Skip to main content

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNPSE,volume 4767))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

Abstraction and slicing are both techniques for reducing the size of the state space to be inspected during verification. In this paper, we present a new model checking procedure for infinite-state concurrent systems that interleaves automatic abstraction refinement, which splits states according to new predicates obtained by Craig interpolation, with slicing, which removes irrelevant states and transitions from the abstraction. The effects of abstraction and slicing complement each other. As the refinement progresses, the increasing accuracy of the abstract model allows for a more precise slice; the resulting smaller representation gives room for additional predicates in the abstraction. The procedure terminates when an error path in the abstraction can be concretized, which proves that the system is erroneous, or when the slice becomes empty, which proves that the system is correct.

This work was partly supported by the German Research Council (DFG) as part of the Transregional Collaborative Research Center “Automatic Verification and Analysis of Complex Systems” (SFB/TR 14 AVACS, www.avacs.org).

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

Access this chapter

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

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Graf, S., Saidi, H.: Construction of abstract state graphs with PVS. In: Grumberg, O. (ed.) CAV 1997. LNCS, vol. 1254, pp. 72–83. Springer, Heidelberg (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Colón, M.A., Uribe, T.E.: Generating finite-state abstractions of reactive systems using decision procedures. In: Vardi, M.Y. (ed.) CAV 1998. LNCS, vol. 1427, pp. 293–304. Springer, Heidelberg (1998)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  3. Ball, T., Rajamani, S.K.: Automatically validating temporal safety properties of interfaces. In: Proc. SPIN 2001, pp. 103–122. Springer, New York (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Clarke, E.M., Grumberg, O., Jha, S., Lu, Y., Veith, H.: Counterexample-guided abstraction refinement. In: Emerson, E.A., Sistla, A.P. (eds.) CAV 2000. LNCS, vol. 1855, pp. 154–169. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  5. Das, S., Dill, D.L.: Counter-example based predicate discovery in predicate abstraction. In: Aagaard, M.D., O’Leary, J.W. (eds.) FMCAD 2002. LNCS, vol. 2517, Springer, Heidelberg (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Henzinger, T., Jhala, R., Majumdar, R., Sutre, G.: Lazy abstraction. In: Proc. POPL 2002, pp. 58–70. ACM Press, New York (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  7. McMillan, K.L.: Lazy abstraction with interpolants. In: Ball, T., Jones, R.B. (eds.) CAV 2006. LNCS, vol. 4144, pp. 123–136. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  8. Sipma, H.B., Uribe, T.E., Manna, Z.: Deductive model checking. Formal Methods in System Design 15(1), 49–74 (1999) (Preliminary version appeared). In: Proc. 8th Intl. Conference on Computer Aided Verification. LNCS, vol. 1102, pp. 208–219. Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Weiser, M.: Program slicing. In: Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Software Engineering, pp. 439–449. IEEE Press, Los Alamitos (1981)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Ganesh, V., Saidi, N.S.H.: Slicing SAL. Technical report, SRI International (1999), http://theory.stanford.edu/

  11. Dwyer, M.B., Hatcliff, J., Hoosier, M., Ranganath, V., Robby, W.T.: Evaluating the effectiveness of slicing for model reduction of concurrent object-oriented programs. In: Hermanns, H., Palsberg, J. (eds.) TACAS 2006 and ETAPS 2006. LNCS, vol. 3920, pp. 73–89. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  12. Millett, L., Teitelbaum, T.: Issues in slicing PROMELA and its applications to model checking, protocol understanding, and simulation. Software Tools for Technology Transfer 2(4), 343–349 (2000)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. Bozga, M., Fernandez, J.C., Ghirvu, L., Graf, S., Krimm, J.P., Mounier, L.: IF: An Intermediate Representation and Validation Environment for Timed Asynchronous Systems. In: Wing, J.M., Woodcock, J.C.P., Davies, J. (eds.) FM 1999. LNCS, vol. 1708, pp. 307–327. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  14. Jhala, R., Majumdar, R.: Path slicing. In: Proc. PLDI 2005, pp. 38–47. ACM Press, New York (2005)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  15. Canfora, G., Cimitile, A., Lucia, A.D.: Conditioned program slicing. Information and Software Technology Special Issue on Program Slicing 40, 595–607 (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Fox, C., Danicic, S., Harman, M., Hierons, R.M.: Backward Conditioning: A New Program Specialisation Technique and Its Application to Program Comprehension. In: IWPC, pp. 89–97. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Vasudevan, S., Emerson, E.A., Abraham, J.A.: Efficient Model Checking of Hardware Using Conditioned Slicing. ENTCS 128(6), 279–294 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Hong, H., Lee, I., Sokolsky, O.: Abstract slicing: A new approach to program slicing based on abstract interpretation and model checking. In: SCAM, pp. 25–34. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  19. McMillan, K.L.: Applications of Craig interpolants in model checking. In: Halbwachs, N., Zuck, L.D. (eds.) TACAS 2005. LNCS, vol. 3440, pp. 1–12. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Henzinger, T.A., Jhala, R., Majumdar, R., McMillan, K.L.: Abstractions from proofs. In: Proc. POPL 2004, pp. 232–244. ACM Press, New York (2004)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  21. Rybalchenko, A.: CLP-prover (2006), http://mtc.epfl.ch/~rybalche/clp-prover/

  22. Podelski, A., Rybalchenko, A.: ARMC: the logical choice for software model checking with abstraction refinement. In: Hanus, M. (ed.) PADL 2007. LNCS, vol. 4354, Springer, Heidelberg (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Henzinger, T.A., Jhala, R., Majumdar, R., Sutre, G.: Software Verification with BLAST. In: Ball, T., Rajamani, S.K. (eds.) SPIN 2003. LNCS, vol. 2648, pp. 235–239. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Lamport, L.: A new solution of Dijkstra’s concurrent programming problem. Communications of the ACM 17(8), 435–455 (1974)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  25. Manna, Z., Pnueli, A.: Clocked transition systems. Technical Report STAN-CS-TR-96-1566, Computer Science Department, Stanford University (1996)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Farhad Arbab Marjan Sirjani

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2007 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Brückner, I., Dräger, K., Finkbeiner, B., Wehrheim, H. (2007). Slicing Abstractions. In: Arbab, F., Sirjani, M. (eds) International Symposium on Fundamentals of Software Engineering. FSEN 2007. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 4767. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-75698-9_2

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-75698-9_2

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-75697-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-75698-9

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics