Abstract
We study the decidability of general verification problems for ASMs. This corresponds to the question whether all computations of an ASM satisfy a property (usually expressed in some temporal logic). Because of undecidability in the general case, one has to identify classes of ASMs and classes of properties in order to receive positive decidability results. One idea for this could be to put simple restrictions on the ASMs as forbidding certain advanced constructs. But it turns out that this does not help much. Additionally, the restrictions in those cases are very strong. Consequently, one has to look for others. Such restrictions may result from techniques which are intended to be used in the proofs of decidability. One proof technique is the reduction to a decidable rea-soning problem in logic. In [8] and [10], this has been applied to receive some positive decidability results.
In this paper, we identify further classes of ASMs and classes of properties for which the general verification problem is decidable. Each proof is a reduction to the satisfiability problem of a fragment of linear temporal first-order logic which has respectively been proved to be decidable in [6] or [7].
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
H. Andréka, J. van Benthem, and I. Németi. Modal Languages and Bounded Fragments of Predicate Logic. Technical Report ILLC Research Report ML-96-03, ILLC, 1996. 347
D. Beauquier and A. Slissenko. A First Order Logic for Specification of Timed Algorithms: Basic Properties and a Decidable Class. Annals of Pure and Applied Logic, 113(1–3):13–52, 2002. 346
E. Grädel. On the restraining power of guards. Journal of Symbolic Logic, 64:1719–1742, 1999. 347
E. Grädel. Guarded fixed point logic and the monadic theory of trees. Theoretical Computer Science, 288:129–152, 2002. 347
Y. Gurevich. May 1997 Draft of the ASM Guide. Technical Report CSE-TR-336-97, EECS Dept, University of Michigan, 1997. 343
I. Hodkinson, F. Wolter, and M. Zakharyaschev. Decidable fragments of first-order temporal logics. Annals of Pure and Applied Logic, 106:85–134, 2000. 341, 342, 345, 348, 351
I. Hodkinson. Monodic packed fragment with equality is decidable. Preprint, 2001. 341, 342, 348, 351, 354
M. Spielmann. Automatic Verification of Abstract State Machines. In Proceedings of 11th International Conference on Computer-Aided Verification (CAV’ 99), volume 1633 of LNCS, pages 431–442. Springer-Verlag, 1999. 341, 342, 344, 352
M. Spielmann. Model Checking Abstract State Machines and Beyond. In International Workshop on Abstract State Machines ASM 2000, LNCS, pages 323–340. Springer-Verlag, 2000.
M. Spielmann. Verification of Relational Transducers for Electronic Commerce. In 19th ACM Symposium on Principles of Database Systems PODS 2000, Dallas, pages 92–93. ACM Press, 2000. 341, 342, 344, 345, 351, 352, 354
J. van Benthem. Dynamic Bits and Pieces. Technical Report LP-97-01, ILLC, University of Amsterdam, 1997. 347
F. Wolter and M. Zakharyaschev. Axiomatizing the monodic fragment of first-order temporal logic, 2000. Submitted. 351
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2003 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Nowack, A. (2003). Deciding the Verification Problem for Abstract State Machines. In: Börger, E., Gargantini, A., Riccobene, E. (eds) Abstract State Machines 2003. ASM 2003. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 2589. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-36498-6_20
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-36498-6_20
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-00624-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-36498-6
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive