Results 1  10
of
598
Compositional Model Checking
, 1999
"... We describe a method for reducing the complexity of temporal logic model checking in systems composed of many parallel processes. The goal is to check properties of the components of a system and then deduce global properties from these local properties. The main difficulty with this type of approac ..."
Abstract

Cited by 3218 (68 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
We describe a method for reducing the complexity of temporal logic model checking in systems composed of many parallel processes. The goal is to check properties of the components of a system and then deduce global properties from these local properties. The main difficulty with this type of approach is that local properties are often not preserved at the global level. We present a general framework for using additional interface processes to model the environment for a component. These interface processes are typically much simpler than the full environment of the component. By composing a component with its interface processes and then checking properties of this composition, we can guarantee that these properties will be preserved at the global level. We give two example compositional systems based on the logic CTL*.
Symbolic Boolean manipulation with ordered binarydecision diagrams
 ACM COMPUTING SURVEYS
, 1992
"... Ordered BinaryDecision Diagrams (OBDDS) represent Boolean functions as directed acyclic graphs. They form a canonical representation, making testing of functional properties such as satmfiability and equivalence straightforward. A number of operations on Boolean functions can be implemented as grap ..."
Abstract

Cited by 1022 (13 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Ordered BinaryDecision Diagrams (OBDDS) represent Boolean functions as directed acyclic graphs. They form a canonical representation, making testing of functional properties such as satmfiability and equivalence straightforward. A number of operations on Boolean functions can be implemented as graph algorithms on OBDD
Symbolic Model Checking without BDDs
, 1999
"... Symbolic Model Checking [3, 14] has proven to be a powerful technique for the verification of reactive systems. BDDs [2] have traditionally been used as a symbolic representation of the system. In this paper we show how boolean decision procedures, like Stalmarck's Method [16] or the Davis ..."
Abstract

Cited by 910 (74 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
Symbolic Model Checking [3, 14] has proven to be a powerful technique for the verification of reactive systems. BDDs [2] have traditionally been used as a symbolic representation of the system. In this paper we show how boolean decision procedures, like Stalmarck's Method [16] or the Davis & Putnam Procedure [7], can replace BDDs. This new technique avoids the space blow up of BDDs, generates counterexamples much faster, and sometimes speeds up the verification. In addition, it produces counterexamples of minimal length. We introduce a bounded model checking procedure for LTL which reduces model checking to propositional satisfiability. We show that bounded LTL model checking can be done without a tableau construction. We have implemented a model checker BMC, based on bounded model checking, and preliminary results are presented.
Reachability Analysis of Pushdown Automata: Application to ModelChecking
, 1997
"... We apply the symbolic analysis principle to pushdown systems. We represent (possibly infinite) sets of configurations of such systems by means of finitestate automata. In order to reason in a uniform way about analysis problems involving both existential and universal path quantification (like mode ..."
Abstract

Cited by 385 (39 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
We apply the symbolic analysis principle to pushdown systems. We represent (possibly infinite) sets of configurations of such systems by means of finitestate automata. In order to reason in a uniform way about analysis problems involving both existential and universal path quantification (like modelchecking for branchingtime logics), we consider the more general class of alternating pushdown systems and use alternating finitestate automata as a representation structure for their sets of configurations. We give a simple and natural procedure to compute sets of predecessors for this representation structure. We apply this procedure and the automatatheoretic approach to modelchecking to define new modelchecking algorithms for pushdown systems and both linear and branchingtime properties. From these results we derive upper bounds for several modelchecking problems, and we also provide matching lower bounds, using reductions based on some techniques introduced by Walukiewicz.
Symbolic Model Checking Using SAT Procedures instead of BDDs
 DAC 99
, 1999
"... In this paper, we study the application of propositional decision procedures in hardware verification. In particular, we apply bounded model checking, as introduced in [1], to equivalence and invariant checking. We present several optimizations that reduce the size of generated propositional formula ..."
Abstract

Cited by 329 (27 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
In this paper, we study the application of propositional decision procedures in hardware verification. In particular, we apply bounded model checking, as introduced in [1], to equivalence and invariant checking. We present several optimizations that reduce the size of generated propositional formulas. In many instances, our SATbased approach can significantly outperform BDDbased approaches. We observe that SATbased techniques are particularly efficient in detecting errors in both combinational and sequential designs.
Symbolic model checking for sequential circuit verification
 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON COMPUTERAIDED DESIGN OF INTEGRATED CIRCUITS AND SYSTEMS
, 1994
"... The temporal logic model checking algorithm of Clarke, Emerson, and Sistla [17] is modified to represent state graphs using binary decision diagrams (BDD’s) [7] and partitioned trunsirion relations [lo], 1111. Because this representation captures some of the regularity in the state space of circuit ..."
Abstract

Cited by 270 (12 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
The temporal logic model checking algorithm of Clarke, Emerson, and Sistla [17] is modified to represent state graphs using binary decision diagrams (BDD’s) [7] and partitioned trunsirion relations [lo], 1111. Because this representation captures some of the regularity in the state space of circuits with data path logic, we are able to verify circuits with an extremely large number of states. We demonstrate this new technique on a synchronous pipelined design with approximately 5 x 10^120 states. Our model checking algorithm handles full CTL with fairness constraints. Consequently, we are able to express a number of important liveness and fairness properties, which would otherwise not be expressible in CTL. We give empirical results on the performance of the algorithm applied to both synchronous and asynchronous circuits with data path logic.
Bebop: A Symbolic Model Checker for Boolean Programs
, 2000
"... We present the design, implementation and empirical evaluation of Bebop  a symbolic model checker for boolean programs. Bebop represents control flow explicitly, and sets of states implicitly using BDDs. By harnessing the inherent modularity in procedural abstraction and exploiting the locality of ..."
Abstract

Cited by 263 (24 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
We present the design, implementation and empirical evaluation of Bebop  a symbolic model checker for boolean programs. Bebop represents control flow explicitly, and sets of states implicitly using BDDs. By harnessing the inherent modularity in procedural abstraction and exploiting the locality of variable scoping, Bebop is able to model check boolean programs with several thousand lines of code, hundreds of procedures, and several thousand variables in a few minutes.
Bounded Model Checking Using Satisfiability Solving
 Formal Methods in System Design
, 2001
"... The phrase model checking refers to algorithms for exploring the state space of a transition system to determine if it obeys a specification of its intended behavior. These algorithms can perform exhaustive verification in a highly automatic manner, and, thus, have attracted much interest in indus ..."
Abstract

Cited by 192 (3 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
The phrase model checking refers to algorithms for exploring the state space of a transition system to determine if it obeys a specification of its intended behavior. These algorithms can perform exhaustive verification in a highly automatic manner, and, thus, have attracted much interest in industry. Model checking programs are now being commercially marketed. However, model checking has been held back by the state explosion problem, which is the problem that the number of states in a system grows exponentially in the number of system components. Much research has been devoted to ameliorating this problem.
Managing conflicts in goaldriven requirements engineering
 IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering
, 1998
"... Abstract A wide range of inconsistencies can arise during requirements engineering as goals and requirements are elicited from multiple stakeholders. Resolving such inconsistencies sooner or later in the process is a necessary condition for successful development of the software implementing those ..."
Abstract

Cited by 177 (25 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
Abstract A wide range of inconsistencies can arise during requirements engineering as goals and requirements are elicited from multiple stakeholders. Resolving such inconsistencies sooner or later in the process is a necessary condition for successful development of the software implementing those requirements. The paper first reviews the main types of inconsistency that can arise during requirements elaboration, defining them in an integrated framework and exploring their interrelationships. It then concentrates on the specific case of conflicting formulations of goals and requirements among different stakeholder viewpoints or within a single viewpoint. A frequent, weaker form of conflict called divergence is introduced and studied in depth. Formal techniques and heuristics are proposed for detecting conflicts and divergences from specifications of goals / requirements and of domain properties. Various techniques are then discussed for resolving conflicts and divergences systematically by introduction of new goals or by transformation of specifications of goals/objects towards conflictfree versions. Numerous examples are given throughout the paper to illustrate the practical relevance of the concepts and techniques presented. The latter are discussed in the framework of the KAOS methodology for goaldriven requirements engineering.