Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

International SPIN Workshop on Model Checking of Software

SPIN 2003: Model Checking Software pp 197–213Cite as

Promela Planning

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 2648))

Abstract

The paper presents a structured translation from a static (bounded) subset of PROMELA/SPIN to the planning description language PDDL2.1. It exploits the representation of protocols as communicating finite state machines.

First, the state-space representation is defined to handle processes, queues, and shared variables. Second, each basic statement (assignment, input, etc.) is translated into a couple of predicates.

The deadlock detection problem is reformulated as an action planning problem and SPIN is compared to two action planners Metric-FF and MIPS on several benchmarks (e.g. leader election, dining philosophers, optical telegraph).

The difference to existing approaches is the direct use of planning tools. As a byproduct this introduces refined estimates for improved error detection in directed protocol validation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. F. Bacchus and F. Kabanza. Using temporal logics to express search control knowledge for planning. Artificial Intelligence, 116:123–191, 2000.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  2. G. Behrmann, A. Fehnker, T. Hune, K. G. Larsen, P. Petterson, J. Romijn, and F. W. Vaandrager. Efficient guiding towards cost-optimality in uppaal. In Tools and Algorithms for the Construction and Analysis of Systems (TACAS), 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  3. A. Biere, A. Cimatti, E. Clarke, and Y. Zhu. Symbolic model checking without BDDs. In Tools and Algorithms for the Construction and Analysis of Systems, Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  4. A. Blum and M. L. Furst. Fast planning through planning graph analysis. In International Joint Conferences on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI), pages 1636–1642, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  5. A. Cimatti and M. Roveri. Conformant planning via model checking. In European Conference on Planning (ECP), pages 21–33, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  6. A. Cimatti, M. Roveri, and P. Traverso. Automatic OBDD-based generation of universal plans in non-deterministic domains. In National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI), pages 875–881, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  7. E. M. Clarke, O. Grumberg, and D. A. Peled. Model Checking. MIT Press, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  8. H. Dierks, G. Behrmann, and K. G. Larsen. Solving planning problems using real-time model checking (translating pddl3 into timed automata). In Artificial Intelligence Planning and Scheduling (AIPS)-Workshop on Temporal Planning, pages 30–39, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  9. S. Edelkamp. Planning with pattern databases. In European Conference on Planning (ECP), 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  10. S. Edelkamp. Taming numbers and durations in the model checking integrated planning system. Journal of Artificial Research (JAIR), 2003. Submitted, A draft is available at PUK-Workshop 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  11. S. Edelkamp and M. Helmert. The model checking integrated planning system MIPS. AI-Magazine, pages 67–71, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  12. S. Edelkamp, S. Leue, and A. Lluch-Lafuente. Directed explicit-state model checking in the validation of communication protocols. International Journal on Software Tools for Technology (STTT), 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  13. R. Fikes and N. Nilsson. Strips: A new approach to the application of theorem proving to problem solving. Artificial Intelligence, 2:189–208, 1971.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  14. M. Fox and D. Long. PDDL2.1: An extension to PDDL for expressing temporal planning domains. Technical report, University of Durham, UK, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  15. A. Gerevini and L. Schubert. Discovering state constraints in DISCOPLAN: Some new results. In National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI), pages 761–767, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  16. A. Gerevini and I. Serina. LPG: a planner based on local search for planning graphs with action costs. In Artificial Intelligence Planning and Scheduling (AIPS), pages 13–22, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  17. F. Giunchiglia and P. Traverso. Planning as model checking. In European Conference on Planning (ECP), pages 1–19, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Patrice Godefroid and Sarfraz Khurshid. Exploring very large state spaces using genetic algorithms. In Tools and Algorithms for the Construction and Analysis of Systems (TACAS), 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  19. P. E. Hart, N. J. Nilsson, and B. Raphael. A formal basis for heuristic determination of minimum path cost. IEEE Transactions on on Systems Science and Cybernetics, 4:100–107, 1968.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. J. Hoey, R. Aubin, A. Hu, and C. Boutilier. Spudd: Stochastic planning using decision diagrams. In Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence (UAI), 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  21. J. Hoffmann. Extending FF to numerical state variables. In European Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  22. J. Hoffmann and B. Nebel. Fast plan generation through heuristic search. Artificial Intelligence Research, 14:253–302, 2001.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  23. G. J. Holzmann and M. H. Smith. Software model checking: Extracting verification models from source code. In Formal Description Techniques for Distributed Systems and Communication Protocols, Protocol Specification, Testing and Verification (FORTE/PSTV), pages 481–497, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Gerard J. Holzmann. Design and Validation of Computer Protocols. Prentice Hall, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Falk Hüffner, S. Edelkamp, H. Fernau, and R. Niedermeier. Finding optimal solutions to Atomix. In German Conference on Artificial Intelligence (KI), pages 229–243, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  26. H. Kautz and B. Selman. Pushing the envelope: Planning propositional logic, and stochastic search. In National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI), pages 1194–1201, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  27. R. E. Korf. Depth-first iterative-deepening: An optimal admissible tree search. Artificial Intelligence, 27(1):97–109, 1985.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  28. J. Kvarnström, P. Doherty, and P. Haslum. Extending TALplanner with concurrency and ressources. In European Conference on Artificial Intelligence (ECAI), pages 501–505, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  29. D. Long and M. Fox. Efficient implementation of the plan graph in STAN. Artificial Intelligence Research, 10:87–115, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  30. D. McDermott. The 1998 AI Planning Competition. AI Magazine, 21(2), 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  31. J. Pearl. Heuristics. Addison-Wesley, 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  32. C. H. Yang and D. L. Dill. Validation with guided search of the state space. In Conference on Design Automation (DAC), pages 599–604, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Fachbereich Informatik, Universität Dortmund, D-44221, Dortmund

    Stefan Edelkamp

Authors
  1. Stefan Edelkamp
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Microsoft Research, One Microsoft Way, Redmond, WA, 98052, USA

    Thomas Ball  & Sriram K. Rajamani  & 

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2003 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Edelkamp, S. (2003). Promela Planning. In: Ball, T., Rajamani, S.K. (eds) Model Checking Software. SPIN 2003. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 2648. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-44829-2_13

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-44829-2_13

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-40117-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-44829-7

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation