Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

International Conference on Concurrency Theory

CONCUR 1996: CONCUR '96: Concurrency Theory pp 546–562Cite as

Verifying abstractions of timed systems

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 1119))

Abstract

Given two descriptions of a real-time system at different levels of abstraction, we consider the problem of proving that the refined representation is a correct implementation of the abstract one. To avoid the complexity of building a representation for the refined system in its entirety, we develop a compositional framework for the implementation check to be carried out in a module-by-module manner using assume-guarantee style proof rules. On the algorithmic side, we show that the problem of checking the existence of timed simulation relations, a sufficient condition for correct implementation, is decidable. We study state homomorphisms as a way of specifying a correspondence between two modules. We present an algorithm for checking if a given mapping is a homomorphism preserving timed behaviors. We have implemented this check in the verifier Cospan, and applied our method to the compositional verification of an asynchronous queue circuit.

Supported by SRC under contract DC-324-026.

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

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. R. Alur and D.L. Dill. A theory of timed automata. Theoretical Computer Science, 126:183–235, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  2. R. Alur and T.A. Henzinger. Reactive modules. In Proceedings of the 11th IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  3. R. Alur and R.P. Kurshan. Timing analysis in COSPAN. In Hybrid Systems III, LNCS 1066, pages 220–231, Springer-Verlag, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  4. M. Abadi and L. Lamport. An old-fashioned recipe for real time. In Real-Time: Theory in Practice, REX Workshop, LNCS 600, pages 1–27. Springer-Verlag, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  5. M. Abadi and L. Lamport. Composing specifications. ACM TOPLAS, 15(1):73–132, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  6. C. Daws, A. Olivero, and S. Yovine. Verifying ET-LOTOS programs with KRONOS. In Formal Description Techniques VII, Proceedings of FORTE'94, pages 227–242, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  7. O. Grümberg and D.E. Long. Model checking and modular verification. ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems, 16(3):843–871, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  8. R. Gawlick, R. Segala, J. Sogaard-Andersen, and N. Lynch. Liveness in timed and untimed systems. In Automata, Languages, and Programming, Proceedings of the 21st ICALP, LNCS 820, pages 166–177, Springer-Verlag 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  9. M.R. Henzinger, T.A. Henzinger, and P.W. Kopke. Computing simulations on finite and infinite graphs. In Proceedings of the 36th IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, pages 453–462, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  10. P. Kanellakis and S.A. Smolka. CCS expressions, finite state processes, and three problems of equivalence. Information and Computation, 86(1):43–68, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  11. R.P. Kurshan. Computer-aided Verification of Coordinating Processes: the automata-theoretic approach. Princeton University Press, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  12. N.A. Lynch and H. Attiya. Using mappings to prove timing properties. Distributed Computing, 6:121–139, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  13. K. Larsen, P. Pettersson, and W. Yi. Compositional and symbolic model-checking of real-time systems. In Proceedings of the 16th IEEE Real-Time Systems Symposium, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  14. N.A. Lynch and M. Tuttle. Hierarchical correctness proofs for distributed algorithms. In Proceedings of the Seventh ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing, pages 137–151, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  15. T. Rokicki. Representing and modeling digital circuits. PhD thesis, Stanford University, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  16. A.U. Shankar. A simple assertional proof system for real-time systems. In Proceedings of the 13th IEEE Real-Time Systems Symposium, pages 167–176, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  17. K. čerÃns. Decidability of bisimulation equivalence for parallel timer processes. In Proceedings of the Fourth Workshop on Computer-Aided Verification, LNCS 663, pages 302–315, Springer-Verlag, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Sciences, University of California at Berkeley, USA

    Serdar TaŞiran & Robert K. Brayton

  2. Computing Sciences Research Center, Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill, NJ

    Rajeev Alur & Robert P. Kurshan

Authors
  1. Serdar TaŞiran
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Rajeev Alur
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Robert P. Kurshan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Robert K. Brayton
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Ugo Montanari Vladimiro Sassone

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1996 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

TaŞiran, S., Alur, R., Kurshan, R.P., Brayton, R.K. (1996). Verifying abstractions of timed systems. In: Montanari, U., Sassone, V. (eds) CONCUR '96: Concurrency Theory. CONCUR 1996. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 1119. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-61604-7_75

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-61604-7_75

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-61604-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-70625-0

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation