Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems
|
|
- Cornelia Moore
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems Amit Kumar Dhar LIAFA, Univ Paris Diderot, Paris Cité Sorbonne, CNRS, France April 2, 2012 Joint work with : Stéphane Demri(LSV) and Arnaud Sangnier(LIAFA) LIAFA Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52
2 Model Checking A System Satisfies A Property Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52
3 Model Checking A System Satisfies A Property Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52
4 Model Checking A System Satisfies A Property φ Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52
5 Model Checking A System Satisfies A Property = φ Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52
6 Model Checking A System Satisfies A Property = φ Decision Procedure ψ(x 1, x 2,, x n ) in decidable theory Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52
7 Model Checking A System Satisfies A Property = φ Decision Procedure ψ(x 1, x 2,, x n ) in decidable theory Yes/No Tools & Solvers Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52
8 Table of Contents 1 Introduction Models Logic Related Works Problem 2 Path Schemas 3 PLTL[ ] over KPS,KFS Stuttering Theorem 4 PLTL[C] over CPS, CFS Characterizing runs by equations Elimination of Disjunction and Constraints NP-Algorithm for PLTL[C] over CPS Fixing the number of loops 5 Conclusion Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52
9 Table of Contents Introduction Models 1 Introduction Models Logic Related Works Problem 2 Path Schemas 3 PLTL[ ] over KPS,KFS Stuttering Theorem 4 PLTL[C] over CPS, CFS Characterizing runs by equations Elimination of Disjunction and Constraints NP-Algorithm for PLTL[C] over CPS Fixing the number of loops 5 Conclusion Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52
10 Kripke Structures (KS) Introduction Models q 7 q 9 q 8 q 6 q 10 q 4 q 3 q 5 q 1 q 2 S = (Q,, l) l : Q 2 AP. Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52
11 Counter Systems (CS) Introduction Models q 7 q 9 q 8 q 6 q 10 q 4 q 3 q 5, (2, 3) q 1 q 2 2.x x 2 20, (5, 7) S = (Q, C n,, l) Guards : Boolean combination of linear constraints of the form Σ i a i.x i b and {=,,, <, >}. Updates : u Z n are translations. Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52
12 Introduction Models Runs in Counter Systems q 0, v 0 δ0 q 1, v 1 δ1 q 2, v 2 δ2 q 3, v 3 δ3 At each position i N, v i represents the counter values. δ i = q i, guard(δ i ), update(δ i ), q i+1 v i N n c 0 = q 0, v 0 is the initial configuration. i N, v i satisfies guard(δ i ) and v i+1 = v i + update(δ i ). Main Drawback: Most of the verification problems are undecidable for counter systems. Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52
13 Introduction Flat Counter Systems (CFS) Models q 2 q 7 c 1 > 1, (2, 4) c 1 5 c 2 < 25, (3, 1) c 1 = 0, (1, 0) q 1 c 1 0, (1, 0) q 5 q 6 c 1 2, (1, 5) q 8 S = (Q, C n,, l) Guards : Boolean combination of linear constraints of the form Σ i a i.x i b and {=,,, <, >}. Updates : u Z n are translations. Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52
14 Introduction Flat Counter Systems (CFS) Models q 7 Not Flat q 9 q 8 q 6 q 10 q 4 q 3 q 5, (2, 3) q 1 q 2 2.x x 2 20, (5, 7) S = (Q, C n,, l) Guards : Boolean combination of linear constraints of the form Σ i a i.x i b and {=,,, <, >}. Updates : u Z n are translations. Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52
15 Introduction Flat Counter Systems (CFS) Models q 7 Flat q 9 q 8 q 6 q 10 q 4 q 3 q 5, (2, 3) q 1 q 2 2.x x 2 20, (5, 7) S = (Q, C n,, l) Guards : Boolean combination of linear constraints of the form Σ i a i.x i b and {=,,, <, >}. Updates : u Z n are translations. Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52
16 Introduction Flat Kripke Structures (KFS) Models q 7 q 9 q 8 q 6 q 10 q 4 q 3 q 5 q 1 q 2 S = (Q,, l) Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52
17 Table of Contents Introduction Logic 1 Introduction Models Logic Related Works Problem 2 Path Schemas 3 PLTL[ ] over KPS,KFS Stuttering Theorem 4 PLTL[C] over CPS, CFS Characterizing runs by equations Elimination of Disjunction and Constraints NP-Algorithm for PLTL[C] over CPS Fixing the number of loops 5 Conclusion Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52
18 Introduction Temporal Logic PLTL[ ] (Standard version) Logic φ ::= p φ φ φ φ φ Xφ φuφ X 1 φ φsφ where p AT. For a model σ Σ ω and Σ = 2 AP σ, i = p def def σ, i = Xφ def σ, i = φ 1 Uφ 2 def σ, i = X 1 φ def σ, i = φ 1 Sφ 2 p σ(i) σ, i + 1 = φ σ, j = φ 2 for some i j such that σ, k = φ 1 for all i k < j i > 0 and σ, i 1 = φ σ, j = φ 2 for some 0 j i such that σ, k = φ 1 for all j < k j Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52
19 Introduction Logic PLTL[C] (with arithmetical constraints) Logic φ ::= p g φ φ φ φ φ Xφ φuφ X 1 φ φsφ where g is defined as : t ::= a.x t + t g ::= t b g g g g where x C n (counters) for some n, a Z, b Z and {=,,, <, >}. The model here is defined as σ Σ ω and Σ = 2 AP N n σ, i = g def v i = g where v i (x j ) = π 2 (σ(i))(x j ) Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52
20 Example of PLTL[C] Introduction Logic q 2 q 7 c 1 > 1, (2, 4) c 1 5 c 2 < 25, (3, 1) c 1 = 0, (1, 0) q 1 c 1 0, (1, 0) q 5 q 6 c 1 2, (1, 5) q 8 φ = U(q 7 Xq 6 c 1 > 5) q 1, (0, 0) q 1, (1, 0) q 5, (2, 0) q 6, (3, 5) q 7, (5, 9) q 6, (8, 10) q 7, (10, 14)..., 0 = φ Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52
21 Table of Contents Introduction Related Works 1 Introduction Models Logic Related Works Problem 2 Path Schemas 3 PLTL[ ] over KPS,KFS Stuttering Theorem 4 PLTL[C] over CPS, CFS Characterizing runs by equations Elimination of Disjunction and Constraints NP-Algorithm for PLTL[C] over CPS Fixing the number of loops 5 Conclusion Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52
22 Introduction Related Works Related Works Flat Counter Systems are extensively studied. See e.g. [Boigelot 98, Comon and Jurski - CAV 98]. Flatness is a useful property. See e.g. [Comon and Cortier - CSL 00, Leroux and Sutre - ATVA 05] Flateness leads to decidable safety and reachability property. See e.g.[ Finkel and Leroux - FSTTCS 02, Bozga et al. - CAV 10] Local model checking of Presburger-CTL* is decidable. See [Demri et al. - JANCL 10] Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52
23 Table of Contents Introduction Problem 1 Introduction Models Logic Related Works Problem 2 Path Schemas 3 PLTL[ ] over KPS,KFS Stuttering Theorem 4 PLTL[C] over CPS, CFS Characterizing runs by equations Elimination of Disjunction and Constraints NP-Algorithm for PLTL[C] over CPS Fixing the number of loops 5 Conclusion Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52
24 Introduction Problem Model Checking: MC(L,C): Input: A system S C, a configuration c 0 and a formula φ L; Output: Does there exist a run ρ starting from c 0 in S such that ρ, 0 = φ? Problems Studied: MC(PLTL[C],CFS) is decidable by translation into Presburger Arithmetic. ([Demri et al. - JANCL 10]) MC(PLTL[ ],KFS). (MC(LTL,KFS) is NP-complete[Khutz and Finkbeiner - CONCUR 11]). Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52
25 Table of Contents Path Schemas 1 Introduction Models Logic Related Works Problem 2 Path Schemas 3 PLTL[ ] over KPS,KFS Stuttering Theorem 4 PLTL[C] over CPS, CFS Characterizing runs by equations Elimination of Disjunction and Constraints NP-Algorithm for PLTL[C] over CPS Fixing the number of loops 5 Conclusion Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52
26 P = p 1 l 1 + p 2l 2 + p 3l3 ω p 1 = (e 10 ) l 1 = (e 1, e 2, e 3, e 4 ) p 2 = (e 1, e 5, e 6 ) l 2 = (e 7, e 8, e 86 ) p 3 = (e 7, e 9 ) l 3 = (e 0 ) Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52 Path Schemas Path Schema in Flat Kripke Structures (KPS) e 0 e 9 q 7 e 8 e 7 q 9 q 8 e 86 q 6 q 10 e 10 q 4 e 3 e 6 q 3 e 5 e 4 e 2 e q 1 1 q 2 q 5
27 Path Schemas Path Schema in Flat Kripke Structures (KPS) q 3 e 8 q 4 e 3 e 4 e 2 e 1 q 2 q 8 e 86 e 7 q 7 e 0 q 10 q 1 e 10 q 2 q 5 q 6 e 1 e 5 e 6 q 7 q 9 e 7 e 9 P = p 1 l 1 + p 2l 2 + p 3l3 ω p 1 = (e 10 ) l 1 = (e 1, e 2, e 3, e 4 ) p 2 = (e 1, e 5, e 6 ) l 2 = (e 7, e 8, e 86 ) p 3 = (e 7, e 9 ) l 3 = (e 0 ) Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52
28 Path Schemas Path Schema in Flat Counter System (CPS) q 3 e 3 e 2 q 4 e 4 e 1, (2, 3) e 10 q 10 q 1 e 8 q 2 q 8 2.x x 2 20 e 86 (5, 7) q 2 q 5 q 6 e 1 e 5 e 6 q 7 e 0 e 7 q 7 q 9 e 7 e 9 P = p 1 l 1 + p 2l 2 + p 3l3 ω p 1 = (e 10 ) l 1 = (e 1, e 2, e 3, e 4 ) p 2 = (e 1, e 5, e 6 ) l 2 = (e 7, e 8, e 86 ) p 3 = (e 7, e 9 ) l 3 = (e 0 ) Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52
29 Why Path Schemas? Path Schemas Exponentially many minimal path schemas in a flat system. Every run in a flat system respects one of the minimal path schemas of the system. Simpler structure Easy to study. Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52
30 Why Path Schemas? Path Schemas Exponentially many minimal path schemas in a flat system. Any transition occurs at most twice. Every run in a flat system respects one of the minimal path schemas of the system. Simpler structure Easy to study. Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52
31 Path Schemas Why Path Schemas? Exponentially many minimal path schemas in a flat system. Any transition occurs at most twice. Every run in a flat system respects one of the minimal path schemas of the system. run belongs to the language described by the minimal path schema. Simpler structure Easy to study. Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52
32 Table of Contents PLTL[ ] over KPS,KFS 1 Introduction Models Logic Related Works Problem 2 Path Schemas 3 PLTL[ ] over KPS,KFS Stuttering Theorem 4 PLTL[C] over CPS, CFS Characterizing runs by equations Elimination of Disjunction and Constraints NP-Algorithm for PLTL[C] over CPS Fixing the number of loops 5 Conclusion Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52
33 PLTL[ ] over KPS,KFS PLTL[ ] over KPS Theorem MC(PLTL[ ], KPS) is NP-complete. Stuttering Theorem for LTL (no past time operator) proposed earlier by [Kučera and Strejček - Acta Informatica 05] Translating PLTL to LTL [Gabbay - TLS 87] Exponential blowup of temporal depth. We need to extend the Stuttering Theorem for PLTL[ ]. Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52
34 Stuttering Theorem PLTL[ ] over KPS,KFS Stuttering Theorem PLTL[ ] formula: φ = ((q 5 Xq 6 ) q 6 )Uq 7 Temporal Depth (td): q 5 q 6 q 5 q 6... q 5 q 6 q 5 q 6 q 7... = φ q 5 q 6 q 7... = φ Formula (φ) td(φ) U(q 7 Xq 6 c 1 > 5) 2 ((q 5 Xq 6 ) (q 6 Xq 5 ))Uq 7 2 q 2 U(q 3 U(Xq 4 )) 3 Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52
35 PLTL[ ] over KPS,KFS Stuttering Theorem Stuttering Theorem Theorem Given two models σ, σ such that σ = σ 1 s M σ 2, σ = σ 1 s M σ 2 (2 AT ) ω and M, M 2N + 1,N 2 then, for every PLTL[ ] formula φ with td(φ) N, we have σ, 0 = φ iff σ, 0 = φ. Proof. The proof proceeds by induction on the structure of the formula: For each temporal operator show that the satifiability does not change by changing the number of repetitions of s by 1. Easy to see that boolean combination does not need to change the number of repetitions. Hence, maximum number of repetitions that can be distinguished is dependent on td(φ). Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52
36 PLTL[ ] over KPS,KFS Stuttering Theorem PLTL[ ] over Kripke Path Schema Theorem MC(PLTL[ ], KPS) is in NP. Proof. 1 Guess the number of times each loop will be taken - at most 2.td(φ) Unfold the loops to obtain an ultimately periodic path of at most polynomial size. 3 Check for the satisfiability of the formula over the ultimately periodic path in polynomial time [Laroussinie, Markey and Schnoebelen - LICS 02]. Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52
37 PLTL[ ] over KPS PLTL[ ] over KPS,KFS Stuttering Theorem Lemma (Khutz and Finkbeiner - CONCUR 11) MC(PLTL[ ], KPS) is NP-hard. Proof. p 1 p 2 p 3 p n start φ = ψ 1 2 ψ truth ψ 1 2 = [ i (G(q i XXq i XXXG q i ))] ψ truth = φ[p i F(q i XXq i )]. Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52
38 PLTL[ ] over KPS PLTL[ ] over KPS,KFS Stuttering Theorem Lemma (Khutz and Finkbeiner - CONCUR 11) MC(PLTL[ ], KPS) is NP-hard. Proof. p 1 p 2 p 3 p n start φ = ψ 1 2 ψ truth ψ 1 2 = [ i (G(q i XXq i XXXG q i ))] ψ truth = φ[p i F(q i XXq i )]. Same proof for MC(PLTL[ ], CPS), MC(PLTL[ ], KFS),MC(PLTL[C], CFS) Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52
39 PLTL[ ] over KPS,KFS Stuttering Theorem PLTL[ ] over KFS Theorem MC(PLTL[ ], KFS) is NP-complete. Proof. 1 Guess a minimal path schema in the Kripke structure. 2 Apply the algorithm for model checking of KPS. Note: Finite number of minimal path schemas of at most polynomial length in a given Kripke structure. Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52
40 PLTL[ ] over KPS,KFS Stuttering Theorem PLTL[ ] over KPS(n) Fixing the number of the loops makes the problem easier Lemma MC(PLTL[ ], KPS(n)) is in PTime. Proof. Enumerate all possible paths that can be obtained by repeating each loop at most (2.td(φ) + 5) times, and check for the satisfiability of the formula. Number of different possible paths = (2.td(φ) + 5) n (It is polynomial for a fixed n). Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52
41 Table of Contents PLTL[C] over CPS, CFS 1 Introduction Models Logic Related Works Problem 2 Path Schemas 3 PLTL[ ] over KPS,KFS Stuttering Theorem 4 PLTL[C] over CPS, CFS Characterizing runs by equations Elimination of Disjunction and Constraints NP-Algorithm for PLTL[C] over CPS Fixing the number of loops 5 Conclusion Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52
42 PLTL[C] over CPS, CFS 3 main ingredients for proving MC(PLTL[C], CFS) in NP 1 Characterize all valid runs in a counter system (without disjunction) by System of equations. Respecting the updates, guards and non-negative counter values. 2 Elimination of disjunction in guards and arithmetical constraints in formula. 3 Stuttering theorem for PLTL. Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52
43 Table of Contents PLTL[C] over CPS, CFS Characterizing runs by equations 1 Introduction Models Logic Related Works Problem 2 Path Schemas 3 PLTL[ ] over KPS,KFS Stuttering Theorem 4 PLTL[C] over CPS, CFS Characterizing runs by equations Elimination of Disjunction and Constraints NP-Algorithm for PLTL[C] over CPS Fixing the number of loops 5 Conclusion Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52
44 PLTL[C] over CPS, CFS Characterizing runs by equations Characterizing runs by equations Relation between system of equations and path schemas Equivalence between : (n 1, n 2,..., n k 1 ) is a solution of the system of equation. There exists a run in the path schema in which loop l i is taken n i times. Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52
45 PLTL[C] over CPS, CFS Characterizing runs by equations Characterizing runs by equations Relation between system of equations and path schemas Equivalence between : (n 1, n 2,..., n k 1 ) is a solution of the system of equation. There exists a run in the path schema in which loop l i is taken n i times. Number of variables in equation = Number of loops in path schema Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52
46 PLTL[C] over CPS, CFS Characterizing runs by equations Characterizing runs by equations Relation between system of equations and path schemas Equivalence between : (n 1, n 2,..., n k 1 ) is a solution of the system of equation. There exists a run in the path schema in which loop l i is taken n i times. Number of variables in equation = Number of loops in path schema Solution of equations signifies the number of times each loop in the path schema is taken. Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52
47 PLTL[C] over CPS, CFS Characterizing runs by equations Characterizing runs by equations q 2 q 7 c 1 > 1, (2, 4) e e 5 4 c1 5 c2 < 25, (3, 1) c 1 0, (1, 0) e q 2 e 3 e 1 1 c 1 = 1, (1, 0) c 1 2, (1, 5) q 5 q 6 e 6 q 8 e 7 Consider the path schema e + 1 (e 2, e 3 ).(e 4, e 5 ) +.e 6.e ω 7 Consider the equations for the edge e 5 (for counter c 2 ): Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52
48 PLTL[C] over CPS, CFS Characterizing runs by equations Characterizing runs by equations q 7 c 1 > 1, (2, 4) e e 5 4 c1 5 c2 < 25, (3, 1) c 1 0, (1, 0) e 2 e q 1 q 3 5 q e 6 1 c 1 = 1, (1, 0) c 1 2, (1, 5) e 6 q 8 e 7 Consider the path schema e + 1 (e 2, e 3 ).(e 4, e 5 ) +.e 6.e ω 7 Consider the equations for the edge e 5 (for counter c 2 ): To ensure that it is taken at least once: 0.X < 25. Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52
49 PLTL[C] over CPS, CFS Characterizing runs by equations Characterizing runs by equations q 7 c 1 > 1, (2, 4) e e 5 4 c1 5 c2 < 25, (3, 1) c 1 0, (1, 0) e 2 e q 1 q 3 5 q e 6 1 c 1 = 1, (1, 0) c 1 2, (1, 5) e 6 q 8 e 7 Consider the path schema e + 1 (e 2, e 3 ).(e 4, e 5 ) +.e 6.e ω 7 Consider the equations for the edge e 5 (for counter c 2 ): To ensure that it is taken at least once: To ensure that it is taken X 2 times: 0.X < X (X 2 1) < 25 Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52
50 PLTL[C] over CPS, CFS Characterizing runs by equations Characterizing runs by equations Lemma Let S = Q, C n,, l be a flat counter system without disjunctions in guards, P = p 1 l 1 + p 2l p klk ω be one of its valid path schemas and c 0 be a configuration. One can compute a constraint system E such that the set of solutions of E is the number of times each loop in P can be taken, E has k 1 variables, The greatest absolute value of constants in the equations is polynomial in the maximum constant appearing in the input. Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52
51 Table of Contents PLTL[C] over CPS, CFS Elimination of Disjunction and Constraints 1 Introduction Models Logic Related Works Problem 2 Path Schemas 3 PLTL[ ] over KPS,KFS Stuttering Theorem 4 PLTL[C] over CPS, CFS Characterizing runs by equations Elimination of Disjunction and Constraints NP-Algorithm for PLTL[C] over CPS Fixing the number of loops 5 Conclusion Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52
52 PLTL[C] over CPS, CFS Elimination of Disjunction and Constraints Elimination of Disjunction and Constraints Counter Path Schema: x 3 x = 1, +2 1 ω q 0 q 1 q 2, +1, +1 PLTL[C] formula : φ = F((x 2)Uq 2 ) Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52
53 PLTL[C] over CPS, CFS Elimination of Disjunction and Constraints Elimination of Disjunction and Constraints Intervals = {[, 1), [1, 1], (1, 2), [2, 2], (2, 3), [3, 3], (3, ]}. Terms = {x}. x 3 x = 1, +2 1 ω q 0 q 1 q 2, +1, +1 x + 2 > 3, +2 1 ω q 0, [, 1) q 1, [1, 1] q 1, [3, 3] q 1, (3, ] x + 1 = 1, +1 x + 2 = 3, +2 x + 2 3, +2 x + 1 3, +1 q 2, (3, ] Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52
54 PLTL[C] over CPS, CFS Elimination of Disjunction and Constraints Elimination of Disjunction and Constraints Properties of the set of unfolded Path Schemas (Y P ): No path schema in Y P contains disjunction in guards. Every path schema in Y P is polynomial in the size of the input. Runs respecting the original path schema = Runs respecting all the path schemas in Y P. Checking whether a path schema is in Y P can be done in polynomial time. Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52
55 PLTL[C] over CPS, CFS Elimination of Disjunction and Constraints Elimination of Disjunction and Constraints Properties of the set of unfolded Path Schemas (Y P ): No path schema in Y P contains disjunction in guards. Every path schema in Y P is polynomial in the size of the input. Runs respecting the original path schema = Runs respecting all the path schemas in Y P. Checking whether a path schema is in Y P can be done in polynomial time. Y P is equivalent to P Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52
56 Table of Contents PLTL[C] over CPS, CFS NP-Algorithm for PLTL[C] over CPS 1 Introduction Models Logic Related Works Problem 2 Path Schemas 3 PLTL[ ] over KPS,KFS Stuttering Theorem 4 PLTL[C] over CPS, CFS Characterizing runs by equations Elimination of Disjunction and Constraints NP-Algorithm for PLTL[C] over CPS Fixing the number of loops 5 Conclusion Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52
57 PLTL[C] over CPS, CFS NP-Algorithm for PLTL[C] over CPS NP-Algorithm for PLTL[C] over CPS 1: guess a compatible unfolding and intervals for each term on each node and formula and construct P = p 1 l + 1 p 2l l + k 1 p kl ω k 2: guess y [1, 2td(φ) + 5] k 1 3: guess y [1, 2 p (size(s)+size(c 0)+size(φ)) ] k 1 4: check that p 1 l y[1] 1 p 2 l y[2] 2... l y[k 1] p k lk ω, 0 = symb φ k 1 Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52
58 PLTL[C] over CPS, CFS NP-Algorithm for PLTL[C] over CPS NP-Algorithm for PLTL[C] over CPS 1: guess a compatible unfolding and intervals for each term on each node and formula and construct P = p 1 l + 1 p 2l l + k 1 p kl ω k 2: guess y [1, 2td(φ) + 5] k 1 3: guess y [1, 2 p (size(s)+size(c 0)+size(φ)) ] k 1 4: check that p 1 l y[1] 1 p 2 l y[2] 2... l y[k 1] k 1 p k lk ω, 0 = symb φ 5: build the constraint system E over the variables y 1,..., y k 1 for P with initial counter values v 0. 6: for i = 1 k 1 do 7: if y[i] = 2td(φ) + 5 then 8: ψ i y i 2td(φ) + 5 9: else 10: ψ i y i = y[i] 11: end if 12: end for 13: check that y = E ψ 1 ψ k 1 Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52
59 Algorithm in NP PLTL[C] over CPS, CFS NP-Algorithm for PLTL[C] over CPS 1: guess a compatible unfolding and intervals for each term on each node and construct P = p 1 l + 1 p 2l l + k 1 p kl ω k 2: guess y [1, 2td(φ) + 5] k 1 3: guess y [1, 2 p (size(s)+size(c 0)+size(φ)) ] k 1 4: check that p 1 l y[1] 1 p 2 l y[2] 2... l y[k 1] k 1 p k lk ω = symb φ 5: build the constraint system E over the variables y 1,..., y k 1 for P with initial counter values v 0. 6: for i = 1 k 1 do 7: if y[i] = 2td(φ) + 5 then 8: ψ i y i 2td(φ) + 5 9: else 10: ψ i y i = y[i] 11: end if 12: end for 13: check that y = E ψ 1 ψ k 1 Polynomial size guesses (may be of exponential values) Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52
60 Algorithm in NP PLTL[C] over CPS, CFS NP-Algorithm for PLTL[C] over CPS 1: guess a compatible unfolding and intervals for each term on each node and construct P = p 1 l + 1 p 2l l + k 1 p kl ω k 2: guess y [1, 2td(φ) + 5] k 1 3: guess y [1, 2 p (size(s)+size(c 0)+size(φ)) ] k 1 4: check that p 1 l y[1] 1 p 2 l y[2] 2... l y[k 1] k 1 p k lk ω = symb φ 5: build the constraint system E over the variables y 1,..., y k 1 for P with initial counter values v 0. 6: for i = 1 k 1 do 7: if y[i] = 2td(φ) + 5 then 8: ψ i y i 2td(φ) + 5 9: else 10: ψ i y i = y[i] 11: end if 12: end for 13: check that y = E ψ 1 ψ k 1 Polynomial size path schema, symbolic model checking and constraint system Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52
61 Algorithm in NP PLTL[C] over CPS, CFS NP-Algorithm for PLTL[C] over CPS 1: guess a compatible unfolding and intervals for each term on each node and construct P = p 1 l + 1 p 2l l + k 1 p kl ω k 2: guess y [1, 2td(φ) + 5] k 1 3: guess y [1, 2 p (size(s)+size(c 0)+size(φ)) ] k 1 4: check that p 1 l y[1] 1 p 2 l y[2] 2... l y[k 1] k 1 p k lk ω = symb φ 5: build the constraint system E over the variables y 1,..., y k 1 for P with initial counter values v 0. 6: for i = 1 k 1 do 7: if y[i] = 2td(φ) + 5 then 8: ψ i y i 2td(φ) + 5 9: else 10: ψ i y i = y[i] 11: end if 12: end for 13: check that y = E ψ 1 ψ k 1 Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52
62 Algorithm in NP PLTL[C] over CPS, CFS NP-Algorithm for PLTL[C] over CPS 1: guess a compatible unfolding and intervals for each term on each node and construct P = p 1 l + 1 p 2l l + k 1 p kl ω k 2: guess y [1, 2td(φ) + 5] k 1 3: guess y [1, 2 p (size(s)+size(c 0)+size(φ)) ] k 1 4: check that p 1 l y[1] 1 p 2 l y[2] 2... l y[k 1] k 1 p k lk ω = symb φ 5: build the constraint system E over the variables y 1,..., y k 1 for P with initial counter values v 0. 6: for i = 1 k 1 do 7: if y[i] = 2td(φ) + 5 then 8: ψ i y i 2td(φ) + 5 9: else 10: ψ i y i = y[i] 11: end if 12: end for 13: check that y = E ψ 1 ψ k 1 Arithmetic operations on polynomial bits Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52
63 PLTL[C] over CPS, CFS Correctness of Algorithm NP-Algorithm for PLTL[C] over CPS guess a compatible unfolding and intervals for each term on each node and construct P = p 1 l 1 + p 2l l + k 1 p klk ω guess y [1, 2td(φ) + 5] k 1 guess y [1, 2 p (size(s)+size(c 0)+size(φ)) ] k 1 check that p 1 l y[1] 1 p 2 l y[2] 2... l y[k 1] k 1 p k lk ω = symb φ build the constraint system E over the variables y 1,..., y k 1 for P with initial counter values v 0. for i = 1 k 1 do if y[i] = 2td(φ) + 5 then ψ i y i 2td(φ) + 5 else ψ i y i = y[i] end if end for check that y = E ψ 1 ψ k 1 Stuttering Invariant Property Ensures the satisfiability of the formula by the path schema Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52
64 PLTL[C] over CPS, CFS Correctness of Algorithm NP-Algorithm for PLTL[C] over CPS guess a compatible unfolding and intervals for each term on each node and construct P = p 1 l 1 + p 2l l + k 1 p klk ω guess y [1, 2td(φ) + 5] k 1 guess y [1, 2 p (size(s)+size(c 0)+size(φ)) ] k 1 check that p 1 l y[1] 1 p 2 l y[2] 2... l y[k 1] k 1 p k lk ω = symb φ build the constraint system E over the variables y 1,..., y k 1 for P with initial counter values v 0. for i = 1 k 1 do if y[i] = 2td(φ) + 5 then ψ i y i 2td(φ) + 5 else ψ i y i = y[i] end if end for check that y = E ψ 1 ψ k 1 Small Solution Property [Borosh and Treybig - AMS 76] exists an exponential solution Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52
65 PLTL[C] over CPS, CFS Correctness of Algorithm NP-Algorithm for PLTL[C] over CPS guess a compatible unfolding and intervals for each term on each node and construct P = p 1 l 1 + p 2l l + k 1 p klk ω guess y [1, 2td(φ) + 5] k 1 guess y [1, 2 p (size(s)+size(c 0)+size(φ)) ] k 1 check that p 1 l y[1] 1 p 2 l y[2] 2... l y[k 1] k 1 p k lk ω = symb φ build the constraint system E over the variables y 1,..., y k 1 for P with initial counter values v 0. for i = 1 k 1 do if y[i] = 2td(φ) + 5 then ψ i y i 2td(φ) + 5 else ψ i y i = y[i] end if end for check that y = E ψ 1 ψ k 1 Combining Two Properties Adding constraints to ensure the previous satisfiability Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52
66 PLTL[C] over CPS, CFS Correctness of Algorithm NP-Algorithm for PLTL[C] over CPS guess a compatible unfolding and intervals for each term on each node and construct P = p 1 l 1 + p 2l l + k 1 p klk ω guess y [1, 2td(φ) + 5] k 1 guess y [1, 2 p (size(s)+size(c 0)+size(φ)) ] k 1 check that p 1 l y[1] 1 p 2 l y[2] 2... l y[k 1] k 1 p k lk ω = symb φ build the constraint system E over the variables y 1,..., y k 1 for P with initial counter values v 0. for i = 1 k 1 do if y[i] = 2td(φ) + 5 then ψ i y i 2td(φ) + 5 else ψ i y i = y[i] end if end for check that y = E ψ 1 ψ k 1 Checking Guesses Ensures the validity of run with respect to updates and guards Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52
67 PLTL[C] over CPS, CFS NP-Algorithm for PLTL[C] over CPS PLTL[C] over CPS and CFS Theorem MC(PLTL[C], CFS) is NP-complete. Proof. Guess a path schema in the flat counter system. Apply the algorithm for model checking of CPS. Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52
68 Table of Contents PLTL[C] over CPS, CFS Fixing the number of loops 1 Introduction Models Logic Related Works Problem 2 Path Schemas 3 PLTL[ ] over KPS,KFS Stuttering Theorem 4 PLTL[C] over CPS, CFS Characterizing runs by equations Elimination of Disjunction and Constraints NP-Algorithm for PLTL[C] over CPS Fixing the number of loops 5 Conclusion Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52
69 PLTL[C] over CPS(n) PLTL[C] over CPS, CFS Fixing the number of loops Lemma MC(PLTL[C], CPS(n)) is NP-complete for n 2. Proof. x 1 2 n, , q 0 q 1, 2 n 2 n 1 ω. 2 1 The formula ψ is defined defined from φ by replacing each occurrence of p i by F(q 1 x i 2 n 2 n i 2 n i+1 x i 2 n 1 2 n i+1 ). (p i is true iff i th bit of the counter value is 1). Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52
70 PLTL[C] over CPS, CFS PLTL[C] over CPS(n) (contd.) Fixing the number of loops p p p Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52
71 PLTL[C] over CPS, CFS PLTL[C] over CPS(n) (contd.) Fixing the number of loops p p p Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52
72 PLTL[C] over CPS, CFS PLTL[C] over CPS(n) (contd.) Fixing the number of loops p p p Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52
73 PLTL[C] over CPS, CFS Fixing the number of loops PLTL[C] over CPS(1) Lemma MC(PLTL[C], CPS(1)) is in PTime. Proof. Unfold the single loop deterministically to reflect the intervals of terms on the unique run. check if the unfolded path schema satisfies the formula. Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52
74 Table of Contents Conclusion 1 Introduction Models Logic Related Works Problem 2 Path Schemas 3 PLTL[ ] over KPS,KFS Stuttering Theorem 4 PLTL[C] over CPS, CFS Characterizing runs by equations Elimination of Disjunction and Constraints NP-Algorithm for PLTL[C] over CPS Fixing the number of loops 5 Conclusion Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52
75 Conclusion Conclusion On Going Works: Classes of Systems PLTL[ ] PLTL[C] KPS NP-complete CPS NP-complete NP-complete KPS(n) PTime CPS(n), n > 1?? NP-complete CPS(1) PTime PTime KFS NP-complete CFS NP-complete NP-complete Extending to linear mu-calculus, ETL,... Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52
76 Conclusion Thank You! Amit Kumar Dhar (LIAFA) Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems April 2, / 52
Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems
Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems Stéphane Demri 2, Amit Kumar Dhar 1, Arnaud Sangnier 1 1. LIAFA, Univ Paris Diderot, Sorbonne Paris Cité, CNRS, France 2. LSV, ENS Cachan, CNRS, INRIA, France June
More informationTaming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems
Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems Stéphane Demri a, Amit Kumar Dhar b, Arnaud Sangnier b a LSV, CNRS, France b LIAFA, Univ. Paris Diderot, Sorbonne Paris Cité, CNRS, France Abstract Reachability
More informationTaming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems
Taming Past LTL and Flat Counter Systems Stéphane Demri a, Amit Kumar Dhar b, Arnaud Sangnier b a LSV, CNRS, ENS Cachan, INRIA, France b LIAFA, Univ. Paris Diderot, Sorbonne Paris Cité, CNRS, France arxiv:1205.6584v2
More informationReversal-Bounded Counter Machines
Reversal-Bounded Counter Machines Stéphane Demri LSV, CNRS, ENS Cachan Workshop on Logics for Resource-Bounded Agents, Barcelona, August 2015 Overview Presburger Counter Machines Reversal-Bounded Counter
More informationVerifying qualitative and quantitative properties with LTL over concrete domains
Verifying qualitative and quantitative properties with LTL over concrete domains Régis Gascon Laboratoire Spécification et Vérification CNRS & ENS Cachan FRANCE gascon@lsv.ens-cachan.fr Abstract. We introduce
More informationNew Complexity Results for Some Linear Counting Problems Using Minimal Solutions to Linear Diophantine Equations
New Complexity Results for Some Linear Counting Problems Using Minimal Solutions to Linear Diophantine Equations (Extended Abstract) Gaoyan Xie, Cheng Li and Zhe Dang School of Electrical Engineering and
More informationFast Acceleration of Ultimately Periodic Relations
Fast Acceleration of Ultimately Periodic Relations Marius Bozga 1, Radu Iosif 1, Filip Konečný 1,2 1 VERIMAG / CNRS / University of Grenoble, France 2 Brno University of Technology, Czech Republic Fast
More informationLTL with Arithmetic and its Applications in Reasoning about Hierarchical Systems
This space is reserved for the EPiC Series header, do not use it LTL with Arithmetic and its Applications in Reasoning about Hierarchical Systems Rachel Faran and Orna Kupferman The Hebrew 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 informationStéphane Demri Arnaud Sangnier. When Model-Checking Freeze LTL over Counter Machines Becomes Decidable. Research Report LSV-10-05
Stéphane Demri Arnaud Sangnier When Model-Checking Freeze LTL over Counter Machines Becomes Decidable Research Report LSV-10-05 February 2010 When Model-Checking Freeze LTL over Counter Machines Becomes
More informationWeak Kripke Structures and LTL
Weak Kripke Structures and LTL Lars Kuhtz 1 and Bernd Finkbeiner 2 1 Microsoft Redmond 2 Saarland University Abstract. We revisit the complexity of the model checking problem for formulas of linear-time
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 informationThe Parikh image of languages and linear constraints
The Parikh image of languages and linear constraints Peter.Habermehl@liafa.univ-paris-diderot.fr 1 1 LIAFA, Université Paris Diderot, Sorbonne Paris Cité, CNRS CP meets CAV, Turunç June 28th, 2012 Peter
More informationModel-Checking CTL* over Flat Presburger Counter Systems
Model-Checking CTL* over Flat Presburger Counter Systems Stéphane Demri * Alain Finkel * Valentin Goranko ** Govert van Drimmelen *** * LSV, ENS Cachan, CNRS, INRIA 61 av. Pdt. Wilson, 94235 Cachan Cedex,
More informationReachability in Succinct and Parametric One-Counter Automata
Reachability in Succinct and Parametric One-Counter Automata Christoph Haase, Stephan Kreutzer, Joël Ouaknine, and James Worrell Oxford University Computing Laboratory, UK {chrh,kreutzer,joel,jbw}@comlab.ox.ac.uk
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 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 informationTemporal Logic with Past is Exponentially More Succinct
Temporal Logic with Past is Exponentially More Succinct Nicolas Markey Lab. Informatique Fondamentale d Orléans Univ. Orléans & CNRS FRE 2490 Rue Léonard de Vinci - BP 6759 45067 Orléans Cedex 2 - France
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 2. Reductions and NP. 2.1 Reductions Continued The Satisfiability Problem (SAT) SAT 3SAT. CS 573: Algorithms, Fall 2013 August 29, 2013
Chapter 2 Reductions and NP CS 573: Algorithms, Fall 2013 August 29, 2013 2.1 Reductions Continued 2.1.1 The Satisfiability Problem SAT 2.1.1.1 Propositional Formulas Definition 2.1.1. Consider a set of
More informationOn the Complexity of the Reflected Logic of Proofs
On the Complexity of the Reflected Logic of Proofs Nikolai V. Krupski Department of Math. Logic and the Theory of Algorithms, Faculty of Mechanics and Mathematics, Moscow State University, Moscow 119899,
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 informationAutomata on Infinite words and LTL Model Checking
Automata on Infinite words and LTL Model Checking Rodica Condurache Lecture 4 Lecture 4 Automata on Infinite words and LTL Model Checking 1 / 35 Labeled Transition Systems Let AP be the (finite) set of
More informationParameterized model-checking problems
Parameterized model-checking problems Stéphane Demri Laboratoire Spécification et Vérification (LSV) CNRS UMR 8643 & ENS de Cachan Parameterized model-checking problems p. 1 Plan of the talk 1. State explosion
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 informationFirst-Order Logic. 1 Syntax. Domain of Discourse. FO Vocabulary. Terms
First-Order Logic 1 Syntax Domain of Discourse The domain of discourse for first order logic is FO structures or models. A FO structure contains Relations Functions Constants (functions of arity 0) FO
More informationUCLID: Deciding Combinations of Theories via Eager Translation to SAT. SAT-based Decision Procedures
UCLID: Deciding Combinations of Theories via Eager Translation to SAT Sanjit A. Seshia SAT-based Decision Procedures Input Formula Input Formula Satisfiability-preserving Boolean Encoder Boolean Formula
More informationOn the Satisfiability of Two-Variable Logic over Data Words
On the Satisfiability of Two-Variable Logic over Data Words Claire David, Leonid Libkin, and Tony Tan School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh Abstract. Data trees and data words have been studied
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 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 informationFrom Monadic Second-Order Definable String Transformations to Transducers
From Monadic Second-Order Definable String Transformations to Transducers Rajeev Alur 1 Antoine Durand-Gasselin 2 Ashutosh Trivedi 3 1 University of Pennsylvania 2 LIAFA, Université Paris Diderot 3 Indian
More informationLecture 9: The Splitting Method for SAT
Lecture 9: The Splitting Method for SAT 1 Importance of SAT Cook-Levin Theorem: SAT is NP-complete. The reason why SAT is an important problem can be summarized as below: 1. A natural NP-Complete problem.
More informationDipartimento di Scienze dell Informazione
UNIVERSITÀ DEGLI STUDI DI MILANO Dipartimento di Scienze dell Informazione RAPPORTO INTERNO N 313-07 Combination Methods for Satisfiability and Model-Checking of Infinite-State Systems Silvio Ghilardi,
More informationOn the Expressiveness and Complexity of ATL
On the Expressiveness and Complexity of ATL François Laroussinie, Nicolas Markey, Ghassan Oreiby LSV, CNRS & ENS-Cachan Recherches en vérification automatique March 14, 2006 Overview of CTL CTL A Kripke
More informationan efficient procedure for the decision problem. We illustrate this phenomenon for the Satisfiability problem.
1 More on NP In this set of lecture notes, we examine the class NP in more detail. We give a characterization of NP which justifies the guess and verify paradigm, and study the complexity of solving search
More informationModel Checking Restricted Sets of Timed Paths
Model Checking Restricted Sets of Timed Paths Nicolas Markey a Jean-François Raskin b a Lab. Spécification et Vérification ENS Cachan & CNRS UMR8643 61, avenue Président Wilson 94235 Cachan Cedex France
More informationEfficient Model-Checking of Weighted CTL with Upper-Bound Constraints
Software Tools for Technology Transfer manuscript No. (will be inserted by the editor) Efficient Model-Checking of Weighted CTL with Upper-Bound Constraints Jonas Finnemann Jensen, Kim Guldstrand Larsen,
More information1 Computational Problems
Stanford University CS254: Computational Complexity Handout 2 Luca Trevisan March 31, 2010 Last revised 4/29/2010 In this lecture we define NP, we state the P versus NP problem, we prove that its formulation
More informationModels for Efficient Timed Verification
Models for Efficient Timed Verification François Laroussinie LSV / ENS de Cachan CNRS UMR 8643 Monterey Workshop - Composition of embedded systems Model checking System Properties Formalizing step? ϕ Model
More informationAlmost Linear Büchi Automata
Almost Linear Büchi Automata Tomáš Babiak Vojtěch Řehák Jan Strejček Faculty of Informatics Masaryk University Brno, Czech Republic {xbabiak, rehak, strejcek}@fi.muni.cz We introduce a new fragment of
More informationDownloaded from: Usage Guidelines
Artale, A. and Kontchakov, Roman and Ryzhikov, V. and Zakharyaschev, Michael (2013) The complexity of clausal fragments of LTL. In: McMillan, K. and Middeldorp, A. and Voronkov, A. (eds.) Logic for Programming,
More informationNotes for Lecture Notes 2
Stanford University CS254: Computational Complexity Notes 2 Luca Trevisan January 11, 2012 Notes for Lecture Notes 2 In this lecture we define NP, we state the P versus NP problem, we prove that its formulation
More informationA Tableau-Based Decision Procedure for Right Propositional Neighborhood Logic (RPNL )
A Tableau-Based Decision Procedure for Right Propositional Neighborhood Logic (RPNL ) Davide Bresolin Angelo Montanari Dipartimento di Matematica e Informatica Università degli Studi di Udine {bresolin,
More informationarxiv: v1 [cs.lo] 21 Apr 2016
Computation Tree Logic for Synchronization Properties arxiv:1604.06384v1 [cs.lo] 21 Apr 2016 Krishnendu Chatterjee Laurent Doyen IST Austria CNRS & LSV, ENS Cachan Abstract We present a logic that extends
More informationTemporal Logic with Forgettable Past
Temporal Logic with Forgettable Past François Laroussinie 1, Nicolas Markey 1,2, Philippe Schnoebelen 1 1 Laboratoire Spécification et Vérification, ENS de Cachan & CNRS UMR 8643, 61, avenue de Président
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 informationPOLYNOMIAL SPACE QSAT. Games. Polynomial space cont d
T-79.5103 / Autumn 2008 Polynomial Space 1 T-79.5103 / Autumn 2008 Polynomial Space 3 POLYNOMIAL SPACE Polynomial space cont d Polynomial space-bounded computation has a variety of alternative characterizations
More informationLanguages, logics and automata
Languages, logics and automata Anca Muscholl LaBRI, Bordeaux, France EWM summer school, Leiden 2011 1 / 89 Before all that.. Sonia Kowalewskaya Emmy Noether Julia Robinson All this attention has been gratifying
More informationCSE200: Computability and complexity Space Complexity
CSE200: Computability and complexity Space Complexity Shachar Lovett January 29, 2018 1 Space complexity We would like to discuss languages that may be determined in sub-linear space. Lets first recall
More informationAccelerated Data-Flow Analysis
Accelerated Data-Flow Analysis Jérôme Leroux, Grégoire Sutre To cite this version: Jérôme Leroux, Grégoire Sutre. Accelerated Data-Flow Analysis. Springer Berlin. Static Analysis, 2007, Kongens Lyngby,
More information1 First-order logic. 1 Syntax of first-order logic. 2 Semantics of first-order logic. 3 First-order logic queries. 2 First-order query evaluation
Knowledge Bases and Databases Part 1: First-Order Queries Diego Calvanese Faculty of Computer Science Master of Science in Computer Science A.Y. 2007/2008 Overview of Part 1: First-order queries 1 First-order
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 informationCounter Automata and Classical Logics for Data Words
Counter Automata and Classical Logics for Data Words Amal Dev Manuel amal@imsc.res.in Institute of Mathematical Sciences, Taramani, Chennai, India. January 31, 2012 Data Words Definition (Data Words) A
More informationModel Checking of Safety Properties
Model Checking of Safety Properties Orna Kupferman Hebrew University Moshe Y. Vardi Rice University October 15, 2010 Abstract Of special interest in formal verification are safety properties, which assert
More informationCombination Methods for Satisfiability and Model-Checking of Infinite-State Systems
Combination Methods for Satisfiability and Model-Checking of Infinite-State Systems Silvio Ghilardi 1, Enrica Nicolini 2, Silvio Ranise 2, and Daniele Zucchelli 1,2 1 Dipartimento di Informatica, Università
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 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 informationAlternating nonzero automata
Alternating nonzero automata Application to the satisfiability of CTL [,, P >0, P =1 ] Hugo Gimbert, joint work with Paulin Fournier LaBRI, Université de Bordeaux ANR Stoch-MC 06/07/2017 Control and verification
More informationShamir s Theorem. Johannes Mittmann. Technische Universität München (TUM)
IP = PSPACE Shamir s Theorem Johannes Mittmann Technische Universität München (TUM) 4 th Joint Advanced Student School (JASS) St. Petersburg, April 2 12, 2006 Course 1: Proofs and Computers Johannes Mittmann
More informationPart 1: Propositional Logic
Part 1: Propositional Logic Literature (also for first-order logic) Schöning: Logik für Informatiker, Spektrum Fitting: First-Order Logic and Automated Theorem Proving, Springer 1 Last time 1.1 Syntax
More informationReversal-Bounded Counter Machines Revisited
Reversal-Bounded Counter Machines Revisited Alain Finkel 1 and Arnaud Sangnier 1,2 1 LSV, ENS Cachan, CNRS & 2 EDF R&D 61 av. du pdt Wilson 94230 Cachan. France {finkel,sangnier}@lsv.ens-cachan.fr Abstract.
More informationThe Impact of Craig s Interpolation Theorem. in Computer Science
The Impact of Craig s Interpolation Theorem in Computer Science Cesare Tinelli tinelli@cs.uiowa.edu The University of Iowa Berkeley, May 2007 p.1/28 The Role of Logic in Computer Science Mathematical logic
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 informationTemporal Logic and Fair Discrete Systems
Temporal Logic and Fair Discrete Systems Nir Piterman and Amir Pnueli Abstract Temporal logic was used by philosophers to reason about the way the world changes over time. Its modern use in specification
More informationModel Checking for Modal Intuitionistic Dependence Logic
1/71 Model Checking for Modal Intuitionistic Dependence Logic Fan Yang Department of Mathematics and Statistics University of Helsinki Logical Approaches to Barriers in Complexity II Cambridge, 26-30 March,
More informationComplexity. Complexity Theory Lecture 3. Decidability and Complexity. Complexity Classes
Complexity Theory 1 Complexity Theory 2 Complexity Theory Lecture 3 Complexity For any function f : IN IN, we say that a language L is in TIME(f(n)) if there is a machine M = (Q, Σ, s, δ), such that: L
More informationNotes on Space-Bounded Complexity
U.C. Berkeley CS172: Automata, Computability and Complexity Handout 6 Professor Luca Trevisan 4/13/2004 Notes on Space-Bounded Complexity These are notes for CS278, Computational Complexity, scribed by
More informationCS 173 Lecture 2: Propositional Logic
CS 173 Lecture 2: Propositional Logic José Meseguer University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign 1 Propositional Formulas A proposition is a statement that is either true, T or false, F. A proposition usually
More informationTutorial 1: Modern SMT Solvers and Verification
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Tutorial 1: Modern SMT Solvers and Verification Sayan Mitra Electrical & Computer Engineering Coordinated Science Laboratory University of Illinois at Urbana
More informationEmmanuelle Encrenaz Alain Finkel. Automatic verification of counter systems with ranking function. Research Report LSV-07-25
Emmanuelle Encrenaz Alain Finkel Automatic verification of counter systems with ranking function Research Report LSV-07-25 July 2007 or with entcsmacro.sty for your meeting. Both can be found at the ENTCS
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 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 informationBBM402-Lecture 11: The Class NP
BBM402-Lecture 11: The Class NP Lecturer: Lale Özkahya Resources for the presentation: http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/electrical-engineering-andcomputer-science/6-045j-automata-computability-andcomplexity-spring-2011/syllabus/
More informationNotes for Lecture 3... x 4
Stanford University CS254: Computational Complexity Notes 3 Luca Trevisan January 14, 2014 Notes for Lecture 3 In this lecture we introduce the computational model of boolean circuits and prove that polynomial
More informationProbabilistic verification and approximation schemes
Probabilistic verification and approximation schemes Richard Lassaigne Equipe de Logique mathématique, CNRS-Université Paris 7 Joint work with Sylvain Peyronnet (LRDE/EPITA & Equipe de Logique) Plan 1
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 informationImpartial Anticipation in Runtime-Verification
Impartial Anticipation in Runtime-Verification Wei Dong 1, Martin Leucker 2, and Christian Schallhart 2 1 School of Computer, National University of Defense Technology, P.R.China 2 Institut für Informatik,
More informationComputation Tree Logic for Synchronization Properties
Computation Tree Logic for Synchronization Properties Krishnendu Chatterjee 1 and Laurent Doyen 2 1 IST Austria 2 LSV, ENS Cachan & CNRS, France Abstract We present a logic that extends CTL (Computation
More informationModal Logics with Presburger Constraints
LSV, ENS de Cachan, CNRS, INRIA Saclay LABRI March 5th, 2009 Joint work with Denis Lugiez (LIF, Marseille) Overview Introduction Presburger constraints Regularity constraints Motivations Definition Simplifications
More informationLecture 7: The Satisfiability Problem
Lecture 7: The Satisfiability Problem 1 Satisfiability 1.1 Classification of Formulas Remember the 2 classifications of problems we have discussed in the past: Satisfiable and Valid. The Classification
More informationThe Affine Hull of a Binary Automaton is Computable in Polynomial Time
INFINITY 2003 Preliminary Version The Affine Hull of a Binary Automaton is Computable in Polynomial Time Jérôme Leroux 1 Laboratoire Spécification et Vérification, CNRS UMR 8643 & ENS de Cachan, 61 av.
More informationDecidability of Sub-theories of Polynomials over a Finite Field
Decidability of Sub-theories of Polynomials over a Finite Field Alla Sirokofskich Hausdorff Research Institute for Mathematics Poppelsdorfer Allee 45, D-53115, Bonn, Germany Department of Mathematics University
More informationForcing-based cut-elimination for Gentzen-style intuitionistic sequent calculus
Forcing-based cut-elimination for Gentzen-style intuitionistic sequent calculus Hugo Herbelin 1 and Gyesik Lee 2 1 INRIA & PPS, Paris Université 7 Paris, France Hugo.Herbelin@inria.fr 2 ROSAEC center,
More informationThe TLA + proof system
The TLA + proof system Stephan Merz Kaustuv Chaudhuri, Damien Doligez, Leslie Lamport INRIA Nancy & INRIA-MSR Joint Centre, France Amir Pnueli Memorial Symposium New York University, May 8, 2010 Stephan
More informationValentin Goranko Stockholm University. ESSLLI 2018 August 6-10, of 33
ESSLLI 2018 course Logics for Epistemic and Strategic Reasoning in Multi-Agent Systems Lecture 4: Logics for temporal strategic reasoning with complete information Valentin Goranko Stockholm University
More informationSAT, NP, NP-Completeness
CS 473: Algorithms, Spring 2018 SAT, NP, NP-Completeness Lecture 22 April 13, 2018 Most slides are courtesy Prof. Chekuri Ruta (UIUC) CS473 1 Spring 2018 1 / 57 Part I Reductions Continued Ruta (UIUC)
More informationSynthesizing from Components: Building from Blocks
Synthesizing from Components: Building from Blocks Ashish Tiwari SRI International 333 Ravenswood Ave Menlo Park, CA 94025 Joint work with Sumit Gulwani (MSR), Vijay Anand Korthikanti (UIUC), Susmit Jha
More informationPractical Run-Time Norm Enforcement with Bounded Lookahead
Practical Run-Time Norm Enforcement with Bounded Lookahead Natasha Alechina University of Nottingham Nottingham, UK nza@cs.nott.ac.uk Nils Bulling Delft University of Technology Delft, The Netherlands
More informationA Logic-based Framework for Reasoning about Composite Data Structures
A Logic-based Framework or Reasoning about Composite Data Structures Ahmed Bouajjani, Cezara Drăgoi, Constantin Enea, and Mihaela Sighireanu LIAFA, CNRS & University Paris 7, France 175, rue du Chevaleret,
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 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 informationUC Berkeley CS 170: Efficient Algorithms and Intractable Problems Handout 22 Lecturer: David Wagner April 24, Notes 22 for CS 170
UC Berkeley CS 170: Efficient Algorithms and Intractable Problems Handout 22 Lecturer: David Wagner April 24, 2003 Notes 22 for CS 170 1 NP-completeness of Circuit-SAT We will prove that the circuit satisfiability
More informationNotes on Space-Bounded Complexity
U.C. Berkeley CS172: Automata, Computability and Complexity Handout 7 Professor Luca Trevisan April 14, 2015 Notes on Space-Bounded Complexity These are notes for CS278, Computational Complexity, scribed
More informationNP-Completeness Part II
NP-Completeness Part II Please evaluate this course on Axess. Your comments really do make a difference. Announcements Problem Set 8 due tomorrow at 12:50PM sharp with one late day. Problem Set 9 out,
More informationDeductive Verification
Deductive Verification Mooly Sagiv Slides from Zvonimir Rakamaric First-Order Logic A formal notation for mathematics, with expressions involving Propositional symbols Predicates Functions and constant
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 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 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 informationSerge Haddad Mathieu Sassolas. Verification on Interrupt Timed Automata. Research Report LSV-09-16
Béatrice Bérard Serge Haddad Mathieu Sassolas Verification on Interrupt Timed Automata Research Report LSV-09-16 July 2009 Verification on Interrupt Timed Automata Béatrice Bérard 1, Serge Haddad 2, Mathieu
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 information