Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Compositional Reasoning in Model Checking

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Compositionality: The Significant Difference (COMPOS 1997)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 1536))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

The main problem in model checking that prevents it from being used for verification of large systems is the state explosion problem. This problem often arises from combining parallel processes together. Many techniques have been proposed to overcome this difficulty and, thus, increase the size of the systems that model checkers can handle. We describe several compositional model checking techniques used in practice and show a few examples demonstrating their performance.

This research is sponsored by the the Semiconductor Research Corporation (SRC) under Contract No. 97-DJ-294, the National Science Foundation (NSF) under Grant No. CCR-9505472, and the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) under Contract No. DABT63-96-C-0071. Any opinions, findings and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of SRC, NSF, DARPA, or the United States Government.

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

Access this chapter

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 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
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

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Henrik R. Andersen. Partial model checking (extended abstract). Technical Report ID-TR: 1994-148, Department of Computer Science, Technical University of Denmark, October 1994. Accepted for LICS’95.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Henrik R. Andersen, Colin Stirling, and Glynn Winskel. A compositional proof system for the modal μ-calculus. In Proceedings, Ninth Annual IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science, pages 144–153, Paris, France, 4–7 July 1994. IEEE Computer Society Press. Also as BRICS Report RS-94-34.

    Google Scholar 

  3. S. Berezin, E. Clarke, S. Jha, and W. Marrero. Model checking algorithms for the mu-calculus. Technical Report TR CMU-CS-96-180, Carnegie Mellon University, September 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  4. M. C. Browne, E. M. Clarke, and O. Grumberg. Characterizing finite kripke structures in prepositional temporal logic. Theoretical Computer Science, 59(1-2), July 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  5. R. E. Bryant. Graph-based algorithms for boolean function manipulation. IEEE Transactions on Computers, C-35(8):677–691, August 1986.

    Google Scholar 

  6. J. R. Burch, E. M. Clarke, and D. E. Long. Symbolic model checking with partitioned transition relations. In VLSI 91, Edinburgh, Scotland, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Jerry R. Burch, Edmund M. Clarke, David E. Long, Kenneth L. McMillan, and David L. Dill. Symbolic model checking for sequential circuit verification. IEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits, 13(4):401–424, April 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  8. S. Campos, E. Clarke, W. Marrero, and M. Minea. Veras: a tool for quantitative analysis of finite-state real-time systems. In Workshop on Languages, Compilers and Tools for Real-Time Systems, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  9. S. Campos, E. Clarke, W. Marrero, M. Minea, and H. Hiraishi. Computing quantitative characteristics of finite-state real-time systems. In IEEE Real-Time Systems Symposium, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  10. S. Campos, E. Clarke, and M. Minea. Verifying the performance of the PCI local bus using symbolic techniques. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Computer Design, pages 73–79, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  11. S. V. Campos. A Quantitative Approach to the Formal Verification of Real-Time System. PhD thesis, SCS, Carnegie Mellon University, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  12. E. M. Clarke, O. Grumberg, H. Hiraishi, S. Jha, D. E. Long, K. L. McMillan, and L. A. Ness. Verification of the Futurebus+ cache coherence protocol. In L. Claesen, editor, Proceedings of the Eleventh International Symposium on Computer Hardware Description Languages and their Applications. North-Holland, April 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  13. E. M. Clarke, D. E. Long, and K. L. McMillan. Compositional model checking. In Proceedings of the Fourth Annual Symposium on Logic in Computer Science, pages 353–362. IEEE Computer Society Press, June 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  14. O. Coudert, C. Berthet, and J. C. Madre. Verification of synchronous sequential machines based on symbolic execution. In J. Sifakis, editor, Proceedings of the 1989 International Workshop on Automatic Verification Methods for Finite State Systems, Grenoble, France, volume 407 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer-Verlag, June 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  15. M. Dam. Compositional proof systems for model checking infinite state processes. In Proceedings of CONCUR’95, volume 962 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 12–26. Springer-Verlag, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  16. J.F. Groote and F.W. Vaandrager. An efficient algorithm for branching bisimulation and stuttering equivalence. In M. Paterson, editor, Proceedings 17 th ICALP, Warwick, volume 443 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 626–638. Springer-Verlag, July 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Orna Grumberg and David Long. Model checking and modular verification. A CM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems, 16(3):843–871, May 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  18. T. A. Henzinger, O. Kupferman, and S. K. Rajamani. Fair simulation. In Proc. of the 7th Conference on Concurrency Theory (CONCUR’97), volume 1243 of LNCS, Warsaw, July 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  19. IEEE Computer Society. IEEE Standard for Futurebus +—Logical Protocol Specification, 1994. IEEE Standard 896.1, 1994 Edition.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Intel Corporation. PCI Local Bus Specification, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  21. B. Josko. Verifying the correctness of AADL-modules using model checking. In J. W. de Bakker, W.-P. de Roever, and G. Rozenberg, editors, Proceedings of the REX Workshop on Stepwise Refinement of Distributed Systems, Models, Formalisms, Correctness, volume 430 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 386–400. Springer-Verlag, May 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  22. O. Kupferman and M. Y. Vardi. Module checking revisited. In O. Grumberg, editor, Proc. of the 9th conference on Computer-Aided Verification (CAV’97), volume 1254 of LNCS, pages 36–47, Haifa, June 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  23. J. Misra and K. M. Chandy. Proofs of networks of processes. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, SE-7(4), July 1981.

    Google Scholar 

  24. R. Paige and R. Tarjan. Three efficient algorithms based on partition refinement. SIAM lournal on Computing, 16(6), Dec 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  25. A. Pnueli. In transition for global to modular temporal reasoning about programs. In K. R. Apt, editor, Logics and Models of Concurrent Systems, volume 13 of NATO ASI series. Series F, Computer and system sciences. Springer-Verlag, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  26. C. Stirling. Modal logics for communicating systems. Theoretical Computer Science, 49:311–348, July 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  27. H. J. Touati, H. Savoj, B. Lin, R. K. Brayton, and A. Sangiovanni-Vincentelli. Implicit state enumeration of finite state machines using bdd’s. In IEEE Int. Conf. Computer-Aided Design, pages 130–133, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Carnegie Mellon University, USA

    Sergey Berezin & Edmund M. Clarke

  2. Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Brasil

    Sérgio Campos

Authors
  1. Sergey Berezin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sérgio Campos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Edmund M. Clarke
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Informatics and Applied Mathematics, Christian Albrechts University at Kiel, Preußerstr. 1-9, D-24105, Kiel, Germany

    Willem-Paul de Roever  & Hans Langmaack  & 

  2. Department of Applied Mathematics and Computer Science, Weizmann Institute of Science, P.O. Box 26, Rehovot, 76100, Israel

    Amir Pnueli

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1998 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Berezin, S., Campos, S., Clarke, E.M. (1998). Compositional Reasoning in Model Checking. In: de Roever, WP., Langmaack, H., Pnueli, A. (eds) Compositionality: The Significant Difference. COMPOS 1997. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 1536. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-49213-5_4

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-49213-5_4

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-65493-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-49213-9

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation