Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Monterey Workshop

Monterey Workshop 2012: Large-Scale Complex IT Systems. Development, Operation and Management pp 283–302Cite as

A Counterexample-Based Incremental and Modular Verification Approach

  • Conference paper

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNPSE,volume 7539))

Abstract

Model checking is a powerful and widespread technique for the verification of finite state concurrent systems. However, the main hindrance for wider application of this technique is the well-known state explosion problem. In [16], we proposed an incremental and compositional verification approach where the system model is partitioned according to the actions occurring in the property to be verified and where the environment of a component is taken into account. But the verification at each increment might be costly. On the other hand, Symbolic Observation Graphs provide a compact analysis means for LTL∖X properties. We have shown a purely modular construction of these in [15]. Therefore, in this paper, we combine both techniques to benefit from their pros. Also, we propose a novel approach for incrementally checking the validity of the counter-example.

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. Ball, T., Rajamani, S.K.: Automatically Validating Temporal Safety Properties of Interfaces. In: Dwyer, M.B. (ed.) SPIN 2001. LNCS, vol. 2057, pp. 103–122. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  2. Bryant, R.E.: Symbolic boolean manipulation with ordered binary-decision diagrams. ACM Computing Surveys 24(3), 293–318 (1992)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. 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 

  4. Clarke, E.M., Long, D.E., McMillan, K.L.: Compositional model checking. In: LICS 1989, pp. 353–362 (1989)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Cobleigh, J.M., Avrunin, G.S., Clarke, L.A.: Breaking up is hard to do: An evaluation of automated assume-guarantee reasoning. ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. 17(2), 7:1–7:52 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Das, S., Dill, D.L.: Successive approximation of abstract transition relations. In: Proceedings of the 16th Annual IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science, LICS 2001, p. 51. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC (2001)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  7. Duret-Lutz, A., Klai, K., Poitrenaud, D., Thierry-Mieg, Y.: Self-Loop Aggregation Product — A New Hybrid Approach to On-the-Fly LTL Model Checking. In: Bultan, T., Hsiung, P.-A. (eds.) ATVA 2011. LNCS, vol. 6996, pp. 336–350. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  8. Goltz, U., Kuiper, R., Penczek, W.: Propositional Temporal Logics and Equivalences. In: Cleaveland, W.R. (ed.) CONCUR 1992. LNCS, vol. 630, pp. 222–236. Springer, Heidelberg (1992)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  9. Haddad, S., Ilié, J.-M., Klai, K.: Design and Evaluation of a Symbolic and Abstraction-Based Model Checker. In: Wang, F. (ed.) ATVA 2004. LNCS, vol. 3299, pp. 196–210. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  10. Henzinger, T.A., Jhala, R., Majumdar, R., Sutre, G.: Lazy abstraction. SIGPLAN Not. 37(1), 58–70 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Hoare, C.A.R.: Communicating sequential process. Communication of the ACM 21(8), 666–677 (1978)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. Kaivola, R., Valmari, A.: The Weakest Compositional Semantic Equivalence Preserving Nexttime-less Linear Temporal Logic. In: Cleaveland, W.R. (ed.) CONCUR 1992. LNCS, vol. 630, pp. 207–221. Springer, Heidelberg (1992)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  13. Klai, K., Haddad, S., Ilié, J.-M.: Modular Verification of Petri Nets Properties: A Structure-Based Approach. In: Wang, F. (ed.) FORTE 2005. LNCS, vol. 3731, pp. 189–203. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  14. Klai, K., Ochi, H.: Modular verification of inter-enterprise business processes. In: eKNOW, pp. 155–161 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Klai, K., Petrucci, L.: Modular construction of the symbolic observation graph. In: Billington, J., Duan, Z., Koutny, M. (eds.) ACSD, pp. 88–97. IEEE (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Klai, K., Petrucci, L., Reniers, M.: An Incremental and Modular Technique for Checking LTL∖X Properties of Petri Nets. In: Derrick, J., Vain, J. (eds.) FORTE 2007. LNCS, vol. 4574, pp. 280–295. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  17. Klai, K., Poitrenaud, D.: MC-SOG: An LTL Model Checker Based on Symbolic Observation Graphs. In: van Hee, K.M., Valk, R. (eds.) PETRI NETS 2008. LNCS, vol. 5062, pp. 288–306. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  18. Lakos, C., Petrucci, L.: Modular analysis of systems composed of semiautonomous subsystems. In: ACSD, pp. 185–194. IEEE Computer Society Press (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Lehmann, A., Lohmann, N., Wolf, K.: Stubborn Sets for Simple Linear Time Properties. In: Haddad, S., Pomello, L. (eds.) PETRI NETS 2012. LNCS, vol. 7347, pp. 228–247. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  20. Manna, Z., Pnueli, A.: The temporal logic of reactive and concurrent systems. Springer-Verlag New York, Inc., New York (1992)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  21. Peled, D., Valmari, A., Kokkarinen, I.: Relaxed visibility enhances partial order reduction. Formal Methods in System Design 19(3), 275–289 (2001)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  22. Pnueli, A.: In transition from global to modular temporal reasoning about programs. In: Logics and Models of Concurrent Systems, pp. 123–144. Springer-Verlag New York, Inc. (1985)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Puhakka, A., Valmari, A.: Weakest-Congruence Results for Livelock-Preserving Equivalences. In: Baeten, J.C.M., Mauw, S. (eds.) CONCUR 1999. LNCS, vol. 1664, pp. 510–524. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  24. Saïdi, H.: Model Checking Guided Abstraction and Analysis. In: Palsberg, J. (ed.) SAS 2000. LNCS, vol. 1824, pp. 377–396. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  25. Valmari, A.: On-the-fly Verification with Stubborn Sets. In: Courcoubetis, C. (ed.) CAV 1993. LNCS, vol. 697, pp. 397–408. Springer, Heidelberg (1993)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  26. Valmari, A.: Compositionality in State Space Verification Methods. In: Billington, J., Reisig, W. (eds.) ICATPN 1996. LNCS, vol. 1091, pp. 29–56. Springer, Heidelberg (1996)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. LIPN, CNRS UMR 7030, Université Paris 13, Sorbonne Paris Cité, 99 Avenue Jean-Baptiste Clément, 93430, Villetaneuse, France

    Étienne André, Kais Klai, Hanen Ochi & Laure Petrucci

Authors
  1. Étienne André
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kais Klai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Hanen Ochi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Laure Petrucci
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computer Science, University of York, Deramore Lane, YO10 5GH, Heslington, York, UK

    Radu Calinescu

  2. School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University, 15213, Pittsburgh, PA, USA

    David Garlan

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2012 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

André, É., Klai, K., Ochi, H., Petrucci, L. (2012). A Counterexample-Based Incremental and Modular Verification Approach. In: Calinescu, R., Garlan, D. (eds) Large-Scale Complex IT Systems. Development, Operation and Management. Monterey Workshop 2012. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 7539. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-34059-8_15

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-34059-8_15

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-34058-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-34059-8

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation