Verification. Arijit Mondal. Dept. of Computer Science & Engineering Indian Institute of Technology Patna
|
|
- Christiana McLaughlin
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 IIT Patna 1 Verification Arijit Mondal Dept. of Computer Science & Engineering Indian Institute of Technology Patna arijit@iitp.ac.in
2 Introduction The goal of verification To ensure 100% correct in functionality and timing Spend 50 70% of time to verify a design Functional verification Simulation Formal proof Timing verification Dynamic timing simulation (DTS) Static timing analysis (STA) IIT Patna 2
3 Verification vs Test Verification Verifies correctness of design i.e., check if the design meets the specifications. Simulation or formal methods. Performed once prior to manufacturing. Required for reliability of design. Test Checks correctness of manufactured hardware. Two-stage process: Test generation: CAD tools executed once during design for ATPG Test application: TPs tests applied to ALL hardware samples Test application performed on every manufactured device. Responsible for reliability of devices. IIT Patna 3
4 Simulation Need to drive the circuit with the stimulus Exhaustive simulation Drive the circuit with all possible stimulus Non-exhaustive simulations Drive the circuit with selected stimulus To find appropriate subset is a complex problem May not cover all cases Number of test cases may be exponential IIT Patna 4
5 Verification of Combinational Circuits IIT Patna 5 a a sel Y1 sel Y2 b b Are Y1 and Y2 equivalent? Y1 = (a sel) (b sel) Y2 = (a sel) (b sel) Canonical structure of Binary Decision Diagram can be exploited to compare Boolean functions like Y1 & Y2
6 Verification of Sequential Circuits r1 r2 RR Arbiter g1 g2 Properties span across cycle boundaries Example: Two way round robin arbiter If the request bit r1 is true in a cycle then the grant bit g1 has to be true within the next two clock cycles IIT Patna 6
7 Verification of Sequential Circuits r1 r2 RR Arbiter g1 g2 Properties span across cycle boundaries Example: Two way round robin arbiter If the request bit r1 is true in a cycle then the grant bit g1 has to be true within the next two clock cycles Need temporal logic to specify the behavior IIT Patna 6
8 Verification of Sequential Circuits IIT Patna 7 r1 r2 RR Arbiter g1 g2 r1(0) r2(0) g1(0) g2(0) T=0 r1(1) r2(1) g1(1) g2(1) T=1 r1(2) r2(2) g1(2) g2(2) If the request bit r1 is true in a cycle then the grant bit g1 has to be true within the next two clock cycles t[r1(t) g1(t + 1) g1(t + 2)] In propositional temporal logic time (t) is implicit always r1 (next g1) (next next g1) T=2
9 Temporal logic IIT Patna 8 The truth value of a temporal logic is defined with respect to a model. Temporal logic formula is not statically true or false in a model. The models of temporal logic contain several states and a formula can be true in some states and false in others. Example: I am always happy. I will eventually be happy. I will be happy until I do something wrong. I am happy.
10 Kripke Structure IIT Patna 9 p p,q r S0 S1 S S3 S q q,r M = (AP, S, S 0, T, L) AP Set of atomic proposition S Set of states S 0 Set of initial states T Total transition relation (T S S) L Labeling function (S 2 AP )
11 Path IIT Patna 10 A path π = s 0, s 1,... in a Kripke structure is a sequence of states such that i, (s i, s i+1 ) T Sample paths S0, S1, S2, S4, S1,... S0, S3, S4, S0,... p p,q r S0, S1, S4, S1,... π = s 0, s 1,..., s }{{ k, s } k+1... prefix of π k in π π = s 0, s 1,..., s k, s k+1... }{{} suffix of π k in π S0 S1 S S3 S q q,r
12 Temporal operators Two fundamental path operators Next operator Xp property p holds in the next state Until operator p U q property p holds in all states upto the state where property q holds Derived operators Eventual/Future operator Fp property p holds eventually (in some future states) Always/Globally operator Gp property p holds always (at all states) All these operators are interpreted over the paths in Kripke structure under consideration All Boolean operators are supported by the temporal logics IIT Patna 11
13 The next operator (X) Xp p holds p holds in the next state of the path Formally π = Xp iff π 1 = p IIT Patna 12
14 The until operator (U) puq p holds q holds q holds eventually and p holds until q holds Formally π = p U q iff k such that π k = q and j, 0 j < k we have π j = p IIT Patna 13
15 The eventual operator (F) Fp p holds p holds eventually (in future) Formally π = Fp iff k such that π k = p This can be written as true U p IIT Patna 14
16 The always operator (G) G p p holds p holds always (globally) Formally π = Gp iff k we have π k = p This can be written as (true U p) or F p IIT Patna 15
17 Branching Time Logic IIT Patna 16 Interpreted over computation tree a,b a,b b,c c b,c c a,b c c
18 Path Quantifier IIT Patna 17 A: For all paths... E: There exists a path...
19 Universal Path Quantification IIT Patna 18 AX p AG p p p p p p p p p p In all the next states p holds. Along all the paths p holds forever.
20 Universal Path Quantification IIT Patna 19 AF p A(pUq) p p p q p p q q Along all the paths p holds eventually. Along all the paths p holds until q holds.
21 Existential Path Quantification IIT Patna 20 EX p EG p p p p p There exists a next state where p holds. there exists a path along which p holds forever.
22 Existential Path Quantification IIT Patna 21 EF p E(pUq) p p p q There exists a path along which p holds eventually. There exists a path along which p holds until q holds.
23 Duality between Always & Eventual operators Gp = p (next p) (next next p) (next next next p)... = ( (p (next p) (next next p) (next next next p)...)) applying De Morgan s law = ( p (next p) (next next p) (next next next p)...) = (F p) Therefore we have Gp = F p Fp = G p IIT Patna 22
24 Computation Tree Logic (CTL) Syntax: Given a set of Atomic Propositions (AP): All Boolean formulas of over AP are CTL properties If f and g are CTL properties then so are f, AXf, A(f U g), EXf and E(f U g), Properties like AFp, AGp, EGp, EFp can be derived from the above Semantics: The property Af is true at a state s of the Kripke structure iff the path property f holds on all paths starting from s The property Ef is true at a state s of the Kripke structure iff the path property f holds on some path starting from s IIT Patna 23
25 Nested properties in CTL AX AGp From all the next state p holds forever along all paths EX EFp There exist a next state from where there exist a path to a state where p holds AG EFp From any state there exist a path to a state where p holds p p p p p p p AX AGp p EX EFp p p p p AG EFp IIT Patna 24
26 CTL example IIT Patna 25 S req req req req gr gr gr req gr gr gr gr From S the system always makes a request in future:
27 CTL example IIT Patna 25 S req req req req gr gr gr req gr gr gr gr From S the system always makes a request in future: AF req
28 CTL example IIT Patna 25 S req req req req gr gr gr req gr gr gr gr From S the system always makes a request in future: AF req All requests are eventually granted:
29 CTL example IIT Patna 25 S req req req req gr gr gr req gr gr gr gr From S the system always makes a request in future: AF req All requests are eventually granted: AG(req EF gr)
30 CTL example IIT Patna 25 S req req req req gr gr gr req gr gr gr gr From S the system always makes a request in future: AF req All requests are eventually granted: AG(req EF gr) Sometimes requests are immediately granted:
31 CTL example IIT Patna 25 S req req req req gr gr gr req gr gr gr gr From S the system always makes a request in future: AF req All requests are eventually granted: AG(req EF gr) Sometimes requests are immediately granted: EF (req EX gr)
32 CTL example IIT Patna 25 S req req req req gr gr gr req gr gr gr gr From S the system always makes a request in future: AF req All requests are eventually granted: AG(req EF gr) Sometimes requests are immediately granted: EF (req EX gr) Requests are held till grant is received:
33 CTL example IIT Patna 25 S req req req req gr gr gr req gr gr gr gr From S the system always makes a request in future: AF req All requests are eventually granted: AG(req EF gr) Sometimes requests are immediately granted: EF (req EX gr) Requests are held till grant is received: AG(req A(req U gr))
34 Real Time properties Real time systems Predictable response time are necessary for correct operation Safety critical systems like controller for aircraft, industrial machinery are a few examples It is difficult to express complex timing properties Simple: event p will happen in future Fp Complex: event p will happen within at most n time units p (Xp) (XXp)... ([XX... n times]p) IIT Patna 26
35 Bounded Temporal Operators Specify real-time constraints Over bounded traces Various bounded temporal operators G [m,n] p p always holds between m th and n th time step F [m,n] p p eventually holds between m th and n th time step X [m] p p holds at the m th time step p U [m,n] q q eventually holds between m th and n th time step and p holds until that point of time IIT Patna 27
36 Examples IIT Patna 28 G [2,4] p p holds p holds always between 2nd and 4th time step
37 Examples IIT Patna F [2,4] p p holds p holds eventually between 2nd and 4th time step
38 Examples IIT Patna 30 X p p holds p holds in the 3rd time step
39 Examples IIT Patna 31 pu [2,4] q p holds q holds q holds eventually between 2nd and 4th time step and p holds until q holds
40 Timing properties IIT Patna 32 Whenever request is recorded grant should take place within 4 time units AG(posedge(req) AF [0,4] posedge(gr)) The arbiter will provide exactly 64 time units to high priority user in each grant AG(posedge(hpusing) A( negedge(hpusing) U [64,64] negedge(hpusing)))
41 Formal Verification IIT Patna 33 State machine extraction Specification A(pUq) Model Checker Yes No
42 Formal Property Verification IIT Patna 34 The formal method is called Model Checking The algorithm has two inputs A finite state state machine (FSM) that represents the implementation A formal property that represent the specification The algorithm checks whether the FSM models the property This is an exhaustive search of the FSM to see whether it has any path / state that refutes the property
43 Example: Explicit State Model IIT Patna 35 a a,b a S0 S1 S3 S2 b
44 Example: EX IIT Patna 36 a a,b a S0 S1 S3 S2 b EXa
45 Example: EX IIT Patna 36 a a,b a S0 S1 S3 S2 b EXa
46 Example: EX IIT Patna 36 a a,b a S0 S1 S3 S2 b EXa
47 Example: EX IIT Patna 36 a a,b a S0 S1 S3 S2 b EXa
48 Example: EX IIT Patna 36 a a,b a S0 S1 S3 S2 b EXa
49 Example: AX IIT Patna 37 a a,b a S0 S1 S3 S2 b AXa
50 Example: AX IIT Patna 37 a a,b a S0 S1 S3 S2 b AXa
51 Example: AX IIT Patna 37 a a,b a S0 S1 S3 S2 b AXa
52 Example: AX IIT Patna 37 a a,b a S0 S1 S3 S2 b AXa
53 Example: EG IIT Patna 38 a a,b a S0 S1 S3 S2 b EGa
54 Example: EG IIT Patna 38 a a,b a S0 S1 S3 S2 b EGa
55 Example: EG IIT Patna 38 a a,b a S0 S1 S3 S2 b EGa
56 Example: EG IIT Patna 38 a a,b a S0 S1 S3 S2 b EGa
57 Example: AG IIT Patna 39 a a,b a S0 S1 S3 S2 b AGa
58 Example: AG IIT Patna 39 a a,b a S0 S1 S3 S2 b AGa
59 Example: AU IIT Patna 40 a a,b a S0 S1 S3 S2 b A(a U b)
60 Example: AU IIT Patna 40 a a,b a S0 S1 S3 S2 b A(a U b)
61 Example: AU IIT Patna 40 a a,b a S0 S1 S3 S2 b A(a U b)
62 Example: AU IIT Patna 40 a a,b a S0 S1 S3 S2 b A(a U b)
63 Symbolic Representation IIT Patna 41 Represents set of transition as function δ(old, new) Yields 1 if there is a transition from old to new Can be represented as Boolean function by encoding the states with Boolean variables
64 Symbolic Representation IIT Patna 41 Represents set of transition as function δ(old, new) Yields 1 if there is a transition from old to new Can be represented as Boolean function by encoding the states with Boolean variables
65 Symbolic Representation IIT Patna 41 Represents set of transition as function δ(old, new) Yields 1 if there is a transition from old to new Can be represented as Boolean function by encoding the states with Boolean variables o 1, o 2 Old state variables n 1, n 2 New state variables 11 10
66 Symbolic Representation IIT Patna 41 Represents set of transition as function δ(old, new) Yields 1 if there is a transition from old to new Can be represented as Boolean function by encoding the states with Boolean variables o 1, o 2 Old state variables n 1, n 2 New state variables δ = ō 1 ō 2 n 1 n 2 ō 1 ō 2 n 1 n 2 ō 1 o 2 n 1 n 2 o 1 ō 2 n 1 n 2 o 1 ō 2 n 1 n 2 o 1 o 2 n 1 n 2 o 1 o 2 n 1 n 2
67 Symbolic Representation IIT Patna 41 Represents set of transition as function δ(old, new) Yields 1 if there is a transition from old to new Can be represented as Boolean function by encoding the states with Boolean variables o 1, o 2 Old state variables n 1, n 2 New state variables δ = ō 1 ō 2 n 1 n 2 ō 1 ō 2 n 1 n 2 ō 1 o 2 n 1 n 2 o 1 ō 2 n 1 n 2 o 1 ō 2 n 1 n 2 o 1 o 2 n 1 n 2 o 1 o 2 n 1 n 2 New states = o 1 o 2 [S( o 1 o 2 ) δ( o 1 o 2, n 1 n 2 )]
68 Breadth First Reachability IIT Patna R i is the set of states that can be reached in i transitions Reaches fix point when R n = R n+1 Fix point always exists as it has finite number of states
69 Breadth First Reachability IIT Patna R i is the set of states that can be reached in i transitions Reaches fix point when R n = R n+1 Fix point always exists as it has finite number of states
70 Breadth First Reachability IIT Patna R R i is the set of states that can be reached in i transitions Reaches fix point when R n = R n+1 Fix point always exists as it has finite number of states
71 Breadth First Reachability IIT Patna R R i is the set of states that can be reached in i transitions Reaches fix point when R n = R n+1 Fix point always exists as it has finite number of states
72 Breadth First Reachability IIT Patna R 0 R R i is the set of states that can be reached in i transitions Reaches fix point when R n = R n+1 Fix point always exists as it has finite number of states
73 Breadth First Reachability IIT Patna R 0 R R i is the set of states that can be reached in i transitions Reaches fix point when R n = R n+1 Fix point always exists as it has finite number of states
74 Breadth First Reachability IIT Patna R 0 R 1 R R i is the set of states that can be reached in i transitions Reaches fix point when R n = R n+1 Fix point always exists as it has finite number of states
75 Breadth First Reachability IIT Patna R 0 R 1 R R i is the set of states that can be reached in i transitions Reaches fix point when R n = R n+1 Fix point always exists as it has finite number of states
76 CTL Model Checking It checks whether a given CTL formula f holds on a given Kripke structure M i.e., M = f Need to have modalities for EX, EU and EG Other modalities can be expressed using EX, EU and EG AF f EG f AG f EF f A(f U g) ( EG g) ( E[ g U ( f g)]) Basic procedure The set Sat(f) of all states satisfying f is computed recursively M = f if and only if S 0 Sat(f ) IIT Patna 43
77 CTL Model Checking: EXf IIT Patna 44 s Sat(f) Post(s) = {s S (s, s ) T} Sat(EXf) = {s S Post(s) Sat(f) }
78 CTL Model Checking: EXf IIT Patna 45 function CheckEX(f) 1. S f = {s S f L(s)} 2. while S f 3. Choose s S f 4. S f = S f {s} 5. for all t such that (t, s) T 6. if f L(t) 7. L(t) = L(t) {EXf} 8. endif 9. end for 10. end while
79 CTL Model Checking: EFp IIT Patna 46 f 0 = p
80 CTL Model Checking: EFp IIT Patna 46 f 0 = p
81 CTL Model Checking: EFp IIT Patna 46 f 1 = p EXf 0 f 0 = p
82 CTL Model Checking: EFp IIT Patna 46 f 1 = p EXf 0 f 0 = p
83 CTL Model Checking: EFp IIT Patna 46 f 2 = p EXf 1 f 1 = p EXf 0 f 0 = p
84 CTL Model Checking: EFp IIT Patna 46 f 2 = p EXf 1 f 1 = p EXf 0 f 0 = p
85 CTL Model Checking: EFp IIT Patna 46 f 3 = p EXf 2 f 2 = p EXf 1 f 1 = p EXf 0 f 0 = p
86 CTL Model Checking: EFp IIT Patna 46 f 3 = p EXf 2 f 2 = p EXf 1 f 1 = p EXf 0 f 0 = p
87 CTL Model Checking: EFp IIT Patna 46 f 3 = p EXf 2 f 2 = p EXf 1 f 1 = p EXf 0 f 0 = p Least Fix Point
88 CTL Model Checking: f = EF p IIT Patna 47 Given a model M = AP, S, S 0, T, L and S p the set of states satisfying p in M function CheckEF(S p ) Q φ; Q S p ; while Q Q do Q Q Q Q {s s [T (s, s ) Q(s )]} end while S f Q return S f
89 CTL Model Checking: EFp IIT Patna 48 function CheckEF(p) 1. S p = {s S p L(s)} 2. for all s S p do L(s) = L(s) {EFp} 3. while S p 4. Choose s S p 5. S p = S p {s} 6. for all t such that (t, s) T 7. if {EFp} L(t) 8. L(t) = L(t) {EFp} 9. S p = S p t 10. endif 11. end for 12. end while
90 IIT Patna 49 Example: g = EF ( ) (a c) (a b) c S6 S7 a,b,c S0 a S3 S4 b S5 a,c b,c S2 S1 a,b Let p = ((a c) (a b)) S p = {} {} = g
91 IIT Patna 49 Example: g = EF ( ) (a c) (a b) c S6 S7 a,b,c S0 a S3 g S4 b S5 a,c b,c S2 S1 a,b S4 = g. S p = {S4} {S4} = g
92 IIT Patna 49 Example: g = EF ( ) (a c) (a b) c S6 S7 a,b,c S0 a S3 g S4 g S5 a,c b b,c S2 S1 a,b S5 = g. S p = {S4, S5} {S4, S5} = g
93 IIT Patna 49 Example: g = EF ( ) (a c) (a b) c S6 S7 a,b,c S0 a S3 g S4 g S5 a,c b b,c S2 S1 a,b Choose S4. S p = {S5} {S4, S5} = g
94 IIT Patna 49 Example: g = EF ( ) (a c) (a b) g c S6 S7 a,b,c S0 a S3 g S4 g S5 a,c b b,c S2 S1 a,b S6 = g. S p = {S5} {S4, S5} = g
95 IIT Patna 49 Example: g = EF ( ) (a c) (a b) g c S6 S7 a,b,c S0 a S3 g S4 g S5 a,c b b,c S2 S1 a,b S p = {S5, S6} {S4, S5, S6} = g
96 IIT Patna 49 Example: g = EF ( ) (a c) (a b) g c S6 S7 a,b,c S0 a S3 g S4 g S5 a,c b b,c S2 S1 a,b Choose S5. S p = {S6} {S4, S5, S6} = g
97 IIT Patna 49 Example: g = EF ( ) (a c) (a b) g c S6 S7 a,b,c S0 a S3 g S4 g S5 a,c b b,c S2 S1 a,b No predecessor. S p = {S6} {S4, S5, S6} = g
98 IIT Patna 49 Example: g = EF ( ) (a c) (a b) g c S6 S7 a,b,c S0 a S3 g S4 g S5 a,c b b,c S2 S1 a,b Choose S6. S p = {} {S4, S5, S6} = g
99 IIT Patna 49 Example: g = EF ( ) (a c) (a b) g c S6 g S7 a,b,c S0 a S3 g S4 g S5 a,c b b,c S2 S1 a,b S7 = g. S p = {} {S4, S5, S6} = g
100 IIT Patna 49 Example: g = EF ( ) (a c) (a b) g c S6 g S7 a,b,c S0 a S3 g S4 g S5 a,c b b,c S2 S1 a,b S p = {S7} {S4, S5, S6, S7} = g
101 IIT Patna 49 Example: g = EF ( ) (a c) (a b) g c S6 g S7 a,b,c S0 a S3 g S4 g S5 a,c b b,c S2 S1 a,b Choose S7. S p = {} {S4, S5, S6, S7} = g
102 IIT Patna 49 Example: g = EF ( ) (a c) (a b) g c S6 g S7 a,b,c S0 a S3 g S4 g S5 a,c b b,c S2 Done. S1 a,b {S4, S5, S6, S7} = g
103 CTL Model Checking: EGp IIT Patna 50 f 0 = p
104 CTL Model Checking: EGp IIT Patna 50 f 0 = p f 1 = p EXf 0
105 CTL Model Checking: EGp IIT Patna 50 f 0 = p f 1 = p EXf 0 f 2 = p EXf 1
106 CTL Model Checking: EGp IIT Patna 50 f 0 = p f 1 = p EXf 0 f 2 = p EXf 1 f 3 = p EXf 2
107 CTL Model Checking: EGp IIT Patna 50 f 0 = p f 1 = p EXf 0 f 2 = p EXf 1 f 3 = p EXf 2
108 CTL Model Checking: EGp IIT Patna 50 f 0 = p f 1 = p EXf 0 f 2 = p EXf 1 f 3 = p EXf 2 Greatest Fix Point
109 CTL Model Checking: f = EG p IIT Patna 51 Given a model M = AP, S, S 0, T, L and S p the set of states satisfying p in M function CheckEG(S p ) Q φ; Q S p ; while Q Q do Q Q Q Q {s s [T (s, s ) Q(s )]} end while S f Q return S f
110 CTL Model Checking: EGp function CheckEG(p) 1. S p = {s S p L(s)} 2. SCC = {C C is nontrivial SCC of S p } 3. R = {s s C} C SCC 4. for all s R do L(s) = L(s) {EGp} 5. while R 6. Choose s R 7. R = R {s} 8. for all t such that (t, s) T and t S p 9. if {EGp} L(t) 10. L(t) = L(t) {EGp} 11. R = R {t} 12. endif 13. end for 14. end while IIT Patna 52
111 Example: g = EG b IIT Patna 53 c φ S6 S7 a,b,c S0 a S3 S4 b a,c S5 b,c S2 S1 a,b Let p = b
112 Example: g = EG b IIT Patna 53 c φ S6 S7 a,b,c S0 a S3 S4 b a,c S5 b,c S2 S1 a,b Find states Let p satisfying = b b.
113 Example: g = EG b IIT Patna 53 c φ S6 S7 a,b,c S0 a S3 S4 b a,c S5 b,c S2 S1 a,b Find states Let p satisfying = b b. S p = {S0}
114 Example: g = EG b IIT Patna 53 c φ S6 S7 a,b,c S0 a S3 S4 b a,c S5 b,c S2 S1 a,b Find states Let p satisfying = b b. S p S= p = {S0, {S0} S1}
115 Example: g = EG b IIT Patna 53 c φ S6 S7 a,b,c S0 a S3 S4 b a,c S5 b,c S2 S1 a,b Find states Let p satisfying = b b. S p S= p S= p {S0, = {S0, {S0} S1, S1} S2}
116 Example: g = EG b IIT Patna 53 c φ S6 S7 a,b,c S0 a S3 S4 b a,c S5 b,c S2 S1 a,b Find states Let p satisfying = b b. S p S= p S= p {S0, S= p {S0, = {S0, S1, {S0} S1, S1} S2, S2} S4}
117 Example: g = EG b IIT Patna 53 c φ S6 S7 a,b,c S0 a S3 S4 b a,c S5 b,c S2 S1 a,b Find Find states Let SCCp satisfying using = b S p. b. S p S = p S= p {S0, S= p {S0, = {S0, S1, {S0} S1, S2, S1} S2} S4}
118 Example: g = EG b IIT Patna 53 c φ S6 S7 a,b,c S0 a S3 S4 b a,c S5 b,c S2 S1 a,b Find Find states Let SCCp satisfying using = b S p. b. S p S = p S= p {S0, S= p {S0, = {S0, S1, {S0} S1, S2, S1} S2} S4}
119 Example: g = EG b IIT Patna 53 c φ S6 S7 a,b,c S0 a S3 S4 b a,c S5 b,c S2 S1 a,b Find Find states Let SCCp satisfying using = b S p. b. S p S = p SR = p {S0, S= p = {S0, S1, {S0} S1, S2} S2, S1} S2} S4}
120 Example: g = EG b IIT Patna 53 c φ S6 S7 a,b,c g S0 a S3 b,c g S2 S4 b S1 a,b a,c S5 Find Find states Let SCCp satisfying using = b S p. b. S p S = p SR = p {S0, S= p = {S0, S1, {S0} S1, S2} S2, S1} S2} S4} S g = {S0, S2}
121 Example: g = EG b IIT Patna 53 c φ S6 S7 a,b,c g S0 a S3 b,c g S2 S4 b S1 a,b a,c S5 Find Find states Choose Let SCCp satisfying using = S0. b S p. b. S p S = p SR = p {S0, SR = p = {S0, S1, {S2} {S0} S1, S2} S2, S1} S2} S4} S g = {S0, S2}
122 Example: g = EG b IIT Patna 53 c φ S6 S7 a,b,c g S0 a S3 g S4 a,c S5 g b b,c S2 S1 a,b Find Find states Choose Let SCC S4 p = satisfying using = g. S0. b S p. b. S p S = p SR = p {S0, S R = p = {S0, S1, {S2} {S0} S1, S2} S2, S1} S2} S4} S g = {S0, S2}
123 Example: g = EG b IIT Patna 53 c φ S6 S7 a,b,c g S0 a S3 g S4 a,c S5 g b b,c S2 S1 a,b Find Find states Choose Let SCC S4 p = satisfying using = g. S0. b S p. b. S p S = p S R = p {S0, S R = p = {S0, {S2, S1, {S2} {S0} S1, S2} S4} S2, S1} S2} S4} S g S= g = {S0, {S0, S2, S2} S4}
124 Example: g = EG b IIT Patna 53 c φ S6 S7 a,b,c g S0 a S3 g S4 a,c S5 g b b,c S2 S1 a,b Find Find states Choose Let SCC S4 p = satisfying using = g. S0. S2. b S p. b. S p S = p S R = p {S0, S R = p = {S0, {S2, S1, {S2} {S4} {S0} S1, S2} S4} S2, S1} S2} S4} S g S = g = {S0, {S0, S2, S2} S4}
125 Example: g = EG b IIT Patna 53 c φ S6 S7 a,b,c g S0 a S3 g S4 a,c S5 g b b,c S2 S1 a,b Find Find Nothing states Choose Let SCC S4 p to = satisfying using = explore. g. S0. S2. b S p. b. S p S = p S R = p {S0, S R = p = {S0, {S2, S1, {S2} {S4} {S0} S1, S2} S4} S2, S1} S2} S4} S g S = g = {S0, {S0, S2, S2} S4}
126 Example: g = EG b IIT Patna 53 c φ S6 S7 a,b,c g S0 a S3 g S4 a,c S5 g b b,c S2 S1 a,b Find Find Nothing states Choose Let SCC S4 p to = satisfying using = explore. g. S0. S2. S4. b S p. b. S p S = p S R = p {S0, S R = p R {S0, {S2, = S1, {S2} {S4} {S0} {} S1, S2} S4} S2, S1} S2} S4} S g S = g = {S0, {S0, S2, S2} S4}
127 Example: g = EG b IIT Patna 53 c φ S6 S7 a,b,c g S0 a S3 g S4 a,c S5 g b b,c S2 S1 a,b Find Find Nothing states Choose Let SCC S4 p to = satisfying using = explore. g. S0. S2. S4. b S p. b. S p S = p S R = p {S0, S R = p R {S0, {S2, = S1, {S2} {S4} {S0} {} S1, S2} S4} S2, S1} S2} S4} S g S = g = {S0, {S0, S2, S2} S4}
128 Example: g = EG b IIT Patna 53 c φ S6 S7 a,b,c g S0 a S3 g S4 a,c S5 g b b,c S2 S1 a,b Find Find Nothing states Choose Let SCC S4 Done. p to = satisfying using = explore. g. S0. S2. S4. b S p. b. S p S = g p S R = p {S0, S R = p R {S0, {S2, {S0, = S1, {S2} {S4} {S0} {} S1, S2, S2} S4} S2, S1} S2} S4} S4} S g S = g = {S0, {S0, S2, S2} S4}
129 CTL Model Checking: E(p U q) IIT Patna 54 f 0 = q
130 CTL Model Checking: E(p U q) IIT Patna 54 f 1 = q (p EXf 0 ) f 0 = q
131 CTL Model Checking: E(p U q) IIT Patna 54 f 2 = q (p EXf 1 ) f 1 = q (p EXf 0 ) f 0 = q
132 CTL Model Checking: E(p U q) IIT Patna 54 f 3 = q (p EXf 2 ) f 2 = q (p EXf 1 ) f 1 = q (p EXf 0 ) f 0 = q
133 CTL Model Checking: E(p U q) IIT Patna 54 f 3 = q (p EXf 2 ) f 2 = q (p EXf 1 ) f 1 = q (p EXf 0 ) f 0 = q Least Fix Point
134 CTL Model Checking: E(p U q) IIT Patna 55 function CheckEU(p,q) 1. S q = {s S q L(s)} 2. for all s S q do L(s) = L(s) {E(p U q)} 3. while S q 4. Choose s S q 5. S q = S q {s} 6. for all t such that (t, s) T 7. if {E(p U q)} L(t) and p L(t) 8. L(t) = L(t) {E(p U q)} 9. S q = S q {t} 10. endif 11. end for 12. end while
135 Nested CTL query IIT Patna 56 EF(p AG q)
136 Nested CTL query IIT Patna 56 EF(p AG q) EF p AG q
137 Nested CTL query IIT Patna 56 EF(p AG q) EF p AG q p
138 Nested CTL query IIT Patna 56 EF(p AG q) EF p AG q p
139 Nested CTL query IIT Patna 56 EF(p AG q) EF p AG q p AG q
140 Nested CTL query IIT Patna 56 EF(p AG q) EF p AG q p AG q AG q
141 Nested CTL query IIT Patna 56 EF(p AG q) EF p AG q p AG q AG q
142 Nested CTL query IIT Patna 56 EF(p AG q) EF p AG q p AG q AG q
143 Nested CTL query IIT Patna 56 EF(p AG q) EF p AG q p AG q AG q
144 Nested CTL query IIT Patna 56 EF(p AG q) EF p AG q p AG q AG q
145 Verification of RTCTL query IIT Patna 57 A(p U k q) q (p AX A(p U k 1 q)) if k > 1 E(p U k q) q (p EX E(p U k 1 q)) if k > 1 A(p U 0 q) q E(p U 0 q) Similar fix point characterization of CTL modalities can be used For qualative CTL queries k = S
146 RTCTL Model Checking: f = E(p U k q) function CheckEU(p,q,k) 1. N 0 f = {s S q L(s)} 2. for all s N 0 f do L(s) = L(s) {E(p U k q)} 3. j = 0; 4. while j < k 5. TEMP = N j f 6. while N j f 7. Choose s TEMP; TEMP = TEMP {s} 8. for all t such that (t, s) T 9. if {E(p U k q)} L(t) and p L(t) 10. L(t) = L(t) {E(p U k q)}; N j+1 f = N j+1 f 11. endif 12. end for 13. end while 14. j = j + 1; 15. end while {t} IIT Patna 58
147 Verification of RTCTL query IIT Patna 59 E(p U [a,b] q) p (EX E(p U [a 1,b 1] q)) if a > 0 and b > 0 E(p U [0,b] q) q (p EX E(p U [0,b 1] q)) if b > 0 E(p U [0,0] q) q
148 Verification of RTCTL query IIT Patna 59 E(p U [a,b] q) p (EX E(p U [a 1,b 1] q)) if a > 0 and b > 0 E(p U [0,b] q) q (p EX E(p U [0,b 1] q)) if b > 0 E(p U [0,0] q) q Steps: Compute set of states where p is true for a steps If fix point is reached before a steps, skip to the second case Compute set of states where E(p U q) is true for b steps If fix point is reached before (b-a) steps, skip to the third case
149 Complexity IIT Patna 60 Linear in the size of the model Linear in the size of the CTL formula Complexity is O( F M) Model size M Formula size F
NPTEL Phase-II Video course on. Design Verification and Test of. Dr. Santosh Biswas Dr. Jatindra Kumar Deka IIT Guwahati
NPTEL Phase-II Video course on Design Verification and Test of Digital VLSI Designs Dr. Santosh Biswas Dr. Jatindra Kumar Deka IIT Guwahati Module IV: Temporal Logic Lecture I: Introduction to formal methods
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 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 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 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 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 informationGuest lecturer: Prof. Mark Reynolds, The University of Western Australia
Università degli studi di Udine Corso per il dottorato di ricerca: Temporal Logics: Satisfiability Checking, Model Checking, and Synthesis January 2017 Lecture 01, Part 02: Temporal Logics Guest lecturer:
More information3. Temporal Logics and Model Checking
3. Temporal Logics and Model Checking Page Temporal Logics 3.2 Linear Temporal Logic (PLTL) 3.4 Branching Time Temporal Logic (BTTL) 3.8 Computation Tree Logic (CTL) 3.9 Linear vs. Branching Time TL 3.16
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 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: 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 informationOverview. Discrete Event Systems Verification of Finite Automata. What can finite automata be used for? What can finite automata be used for?
Computer Engineering and Networks Overview Discrete Event Systems Verification of Finite Automata Lothar Thiele Introduction Binary Decision Diagrams Representation of Boolean Functions Comparing two circuits
More informationModel Checking I. What are LTL and CTL? dack. and. dreq. and. q0bar
Model Checking I What are LTL and CTL? q0 or and dack dreq q0bar and 1 View circuit as a transition system (dreq, q0, dack) (dreq, q0, dack ) q0 = dreq and dack = dreq & (q0 + ( q0 & dack)) q0 or and D
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 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 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 informationComputation Tree Logic (CTL)
Computation Tree Logic (CTL) 1 CTL Syntax P - a set of atomic propositions, every p P is a CTL formula. f, g, CTL formulae, then so are f, f g, EXf, A[fUg], E[fUg] E, A path quantifiers, X, U, G, F temporal
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 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 informationModel checking the basic modalities of CTL with Description Logic
Model checking the basic modalities of CTL with Description Logic Shoham Ben-David Richard Trefler Grant Weddell David R. Cheriton School of Computer Science University of Waterloo Abstract. Model checking
More informationModel Checking I. What are LTL and CTL? dack. and. dreq. and. q0bar
Model Checking I What are LTL and CTL? and dack q0 or D dreq D q0bar and 1 View circuit as a transition system (dreq, q0, dack) (dreq, q0, dack ) q0 = dreq dack = dreq and (q0 or (not q0 and dack)) q0
More information3-Valued Abstraction-Refinement
3-Valued Abstraction-Refinement Sharon Shoham Academic College of Tel-Aviv Yaffo 1 Model Checking An efficient procedure that receives: A finite-state model describing a system A temporal logic formula
More informationLecture 2: Symbolic Model Checking With SAT
Lecture 2: Symbolic Model Checking With SAT Edmund M. Clarke, Jr. School of Computer Science Carnegie Mellon University Pittsburgh, PA 15213 (Joint work over several years with: A. Biere, A. Cimatti, Y.
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 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 informationMODEL-CHECKING IN DENSE REAL-TIME SHANT HARUTUNIAN
MODEL-CHECKING IN DENSE REAL-TIME SHANT HARUTUNIAN 1. Introduction These slides are for a talk based on the paper Model-Checking in Dense Real- Time, by Rajeev Alur, Costas Courcoubetis, and David Dill.
More informationSMV the Symbolic Model Verifier. Example: the alternating bit protocol. LTL Linear Time temporal Logic
Model Checking (I) SMV the Symbolic Model Verifier Example: the alternating bit protocol LTL Linear Time temporal Logic CTL Fixed Points Correctness Slide 1 SMV - Symbolic Model Verifier SMV - Symbolic
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 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 informationModel checking (III)
Theory and Algorithms Model checking (III) Alternatives andextensions Rafael Ramirez rafael@iua.upf.es Trimester1, Oct2003 Slide 9.1 Logics for reactive systems The are many specification languages for
More informationDouble Header. Model Checking. Model Checking. Overarching Plan. Take-Home Message. Spoiler Space. Topic: (Generic) Model Checking
Double Header Model Checking #1 Two Lectures Model Checking SoftwareModel Checking SLAM and BLAST Flying Boxes It is traditional to describe this stuff (especially SLAM and BLAST) with high-gloss animation
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 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 informationA brief history of model checking. Ken McMillan Cadence Berkeley Labs
A brief history of model checking Ken McMillan Cadence Berkeley Labs mcmillan@cadence.com Outline Part I -- Introduction to model checking Automatic formal verification of finite-state systems Applications
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 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 informationExplicit State Model Checking Algorithm for CTL. CSE 814 CTL Explicit-State Model Checking Algorithm
Explicit State Model Checking for CTL 1 CTL Model Checking Problem Given A model describing the behaviors of a system A set of specifications expressed in CTL ically Check that every behavior satisfies
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 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 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 informationAbstractions and Decision Procedures for Effective Software Model Checking
Abstractions and Decision Procedures for Effective Software Model Checking Prof. Natasha Sharygina The University of Lugano, Carnegie Mellon University Microsoft Summer School, Moscow, July 2011 Lecture
More informationModel checking, verification of CTL. One must verify or expel... doubts, and convert them into the certainty of YES [Thomas Carlyle]
Chater 5 Model checking, verification of CTL One must verify or exel... doubts, and convert them into the certainty of YES or NO. [Thomas Carlyle] 5. The verification setting Page 66 We introduce linear
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 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 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 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 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. 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 Verification
Computer Aided Verification For Designing correct systems Hao Zheng zheng@cse.usf.edu Dept. of Computer Science & Eng. University South Florida Outlines Basic concepts of verification Challenges to verification
More informationSymbolic Trajectory Evaluation (STE): Orna Grumberg Technion, Israel
Symbolic Trajectory Evaluation (STE): Automatic Refinement and Vacuity Detection Orna Grumberg Technion, Israel Marktoberdort 2007 1 Agenda Model checking Symbolic Trajectory Evaluation Basic Concepts
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 informationCTL Model Checking. Wishnu Prasetya.
CTL Model Checking Wishnu Prasetya wishnu@cs.uu.nl www.cs.uu.nl/docs/vakken/pv Background Example: verification of web applications à e.g. to prove existence of a path from page A to page B. Use of CTL
More informationIntroduction to Model Checking
Introduction to Model Checking Fabio Somenzi Department of Electrical, Computer, and Energy Engineering University of Colorado at Boulder July 25, 2009 Outline 1 Introduction 2 Modeling Systems and Properties
More informationModel Checking Algorithms
Model Checking Algorithms Bow-Yaw Wang Institute of Information Science Academia Sinica, Taiwan November 14, 2018 Bow-Yaw Wang (Academia Sinica) Model Checking Algorithms November 14, 2018 1 / 56 Outline
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 informationBinary Decision Diagrams and Symbolic Model Checking
Binary Decision Diagrams and Symbolic Model Checking Randy Bryant Ed Clarke Ken McMillan Allen Emerson CMU CMU Cadence U Texas http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~bryant Binary Decision Diagrams Restricted Form of
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 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 informationDigital Systems. Validation, verification. R. Pacalet January 4, 2018
Digital Systems Validation, verification R. Pacalet January 4, 2018 2/98 Simulation Extra design tasks Reference model Simulation environment A simulation cannot be exhaustive Can discover a bug Cannot
More informationAlan Bundy. Automated Reasoning LTL Model Checking
Automated Reasoning LTL Model Checking Alan Bundy Lecture 9, page 1 Introduction So far we have looked at theorem proving Powerful, especially where good sets of rewrite rules or decision procedures have
More informationModel Checking. Boris Feigin March 9, University College London
b.feigin@cs.ucl.ac.uk University College London March 9, 2005 Outline 1 2 Techniques Symbolic 3 Software 4 Vs. Deductive Verification Summary Further Reading In a nutshell... Model checking is a collection
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 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 informationTopics in Verification AZADEH FARZAN FALL 2017
Topics in Verification AZADEH FARZAN FALL 2017 Last time LTL Syntax ϕ ::= true a ϕ 1 ϕ 2 ϕ ϕ ϕ 1 U ϕ 2 a AP. ϕ def = trueu ϕ ϕ def = ϕ g intuitive meaning of and is obt Limitations of LTL pay pay τ τ soda
More informationHow Vacuous is Vacuous?
How Vacuous is Vacuous? Arie Gurfinkel and Marsha Chechik Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON M5S 3G4, Canada. Email: {arie,chechik}@cs.toronto.edu Abstract. Model-checking
More informationHomework 2: Temporal logic
ICS-E5010 Computer-Aided Verification and Synthesis, Spring 2016 Stavros Tripakis Homework 2: Temporal logic Assigned: January 20, 2016 Due: February 1, 2016 Total: 235 points. 1. (20 points) Two formulae
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 informationCrash course Verification of Finite Automata CTL model-checking
Crash course Verification of Finite Automata CTL model-checking Exercise session - 07.12.2016 Xiaoxi He 1 Reminders Big picture Objective Verify properties over DES models Formal method Absolute guarantee!
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 informationAlgorithmic verification
Algorithmic verification Ahmed Rezine IDA, Linköpings Universitet Hösttermin 2018 Outline Overview Model checking Symbolic execution Outline Overview Model checking Symbolic execution Program verification
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 informationBounded Model Checking
Vol. 58 of Advances in Computers, 2003. Academic Press (pre-print). Bounded Model Checking Armin Biere 1 Alessandro Cimatti 2 Edmund M. Clarke 3 Ofer Strichman 3 Yunshan Zhu 4 1 Institute of Computer Systems,
More informationAbstraction for Falsification
Abstraction for Falsification Thomas Ball 1, Orna Kupferman 2, and Greta Yorsh 3 1 Microsoft Research, Redmond, WA, USA. Email: tball@microsoft.com, URL: research.microsoft.com/ tball 2 Hebrew University,
More informationCS256/Spring 2008 Lecture #11 Zohar Manna. Beyond Temporal Logics
CS256/Spring 2008 Lecture #11 Zohar Manna Beyond Temporal Logics Temporal logic expresses properties of infinite sequences of states, but there are interesting properties that cannot be expressed, e.g.,
More informationLogic-Based Modeling in Systems Biology
Logic-Based Modeling in Systems Biology Alexander Bockmayr LPNMR 09, Potsdam, 16 September 2009 DFG Research Center Matheon Mathematics for key technologies Outline A.Bockmayr, FU Berlin/Matheon 2 I. Systems
More informationFormal Methods Lecture VII Symbolic Model Checking
Formal Methods Lecture VII Symbolic Model Checking Faculty of Computer Science Free University of Bozen-Bolzano artale@inf.unibz.it http://www.inf.unibz.it/ artale/ Academic Year: 2006/07 Some material
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 informationIntroduction. Pedro Cabalar. Department of Computer Science University of Corunna, SPAIN 2013/2014
Introduction Pedro Cabalar Department of Computer Science University of Corunna, SPAIN cabalar@udc.es 2013/2014 P. Cabalar ( Department Introduction of Computer Science University of Corunna, SPAIN2013/2014
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 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 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 informationThe research thesis was done under the supervision of Prof. Orna Grumberg, in the Faculty of Computer Science, the Technion - Israel Institute of Tech
Techniques for increasing Coverage of Formal Verification Research Thesis Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Computer Science Sagi Katz Submitted
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 informationFinal Exam /614 Bug Catching: Automated Program Verification Matt Fredrikson André Platzer. December 17, 2017
Final Exam 15-414/614 Bug Catching: Automated Program Verification Matt Fredrikson André Platzer December 17, 2017 Name: Andrew ID: André Platzer aplatzer Instructions This exam is closed-book with one
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 informationFormal Verification Techniques. Riccardo Sisto, Politecnico di Torino
Formal Verification Techniques Riccardo Sisto, Politecnico di Torino State exploration State Exploration and Theorem Proving Exhaustive exploration => result is certain (correctness or noncorrectness proof)
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 informationMODEL CHECKING TIMED SAFETY INSTRUMENTED SYSTEMS
TKK Reports in Information and Computer Science Espoo 2008 TKK-ICS-R3 MODEL CHECKING TIMED SAFETY INSTRUMENTED SYSTEMS Jussi Lahtinen ABTEKNILLINEN KORKEAKOULU TEKNISKA HÖGSKOLAN HELSINKI UNIVERSITY OF
More informationTHEORY OF SYSTEMS MODELING AND ANALYSIS. Henny Sipma Stanford University. Master class Washington University at St Louis November 16, 2006
THEORY OF SYSTEMS MODELING AND ANALYSIS Henny Sipma Stanford University Master class Washington University at St Louis November 16, 2006 1 1 COURSE OUTLINE 8:37-10:00 Introduction -- Computational model
More informationPrinciples. Model (System Requirements) Answer: Model Checker. Specification (System Property) Yes, if the model satisfies the specification
Model Checking Princiles Model (System Requirements) Secification (System Proerty) Model Checker Answer: Yes, if the model satisfies the secification Counterexamle, otherwise Krike Model Krike Structure
More informationChapter 5: Linear Temporal Logic
Chapter 5: Linear Temporal Logic Prof. Ali Movaghar Verification of Reactive Systems Spring 91 Outline We introduce linear temporal logic (LTL), a logical formalism that is suited for specifying LT properties.
More informationTesting with model checkers: A survey
COMPETENCE NETWORK SOFTNET AUSTRIA Testing with model checkers: A survey SNA-TR-2007-P2-04 Gordon Fraser, Franz Wotawa, Paul E. Ammann SNA TECHNICAL REPORT NOVEMBER 2007 Competence Network Softnet Austria,
More informationSymmetry Reductions. A. Prasad Sistla University Of Illinois at Chicago
Symmetry Reductions. A. Prasad Sistla University Of Illinois at Chicago Model-Checking Concurrent PGM Temporal SPEC Model Checker Yes/No Counter Example Approach Build the global state graph Algorithm
More informationBounded Model Checking with SAT/SMT. Edmund M. Clarke School of Computer Science Carnegie Mellon University 1/39
Bounded Model Checking with SAT/SMT Edmund M. Clarke School of Computer Science Carnegie Mellon University 1/39 Recap: Symbolic Model Checking with BDDs Method used by most industrial strength model checkers:
More informationLogic in Automatic Verification
Logic in Automatic Verification Javier Esparza Sofware Reliability and Security Group Institute for Formal Methods in Computer Science University of Stuttgart Many thanks to Abdelwaheb Ayari, David Basin,
More informationTemporal Formula Specifications of Asynchronous Control Module in Model Checking
Proceedings of the 6th WSEAS International Conference on Applied Computer Science, Tenerife, Canary Islands, Spain, December 16-18, 2006 214 Temporal Formula Specifications of Asynchronous Control Module
More informationSoftware Verification using Predicate Abstraction and Iterative Refinement: Part 1
using Predicate Abstraction and Iterative Refinement: Part 1 15-414 Bug Catching: Automated Program Verification and Testing Sagar Chaki November 28, 2011 Outline Overview of Model Checking Creating Models
More informationBounded Model Checking 1
Bounded Model Checking 1 ARMIN BIERE Institute of Computer Systems ETH Zurich, 8092 Zurich Switzerland biere@inf.ethz.ch ALESSANDRO CIMATTI Istituto per la Ricerca Scientifica e Technologica (IRST) via
More informationCourse Runtime Verification
Course Martin Leucker (ISP) Volker Stolz (Høgskolen i Bergen, NO) INF5140 / V17 Chapters of the Course Chapter 1 Recall in More Depth Chapter 2 Specification Languages on Words Chapter 3 LTL on Finite
More information