longterm properties such as absence of deadlock.
53 Runs of a transition system 52 A run from state E 0 is a finite or infinite length sequence of transitions a E 1 a 0 E 2 a 1... n a n+1 E n... with maximal length. Similarly, for a Kripke model. Example s p, q r s s q Then an example run is s s s s... A run is a branch in the unfolded transition system/kripke model.
54 Beyond Modal Logic Runs provide a means for expressing long term features. 53 Mutual exclusion: no run has the property that two components are in their critical section at the same time. Absence of deadlock: every run has infinite length Absence of starvation: in every run if a component requests entry into critical section then eventually that component will be in its critical section Assume good = bad and bad = good Safety(bad) = Weak Liveness(good)
55 Liveness(good) = Weak Safety(bad) 54
56 Exercise For each of the following, state whether it is a liveness or a safety property, and identify the good or bad feature. At most five messages are in the buffer at any time. The cost of living never decreases. The temperature never rises. All good things must come to an end. If an interrupt occurs, then a message is printed within one second. 55
57 Next: (K)Φ Pure Temporal Operators on Runs 56 E 0 a 1 E 1 a 2... E i a i+1... a 1 K =... Φ Until: Φ U Ψ. Note: the index i can be 0 E 0 a 1 E 1 a 2... E i a i+1... = =... = Φ Φ Ψ
58 Pure Temporal Operators on Runs II Eventually: F Ψ = tt U Ψ. The index i can be 0 57 Always: G Ψ = F Ψ E 0 a 1 E 1 a 2... E i a i = Ψ E 0 a 1 E 1 a 2... E i a i+1... = =... = Ψ Ψ Ψ...
59 Linear Time Temporal Logic (LTL) 58 Syntax Φ ::= p Φ Φ 1 Φ 2 ( )Φ Φ U Ψ Semantics A state E of a Kripke model satisfies an LTL formula Φ, written E = Φ, if for any run π from E, the run π = Φ.
60 E Exercise F r G 59 p p,q p H Which of the following are true? s = p U q s = F r s = F p s = G(p r) s = F(G r G p)
61 Satisfiability, validity, equivalence A formula is satisfiable (or realisable) if some state of a Kripke model satisfies it. A formula is unsatisfiable if no state of any Kripke model satisfies it. A formula is valid if all states of all Kripke models satisfy it. Two formulas are equivalent if they are satisfied by exactly the same states of any Kripke model. 60
62 Exercise: Which are Valid, Unsatisfiable, Neither? V U N F Φ G Φ G Φ F Φ F(Φ Ψ) F Φ F Ψ F Φ (Φ ( )F Φ) G Φ (Φ ( )G Φ) G FΦ F GΦ F G Φ G F Φ G( Φ ( )Φ) Φ F Φ G(Φ Ψ) (G Φ G Ψ) 61
63 Exercise We write E F if for all LTL Φ, E = Φ iff F = Φ. 62 Prove the following: Proposition If E F then E F.
64 Computational Properties I 63 Satisfiability Problem Given an LTL formula Φ, is Φ satisfiable (realisable)? is PSPACE-complete. Tree Model Property If Φ is satisfiable then Φ is satisfiable in a transition system/kripke model that is a (regular) infinite tree whose branching degree is one.
65 Computational Properties II 64 Finite Model Property If Φ is satisfiable then Φ is satisfiable in a finite transition system/kripke model (that is eventually cyclic). E... Model Checking Problem Given a finite transition system/kripke model, a state E of it, and an LTL formula, does E = Φ? is PSPACE-complete.
Temporal logic CTL : syntax. Communication and Concurrency Lecture 6. Φ ::= tt ff Φ 1 Φ 2 Φ 1 Φ 2 [K]Φ K Φ AG Φ EF Φ AF Φ EG Φ A formula can be
Temporl logic CTL : syntx Communiction nd Concurrency Lecture 6 Colin Stirling (cps) Φ ::= tt ff Φ 1 Φ Φ 1 Φ [K]Φ K Φ A formul cn be School of Informtics 7th October 013 Temporl logic CTL : syntx Temporl
More informationAn Introduction to Temporal Logics
An Introduction to Temporal Logics c 2001,2004 M. Lawford Outline Motivation: Dining Philosophers Safety, Liveness, Fairness & Justice Kripke structures, LTS, SELTS, and Paths Linear Temporal Logic Branching
More informationAutomata-Theoretic Model Checking of Reactive Systems
Automata-Theoretic Model Checking of Reactive Systems Radu Iosif Verimag/CNRS (Grenoble, France) Thanks to Tom Henzinger (IST, Austria), Barbara Jobstmann (CNRS, Grenoble) and Doron Peled (Bar-Ilan University,
More informationTemporal Logic. Stavros Tripakis University of California, Berkeley. We have designed a system. We want to check that it is correct.
EE 244: Fundamental Algorithms for System Modeling, Analysis, and Optimization Fall 2016 Temporal logic Stavros Tripakis University of California, Berkeley Stavros Tripakis (UC Berkeley) EE 244, Fall 2016
More informationComputation Tree Logic (CTL) & Basic Model Checking Algorithms
Computation Tree Logic (CTL) & Basic Model Checking Algorithms Martin Fränzle Carl von Ossietzky Universität Dpt. of Computing Science Res. Grp. Hybride Systeme Oldenburg, Germany 02917: CTL & Model Checking
More informationVerification Using Temporal Logic
CMSC 630 February 25, 2015 1 Verification Using Temporal Logic Sources: E.M. Clarke, O. Grumberg and D. Peled. Model Checking. MIT Press, Cambridge, 2000. E.A. Emerson. Temporal and Modal Logic. Chapter
More informationModal and Temporal Logics
Modal and Temporal Logics Colin Stirling School of Informatics University of Edinburgh July 26, 2003 Computational Properties 1 Satisfiability Problem: Given a modal µ-calculus formula Φ, is Φ satisfiable?
More informationLinear Temporal Logic (LTL)
Chapter 9 Linear Temporal Logic (LTL) This chapter introduces the Linear Temporal Logic (LTL) to reason about state properties of Labelled Transition Systems defined in the previous chapter. We will first
More informationModel for reactive systems/software
Temporal Logics CS 5219 Abhik Roychoudhury National University of Singapore The big picture Software/ Sys. to be built (Dream) Properties to Satisfy (caution) Today s lecture System Model (Rough Idea)
More informationLinear-time Temporal Logic
Linear-time Temporal Logic Pedro Cabalar Department of Computer Science University of Corunna, SPAIN cabalar@udc.es 2015/2016 P. Cabalar ( Department Linear oftemporal Computer Logic Science University
More informationTemporal logics and explicit-state model checking. Pierre Wolper Université de Liège
Temporal logics and explicit-state model checking Pierre Wolper Université de Liège 1 Topics to be covered Introducing explicit-state model checking Finite automata on infinite words Temporal Logics and
More informationTemporal Logic. M φ. Outline. Why not standard logic? What is temporal logic? LTL CTL* CTL Fairness. Ralf Huuck. Kripke Structure
Outline Temporal Logic Ralf Huuck Why not standard logic? What is temporal logic? LTL CTL* CTL Fairness Model Checking Problem model, program? M φ satisfies, Implements, refines property, specification
More informationComputer-Aided Program Design
Computer-Aided Program Design Spring 2015, Rice University Unit 3 Swarat Chaudhuri February 5, 2015 Temporal logic Propositional logic is a good language for describing properties of program states. However,
More informationChapter 4: Computation tree logic
INFOF412 Formal verification of computer systems Chapter 4: Computation tree logic Mickael Randour Formal Methods and Verification group Computer Science Department, ULB March 2017 1 CTL: a specification
More informationFORMAL METHODS LECTURE III: LINEAR TEMPORAL LOGIC
Alessandro Artale (FM First Semester 2007/2008) p. 1/39 FORMAL METHODS LECTURE III: LINEAR TEMPORAL LOGIC Alessandro Artale Faculty of Computer Science Free University of Bolzano artale@inf.unibz.it http://www.inf.unibz.it/
More informationChapter 3: Linear temporal logic
INFOF412 Formal verification of computer systems Chapter 3: Linear temporal logic Mickael Randour Formal Methods and Verification group Computer Science Department, ULB March 2017 1 LTL: a specification
More informationT Reactive Systems: Temporal Logic LTL
Tik-79.186 Reactive Systems 1 T-79.186 Reactive Systems: Temporal Logic LTL Spring 2005, Lecture 4 January 31, 2005 Tik-79.186 Reactive Systems 2 Temporal Logics Temporal logics are currently the most
More informationIntroduction to Model Checking. Debdeep Mukhopadhyay IIT Madras
Introduction to Model Checking Debdeep Mukhopadhyay IIT Madras How good can you fight bugs? Comprising of three parts Formal Verification techniques consist of three parts: 1. A framework for modeling
More informationModels. Lecture 25: Model Checking. Example. Semantics. Meanings with respect to model and path through future...
Models Lecture 25: Model Checking CSCI 81 Spring, 2012 Kim Bruce Meanings with respect to model and path through future... M = (S,, L) is a transition system if S is a set of states is a transition relation
More informationMathematical Logic Propositional Logic - Tableaux*
Mathematical Logic Propositional Logic - Tableaux* Fausto Giunchiglia and Mattia Fumagalli University of Trento *Originally by Luciano Serafini and Chiara Ghidini Modified by Fausto Giunchiglia and Mattia
More informationTimo Latvala. February 4, 2004
Reactive Systems: Temporal Logic LT L Timo Latvala February 4, 2004 Reactive Systems: Temporal Logic LT L 8-1 Temporal Logics Temporal logics are currently the most widely used specification formalism
More informationLecture 16: Computation Tree Logic (CTL)
Lecture 16: Computation Tree Logic (CTL) 1 Programme for the upcoming lectures Introducing CTL Basic Algorithms for CTL CTL and Fairness; computing strongly connected components Basic Decision Diagrams
More informationOverview. overview / 357
Overview overview6.1 Introduction Modelling parallel systems Linear Time Properties Regular Properties Linear Temporal Logic (LTL) Computation Tree Logic syntax and semantics of CTL expressiveness of CTL
More informationComputation Tree Logic
Computation Tree Logic Computation tree logic (CTL) is a branching-time logic that includes the propositional connectives as well as temporal connectives AX, EX, AU, EU, AG, EG, AF, and EF. The syntax
More informationComputation Tree Logic
Chapter 6 Computation Tree Logic Pnueli [88] has introduced linear temporal logic to the computer science community for the specification and verification of reactive systems. In Chapter 3 we have treated
More informationTemporal Logic Model Checking
18 Feb, 2009 Thomas Wahl, Oxford University Temporal Logic Model Checking 1 Temporal Logic Model Checking Thomas Wahl Computing Laboratory, Oxford University 18 Feb, 2009 Thomas Wahl, Oxford University
More informationMODEL CHECKING. Arie Gurfinkel
1 MODEL CHECKING Arie Gurfinkel 2 Overview Kripke structures as models of computation CTL, LTL and property patterns CTL model-checking and counterexample generation State of the Art Model-Checkers 3 SW/HW
More informationLinear-Time Logic. Hao Zheng
Linear-Time Logic Hao Zheng Department of Computer Science and Engineering University of South Florida Tampa, FL 33620 Email: zheng@cse.usf.edu Phone: (813)974-4757 Fax: (813)974-5456 Hao Zheng (CSE, USF)
More informationPSPACE-completeness of LTL/CTL model checking
PSPACE-completeness of LTL/CTL model checking Peter Lohmann April 10, 2007 Abstract This paper will give a proof for the PSPACE-completeness of LTLsatisfiability and for the PSPACE-completeness of the
More informationTemporal & Modal Logic. Acronyms. Contents. Temporal Logic Overview Classification PLTL Syntax Semantics Identities. Concurrency Model Checking
Temporal & Modal Logic E. Allen Emerson Presenter: Aly Farahat 2/12/2009 CS5090 1 Acronyms TL: Temporal Logic BTL: Branching-time Logic LTL: Linear-Time Logic CTL: Computation Tree Logic PLTL: Propositional
More informationThe State Explosion Problem
The State Explosion Problem Martin Kot August 16, 2003 1 Introduction One from main approaches to checking correctness of a concurrent system are state space methods. They are suitable for automatic analysis
More informationProbabilistic Model Checking Michaelmas Term Dr. Dave Parker. Department of Computer Science University of Oxford
Probabilistic Model Checking Michaelmas Term 2011 Dr. Dave Parker Department of Computer Science University of Oxford Overview Temporal logic Non-probabilistic temporal logic CTL Probabilistic temporal
More informationESE601: Hybrid Systems. Introduction to verification
ESE601: Hybrid Systems Introduction to verification Spring 2006 Suggested reading material Papers (R14) - (R16) on the website. The book Model checking by Clarke, Grumberg and Peled. What is verification?
More informationLecture Notes on Emptiness Checking, LTL Büchi Automata
15-414: Bug Catching: Automated Program Verification Lecture Notes on Emptiness Checking, LTL Büchi Automata Matt Fredrikson André Platzer Carnegie Mellon University Lecture 18 1 Introduction We ve seen
More information09 Modal Logic II. CS 3234: Logic and Formal Systems. October 14, Martin Henz and Aquinas Hobor
Martin Henz and Aquinas Hobor October 14, 2010 Generated on Thursday 14 th October, 2010, 11:40 1 Review of Modal Logic 2 3 4 Motivation Syntax and Semantics Valid Formulas wrt Modalities Correspondence
More informationWhat is Temporal Logic? The Basic Paradigm. The Idea of Temporal Logic. Formulas
What is Temporal Logic? A logical formalism to describe sequences of any kind. We use it to describe state sequences. An automaton describes the actions of a system, a temporal logic formula describes
More informationModel Checking with CTL. Presented by Jason Simas
Model Checking with CTL Presented by Jason Simas Model Checking with CTL Based Upon: Logic in Computer Science. Huth and Ryan. 2000. (148-215) Model Checking. Clarke, Grumberg and Peled. 1999. (1-26) Content
More informationChapter 5: Linear Temporal Logic
Chapter 5: Linear Temporal Logic Prof. Ali Movaghar Verification of Reactive Systems Spring 94 Outline We introduce linear temporal logic (LTL), a logical formalism that is suited for specifying LT properties.
More informationIntroduction to Temporal Logic. The purpose of temporal logics is to specify properties of dynamic systems. These can be either
Introduction to Temporal Logic The purpose of temporal logics is to specify properties of dynamic systems. These can be either Desired properites. Often liveness properties like In every infinite run action
More informationLecture Notes on Software Model Checking
15-414: Bug Catching: Automated Program Verification Lecture Notes on Software Model Checking Matt Fredrikson André Platzer Carnegie Mellon University Lecture 19 1 Introduction So far we ve focused on
More informationA logical framework to deal with variability
A logical framework to deal with variability (research in progress) M.H. ter Beek joint work with P. Asirelli, A. Fantechi and S. Gnesi ISTI CNR Università di Firenze XXL project meeting Pisa, 21 June
More informationLTL and CTL. Lecture Notes by Dhananjay Raju
LTL and CTL Lecture Notes by Dhananjay Raju draju@cs.utexas.edu 1 Linear Temporal Logic: LTL Temporal logics are a convenient way to formalise and verify properties of reactive systems. LTL is an infinite
More informationComputation Tree Logic
Computation Tree Logic Hao Zheng Department of Computer Science and Engineering University of South Florida Tampa, FL 33620 Email: zheng@cse.usf.edu Phone: (813)974-4757 Fax: (813)974-5456 Hao Zheng (CSE,
More informationConjunctive Normal Form and SAT
Notes on Satisfiability-Based Problem Solving Conjunctive Normal Form and SAT David Mitchell mitchell@cs.sfu.ca October 4, 2015 These notes are a preliminary draft. Please use freely, but do not re-distribute
More informationFAIRNESS FOR INFINITE STATE SYSTEMS
FAIRNESS FOR INFINITE STATE SYSTEMS Heidy Khlaaf University College London 1 FORMAL VERIFICATION Formal verification is the process of establishing whether a system satisfies some requirements (properties),
More informationFinite-State Model Checking
EECS 219C: Computer-Aided Verification Intro. to Model Checking: Models and Properties Sanjit A. Seshia EECS, UC Berkeley Finite-State Model Checking G(p X q) Temporal logic q p FSM Model Checker Yes,
More informationFORMAL METHODS LECTURE IV: COMPUTATION TREE LOGIC (CTL)
Alessandro Artale (FM First Semester 2007/2008) p. 1/37 FORMAL METHODS LECTURE IV: COMPUTATION TREE LOGIC (CTL) Alessandro Artale Faculty of Computer Science Free University of Bolzano artale@inf.unibz.it
More informationFrom Liveness to Promptness
From Liveness to Promptness Orna Kupferman Hebrew University Nir Piterman EPFL Moshe Y. Vardi Rice University Abstract Liveness temporal properties state that something good eventually happens, e.g., every
More informationLTL Model Checking. Wishnu Prasetya.
LTL Model Checking Wishnu Prasetya wishnu@cs.uu.nl www.cs.uu.nl/docs/vakken/pv Overview This pack : Abstract model of programs Temporal properties Verification (via model checking) algorithm Concurrency
More informationComputation Tree Logic (CTL)
Computation Tree Logic (CTL) Fazle Rabbi University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway Bergen University College, Bergen, Norway fazlr@student.matnat.uio.no, Fazle.Rabbi@hib.no May 30, 2015 Fazle Rabbi et al. (UiO,
More informationPropositional and Predicate Logic - IV
Propositional and Predicate Logic - IV Petr Gregor KTIML MFF UK ZS 2015/2016 Petr Gregor (KTIML MFF UK) Propositional and Predicate Logic - IV ZS 2015/2016 1 / 19 Tableau method (from the previous lecture)
More informationFirst-order resolution for CTL
First-order resolution for Lan Zhang, Ullrich Hustadt and Clare Dixon Department of Computer Science, University of Liverpool Liverpool, L69 3BX, UK {Lan.Zhang, U.Hustadt, CLDixon}@liverpool.ac.uk Abstract
More information3 Propositional Logic
3 Propositional Logic 3.1 Syntax 3.2 Semantics 3.3 Equivalence and Normal Forms 3.4 Proof Procedures 3.5 Properties Propositional Logic (25th October 2007) 1 3.1 Syntax Definition 3.0 An alphabet Σ consists
More informationTheoretical Foundations of the UML
Theoretical Foundations of the UML Lecture 17+18: A Logic for MSCs Joost-Pieter Katoen Lehrstuhl für Informatik 2 Software Modeling and Verification Group moves.rwth-aachen.de/teaching/ws-1718/fuml/ 5.
More informationSafety and Liveness Properties
Safety and Liveness Properties Lecture #6 of Model Checking Joost-Pieter Katoen Lehrstuhl 2: Software Modeling and Verification E-mail: katoen@cs.rwth-aachen.de November 5, 2008 c JPK Overview Lecture
More informationLinear Temporal Logic (LTL)
Linear Temporal Logic (LTL) Grammar of well formed formulae (wff) φ φ ::= p (Atomic formula: p AP) φ (Negation) φ 1 φ 2 (Disjunction) Xφ (successor) Fφ (sometimes) Gφ (always) [φ 1 U φ 2 ] (Until) Details
More informationSyntax and Semantics of Propositional Linear Temporal Logic
Syntax and Semantics of Propositional Linear Temporal Logic 1 Defining Logics L, M, = L - the language of the logic M - a class of models = - satisfaction relation M M, ϕ L: M = ϕ is read as M satisfies
More informationAutomata-based Verification - III
COMP30172: Advanced Algorithms Automata-based Verification - III Howard Barringer Room KB2.20: email: howard.barringer@manchester.ac.uk March 2009 Third Topic Infinite Word Automata Motivation Büchi Automata
More informationReasoning about Strategies: From module checking to strategy logic
Reasoning about Strategies: From module checking to strategy logic based on joint works with Fabio Mogavero, Giuseppe Perelli, Luigi Sauro, and Moshe Y. Vardi Luxembourg September 23, 2013 Reasoning about
More informationModel Checking: the Interval Way
Dept. of Mathematics, Computer Science, and Physics University of Udine, Italy TCS Seminar Series Spring 2018 Department of Theoretical Computer Science KTH ROYAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY June 4, 2018 Model
More informationModel Checking. Temporal Logic. Fifth International Symposium in Programming, volume. of concurrent systems in CESAR. In Proceedings of the
Sérgio Campos, Edmund Why? Advantages: No proofs Fast Counter-examples No problem with partial specifications can easily express many concurrency properties Main Disadvantage: State Explosion Problem Too
More informationAutomata-based Verification - III
CS3172: Advanced Algorithms Automata-based Verification - III Howard Barringer Room KB2.20/22: email: howard.barringer@manchester.ac.uk March 2005 Third Topic Infinite Word Automata Motivation Büchi Automata
More informationDescription Logics. Deduction in Propositional Logic. franconi. Enrico Franconi
(1/20) Description Logics Deduction in Propositional Logic Enrico Franconi franconi@cs.man.ac.uk http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/ franconi Department of Computer Science, University of Manchester (2/20) Decision
More informationPartial model checking via abstract interpretation
Partial model checking via abstract interpretation N. De Francesco, G. Lettieri, L. Martini, G. Vaglini Università di Pisa, Dipartimento di Ingegneria dell Informazione, sez. Informatica, Via Diotisalvi
More informationSummary. Computation Tree logic Vs. LTL. CTL at a glance. KM,s =! iff for every path " starting at s KM," =! COMPUTATION TREE LOGIC (CTL)
Summary COMPUTATION TREE LOGIC (CTL) Slides by Alessandro Artale http://www.inf.unibz.it/ artale/ Some material (text, figures) displayed in these slides is courtesy of: M. Benerecetti, A. Cimatti, M.
More informationComplexity Theory VU , SS The Polynomial Hierarchy. Reinhard Pichler
Complexity Theory Complexity Theory VU 181.142, SS 2018 6. The Polynomial Hierarchy Reinhard Pichler Institut für Informationssysteme Arbeitsbereich DBAI Technische Universität Wien 15 May, 2018 Reinhard
More informationOutline. Complexity Theory EXACT TSP. The Class DP. Definition. Problem EXACT TSP. Complexity of EXACT TSP. Proposition VU 181.
Complexity Theory Complexity Theory Outline Complexity Theory VU 181.142, SS 2018 6. The Polynomial Hierarchy Reinhard Pichler Institut für Informationssysteme Arbeitsbereich DBAI Technische Universität
More informationLogic Model Checking
Logic Model Checking Lecture Notes 10:18 Caltech 101b.2 January-March 2004 Course Text: The Spin Model Checker: Primer and Reference Manual Addison-Wesley 2003, ISBN 0-321-22862-6, 608 pgs. the assignment
More informationPropositional and Predicate Logic - II
Propositional and Predicate Logic - II Petr Gregor KTIML MFF UK WS 2016/2017 Petr Gregor (KTIML MFF UK) Propositional and Predicate Logic - II WS 2016/2017 1 / 16 Basic syntax Language Propositional logic
More informationCharacterizing Fault-Tolerant Systems by Means of Simulation Relations
Characterizing Fault-Tolerant Systems by Means of Simulation Relations TECHNICAL REPORT Ramiro Demasi 1, Pablo F. Castro 2,3, Thomas S.E. Maibaum 1, and Nazareno Aguirre 2,3 1 Department of Computing and
More informationReasoning about Equilibria in Game-like Concurrent Systems
Reasoning about Equilibria in Game-like Concurrent Systems Julian Gutierrez, Paul Harrenstein, Michael Wooldridge Department of Computer Science University of Oxford Abstract In this paper we study techniques
More informationModel Checking & Program Analysis
Model Checking & Program Analysis Markus Müller-Olm Dortmund University Overview Introduction Model Checking Flow Analysis Some Links between MC and FA Conclusion Apology for not giving proper credit to
More informationTecniche di Verifica. Introduction to Propositional Logic
Tecniche di Verifica Introduction to Propositional Logic 1 Logic A formal logic is defined by its syntax and semantics. Syntax An alphabet is a set of symbols. A finite sequence of these symbols is called
More informationCS357: CTL Model Checking (two lectures worth) David Dill
CS357: CTL Model Checking (two lectures worth) David Dill 1 CTL CTL = Computation Tree Logic It is a propositional temporal logic temporal logic extended to properties of events over time. CTL is a branching
More informationModel Checking Fixed Point Logic with Chop
Model Checking Fixed Point Logic with Chop Martin Lange and Colin Stirling Laboratory for Foundations of Computer Science Division of Informatics University of Edinburgh {martin,cps}@dcs.ed.ac.uk Abstract.
More informationLOGIC PROPOSITIONAL REASONING
LOGIC PROPOSITIONAL REASONING WS 2017/2018 (342.208) Armin Biere Martina Seidl biere@jku.at martina.seidl@jku.at Institute for Formal Models and Verification Johannes Kepler Universität Linz Version 2018.1
More informationModel Checking: An Introduction
Model Checking: An Introduction Meeting 3, CSCI 5535, Spring 2013 Announcements Homework 0 ( Preliminaries ) out, due Friday Saturday This Week Dive into research motivating CSCI 5535 Next Week Begin foundations
More informationHelsinki University of Technology Laboratory for Theoretical Computer Science Research Reports 66
Helsinki University of Technology Laboratory for Theoretical Computer Science Research Reports 66 Teknillisen korkeakoulun tietojenkäsittelyteorian laboratorion tutkimusraportti 66 Espoo 2000 HUT-TCS-A66
More informationModels of Concurrency
Models of Concurrency GERARDO SCHNEIDER UPPSALA UNIVERSITY DEPARTMENT OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY UPPSALA, SWEDEN Thanks to Frank Valencia Models of Concurrency p.1/57 Concurrency is Everywhere Concurrent
More informationTemporal Logic - Soundness and Completeness of L
Temporal Logic - Soundness and Completeness of L CS402, Spring 2018 Soundness Theorem 1 (14.12) Let A be an LTL formula. If L A, then A. Proof. We need to prove the axioms and two inference rules to be
More information2.5.2 Basic CNF/DNF Transformation
2.5. NORMAL FORMS 39 On the other hand, checking the unsatisfiability of CNF formulas or the validity of DNF formulas is conp-complete. For any propositional formula φ there is an equivalent formula in
More informationIntroduction to Logic in Computer Science: Autumn 2006
Introduction to Logic in Computer Science: Autumn 2006 Ulle Endriss Institute for Logic, Language and Computation University of Amsterdam Ulle Endriss 1 Plan for Today Today s class will be an introduction
More informationTableau-based decision procedures for the logics of subinterval structures over dense orderings
Tableau-based decision procedures for the logics of subinterval structures over dense orderings Davide Bresolin 1, Valentin Goranko 2, Angelo Montanari 3, and Pietro Sala 3 1 Department of Computer Science,
More informationPropositional and Predicate Logic - V
Propositional and Predicate Logic - V Petr Gregor KTIML MFF UK WS 2016/2017 Petr Gregor (KTIML MFF UK) Propositional and Predicate Logic - V WS 2016/2017 1 / 21 Formal proof systems Hilbert s calculus
More informationPropositional Logic: Models and Proofs
Propositional Logic: Models and Proofs C. R. Ramakrishnan CSE 505 1 Syntax 2 Model Theory 3 Proof Theory and Resolution Compiled at 11:51 on 2016/11/02 Computing with Logic Propositional Logic CSE 505
More informationRecognizing Safety and Liveness by Alpern and Schneider
Recognizing Safety and Liveness by Alpern and Schneider Calvin Deutschbein 17 Jan 2017 1 Intro 1.1 Safety What is safety? Bad things do not happen For example, consider the following safe program in C:
More informationModel Theory of Modal Logic Lecture 5. Valentin Goranko Technical University of Denmark
Model Theory of Modal Logic Lecture 5 Valentin Goranko Technical University of Denmark Third Indian School on Logic and its Applications Hyderabad, January 29, 2010 Model Theory of Modal Logic Lecture
More informationMonitoring Distributed Controllers
Monitoring Distributed Controllers When an Efficient LTL Algorithm on Sequences is Needed to Model-Check Traces A. Genon T. Massart C. Meuter Université Libre de Bruxelles Département d Informatique August
More informationWarm-Up Problem. Is the following true or false? 1/35
Warm-Up Problem Is the following true or false? 1/35 Propositional Logic: Resolution Carmen Bruni Lecture 6 Based on work by J Buss, A Gao, L Kari, A Lubiw, B Bonakdarpour, D Maftuleac, C Roberts, R Trefler,
More informationModal Logic. UIT2206: The Importance of Being Formal. Martin Henz. March 19, 2014
Modal Logic UIT2206: The Importance of Being Formal Martin Henz March 19, 2014 1 Motivation The source of meaning of formulas in the previous chapters were models. Once a particular model is chosen, say
More informationAn On-the-fly Tableau Construction for a Real-Time Temporal Logic
#! & F $ F ' F " F % An On-the-fly Tableau Construction for a Real-Time Temporal Logic Marc Geilen and Dennis Dams Faculty of Electrical Engineering, Eindhoven University of Technology P.O.Box 513, 5600
More informationConjunctive Normal Form and SAT
Notes on Satisfiability-Based Problem Solving Conjunctive Normal Form and SAT David Mitchell mitchell@cs.sfu.ca September 10, 2014 These notes are a preliminary draft. Please use freely, but do not re-distribute
More informationPropositional Logic and Semantics
Propositional Logic and Semantics English is naturally ambiguous. For example, consider the following employee (non)recommendations and their ambiguity in the English language: I can assure you that no
More informationCTL Model checking. 1. finite number of processes, each having a finite number of finite-valued variables. Model-Checking
CTL Model checking Assumptions:. finite number of processes, each having a finite number of finite-valued variables.. finite length of CTL formula Problem:Determine whether formula f 0 is true in a finite
More informationDistributed Algorithms (CAS 769) Dr. Borzoo Bonakdarpour
Distributed Algorithms (CAS 769) Week 1: Introduction, Logical clocks, Snapshots Dr. Borzoo Bonakdarpour Department of Computing and Software McMaster University Dr. Borzoo Bonakdarpour Distributed Algorithms
More informationOptimal Tableaux for Right Propositional Neighborhood Logic over Linear Orders
Optimal Tableaux for Right Propositional Neighborhood Logic over Linear Orders Davide Bresolin 1, Angelo Montanari 2, Pietro Sala 2, and Guido Sciavicco 3 1 Department of Computer Science, University of
More informationChapter 6: Computation Tree Logic
Chapter 6: Computation Tree Logic Prof. Ali Movaghar Verification of Reactive Systems Outline We introduce Computation Tree Logic (CTL), a branching temporal logic for specifying system properties. A comparison
More informationLinear Temporal Logic and Büchi Automata
Linear Temporal Logic and Büchi Automata Yih-Kuen Tsay Department of Information Management National Taiwan University FLOLAC 2009 Yih-Kuen Tsay (SVVRL @ IM.NTU) Linear Temporal Logic and Büchi Automata
More informationComp487/587 - Boolean Formulas
Comp487/587 - Boolean Formulas 1 Logic and SAT 1.1 What is a Boolean Formula Logic is a way through which we can analyze and reason about simple or complicated events. In particular, we are interested
More informationPropositional Logic: Evaluating the Formulas
Institute for Formal Models and Verification Johannes Kepler University Linz VL Logik (LVA-Nr. 342208) Winter Semester 2015/2016 Propositional Logic: Evaluating the Formulas Version 2015.2 Armin Biere
More information