Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Approximate verification of concurrent systems using token structures and invariants

  • General
  • TACAS 2017
  • Published:
International Journal on Software Tools for Technology Transfer Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Distributed systems often rely on token structures to avoid undesired states and behave correctly. While conservative token structures ensure that a fixed number of tokens exist at all times, existential structures guarantee that tokens cannot be completely eliminated. In this paper, we show how a SAT/SMT checker can be used to automatically detect such token structures in concurrent systems and how to derive the natural invariants they preserve. We use these invariants to improve the precision of a deadlock-checking framework that is based on local analysis. Moreover, we conducted some practical experiments to demonstrate that this new framework is as efficient as similar incomplete techniques for deadlock-freedom analysis while handling a different class of systems.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Setting the polarity of SAT variables, so that the solver first decides to assign variables to false, can substantially speed this minimisation process.

  2. We would need to replace \((\bigvee _{\begin{array}{c} i \in \{1 \ldots n\} \\ \wedge {\mathcal {A}}(p_i) \end{array}} t_{i,{\hat{s}}_i})\) by \((\sum _{\begin{array}{c} i \in \{1 \ldots n\} \\ \wedge {\mathcal {A}}(p_i) \end{array}} t_{i,{\hat{s}}_i} > 0)\) in updating \({\mathcal {F}}\) in Minimise.

References

  1. Agerwala, T., Choed-Amphai, Y.C.: A synthesis rule for concurrent systems. In: Design Automation, 1978. 15th Conference on, pp. 305–311. IEEE (1978)

  2. Andrews, G.R., Schneider, F.B.: Concepts and notations for concurrent programming. ACM Comput. Surv. 15(1), 3–43 (1983)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Antonino, P.: Verifying concurrent systems by approximations. DPhil thesis, University of Oxford (2018). https://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:f75c782c-a168-49b3-bfed-e2715f027157

  4. Antonino, P., Gibson-Robinson, T., Roscoe, A.: Efficient deadlock-freedom checking using local analysis and SAT solving. In: IFM, no. 9681 in LNCS, pp. 345–360. Springer (2016)

  5. Antonino, P., Gibson-Robinson, T., Roscoe, A.: Tighter reachability criteria for deadlock freedom analysis. In: FM, no. 9995 in LNCS. Springer (2016)

  6. Antonino, P., Gibson-Robinson, T., Roscoe, A.: Experiment package (2018). www.cs.ox.ac.uk/people/pedro.antonino/thepkg.zip

  7. Antonino, P., Gibson-Robinson, T., Roscoe, A.W.: The automatic detection of token structures and invariants using SAT checking. In: TACAS, no. 10206 in LNCS, pp. 249–265. Springer (2017)

  8. Antonino, P., Gibson-Robinson, T., Roscoe, A.W.: Checking static properties using conservative SAT approximations for reachability. LNCS (2017)

  9. Antonino, P., Gibson-Robinson, T., Roscoe, A.W.: Efficient verification of concurrent systems using local-analysis-based approximations and SAT solving. Formal Asp. Comput. 31(3), 375–409 (2019)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  10. Antonino, P., Gibson-Robinson, T., Rosco, A..W.: Efficient verification of concurrent systems using synchronisation analysis and SAT/SMT solving. ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. 28(3), 18:1-18:43 (2019)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Antonino, P., Oliveira, M.M., Sampaio, A., Kristensen, K., Bryans, J.: Leadership election: an industrial SoS application of compositional deadlock verification. NFM, LNCS 8430, 31–45 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Antonino, P., Sampaio, A., Woodcock, J.: A refinement based strategy for local deadlock analysis of networks of CSP processes. FM, LNCS 8442, 62–77 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-06410-9_5

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  13. Apt, K.R., Francez, N., De Roever, W.P.: A proof system for communicating sequential processes. ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst. (TOPLAS) 2(3), 359–385 (1980)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Attie, P.C., Bensalem, S., Bozga, M., Jaber, M., Sifakis, J., Zaraket, F.A.: An abstract framework for deadlock prevention in BIP. In: FORTE, no. 7892 in LNCS, pp. 161–177. Springer (2013)

  15. Attie, P.C., Bensalem, S., Bozga, M., Jaber, M., Sifakis, J., Zaraket, F.A.: Global and local deadlock freedom in BIP. ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. 26(3), 9:1-9:48 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1145/3152910

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Attie, P.C., Chockler, H.: Efficiently verifiable conditions for deadlock-freedom of large concurrent programs. In: VMCAI, pp. 465–481. Springer (2005)

  17. Audemard, G., Simon, L.: Predicting Learnt Clauses Quality in Modern SAT Solvers. IJCAI’09, pp. 399–404. San Francisco, CA, USA (2009)

  18. Baier, C., Katoen, J.P.: Principles of Model Checking (Representation and Mind Series). The MIT Press, United States (2008)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  19. Batcher, K.E.: Sorting networks and their applications. In: Proceedings of the April 30–May 2, 1968, Spring Joint Computer Conference, AFIPS ’68 (Spring), pp. 307–314. ACM, New York, NY, USA (1968). 10.1145/1468075.1468121

  20. Bensalem, S., Bozga, M., Legay, A., Nguyen, T., Sifakis, J., Yan, R.: Component-based verification using incremental design and invariants. Softw. Syst. Model. 15(2), 427–451 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-014-0410-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Bensalem, S., Griesmayer, A., Legay, A., Nguyen, T.H., Sifakis, J., Yan, R.: D-finder 2: Towards efficient correctness of incremental design. In: NFM, pp. 453–458 (2011)

  22. Bensalem, S., Lakhnech, Y.: Automatic generation of invariants. Form. Methods Syst. Des. 15(1), 75–92 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008744030390

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Biere, A., Cimatti, A., Clarke, E., Zhu, Y.: Symbolic model checking without bdds. Tools and Algorithms for the Construction and Analysis of Systems pp. 193–207 (1999)

  24. Brookes, S.D., Roscoe, A.W.: Deadlock analysis in networks of communicating processes. Distrib. Comput. 4, 209–230 (1991)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  25. Burch, J.R., Clarke, E.M., McMillan, K.L., Dill, D.L., Hwang, L.J.: Symbolic model checking: 1020 states and beyond. Inform. comput. 98(2), 142–170 (1992)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  26. Chaki, S., Clarke, E., Ouaknine, J., Sharygina, N., Sinha, N.: Concurrent software verification with states, events, and deadlocks. Form. Asp. Comput. 17(4), 461–483 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Clarke, E., Grumberg, O., Jha, S., Lu, Y., Veith, H.: Counterexample-guided abstraction refinement. In: Computer aided verification, pp. 154–169. Springer (2000)

  28. Dijkstra, E.W.: The structure of the“the”-multiprogramming system. Commun. ACM 11(5), 341–346 (1968)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Eén, N., Sörensson, N.: Translating pseudo-boolean constraints into SAT. JSAT 2(1–4), 1–26 (2006)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  30. Filho, M.S.C., Oliveira, M.V.M., Sampaio, A., Cavalcanti, A.: Local livelock analysis of component-based models. In: ICFEM, pp. 279–295 (2016)

  31. Gibson-Robinson, T., Armstrong, P., Boulgakov, A., Roscoe, A.: FDR3 – A Modern Refinement Checker for CSP. TACAS, LNCS 8413, 187–201 (2014)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  32. Gibson-Robinson, T., Hansen, H., Roscoe, A., Wang, X.: Practical partial order reduction for CSP. NFM, LNCS 9058, 188–203 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  33. Godefroid, P., Wolper, P.: Using partial orders for the efficient verification of deadlock freedom and safety properties. FMSD 2(2), 149–164 (1993)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  34. Gruner, S., Steyn, T.J.: Deadlock-freeness of hexagonal systolic arrays. Inf. Process. Lett. 110(14–15), 539–543 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ipl.2010.04.021

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  35. Hoare, C.A.R.: Communicating Sequential Processes. Prentice-Hall, United States (1985)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  36. Lambertz, C., Majster-Cederbaum, M.: Analyzing Component-Based Systems on the Basis of Architectural Constraints. In: FSEN, pp. 64–79. Springer (2011)

  37. Lamport, L.: Proving the correctness of multiprocess programs. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 2, 125–143 (1977)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  38. Martin, J., Jassim, S.: An efficient technique for deadlock analysis of large scale process networks. In: FME ’97, pp. 418–441 (1997)

  39. Martin, J.M.R.: The design and construction of deadlock-free concurrent systems. Ph.D. thesis, University of Buckingham (1996)

  40. de Moura, L.M., Bjørner, N.: Z3: An efficient smt solver. In: TACAS, pp. 337–340 (2008)

  41. Murata, T.: Petri nets: Properties, analysis and applications. Proceedings of the IEEE 77(4), 541–580 (1989). https://doi.org/10.1109/5.24143

  42. Oliveira, M.V.M., Antonino, P., Ramos, R., Sampaio, A., Mota, A., Roscoe, A.W.: Rigorous development of component-based systems using component metadata and patterns. Form. Asp. Comput. (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00165-016-0375-1

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  43. Otoni, R., Cavalcanti, A., Sampaio, A.: Local analysis of determinism for CSP. In: Formal Methods: Foundations and Applications - 20th Brazilian Symposium, SBMF 2017, Recife, Brazil, November 29 - December 1, 2017, Proceedings, pp. 107–124 (2017)

  44. Ouaknine, J., Palikareva, H., Roscoe, A.W., Worrell, J.: A static analysis framework for livelock freedom in CSP. LMCS 9(3) (2013)

  45. Palikareva, H., Ouaknine, J., Roscoe, A.: SAT-solving in CSP trace refinement. Sci. Comput. Program. 77(10), 1178–1197 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Peled, D.: All from one, one for all: on model checking using representatives. In: Computer Aided Verification, pp. 409–423. Springer (1993)

  47. Peterson, J.L.: Petri nets. ACM Comput. Surv. 9(3), 223–252 (1977)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Plotkin, G.: A structural approach to operational semantics. Tech. rep., DAIMI FN-19, Computer Science Dept, Aarhus University (1981)

  49. Ramos, R.T.: Systematic development of trustworthy component-based systems. Ph.D. thesis, Universidade Federal de Pernambuco (2011)

  50. Roscoe, A.: Understanding Concurrent Systems. Springer, Berlin (2010)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  51. Roscoe, A.W.: The theory and practice of concurrency. Prentice Hall, United States (1998)

  52. Roscoe, A.W., Dathi, N.: The pursuit of deadlock freedom. Inf. Comput. 75(3), 289–327 (1987)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  53. Roscoe, A.W., Gardiner, P.H.B., Goldsmith, M., Hulance, J.R., Jackson, D.M., Scattergood, J.B.: Hierarchical compression for model-checking CSP or how to check \(10^{{20}}\) dining philosophers for deadlock. In: TACAS, pp. 133–152 (1995)

  54. Valmari, A.: A stubborn attack on state explosion. Form. Methods Syst. Des. 1(4), 297–322 (1992)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Yeh, W.J., Young, M.: Compositional reachability analysis using process algebra. In: Proceedings of the symposium on Testing, analysis, and verification, pp. 49–59. ACM (1991)

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. The Blockhouse Technology Ltd, Oxford, UK

    Pedro Antonino

  2. Cocotec Ltd, Guildford, UK

    Thomas Gibson-Robinson

  3. Department of Computer Science, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK

    A. W. Roscoe

Authors
  1. Pedro Antonino
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Thomas Gibson-Robinson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. A. W. Roscoe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Pedro Antonino.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

The first and second authors were affiliated to the Department of Computer Science at the University of Oxford when this work was conducted.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Antonino, P., Gibson-Robinson, T. & Roscoe, A.W. Approximate verification of concurrent systems using token structures and invariants. Int J Softw Tools Technol Transfer 24, 613–633 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10009-022-00650-6

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10009-022-00650-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation