A semantic framework for the abstract model checking of tccp programs

被引:11
作者
Alpuente, M
Gallardo, MD
Pimentel, E
Villanueva, A
机构
[1] Univ Politecn Valencia, DSIC, E-46022 Valencia, Spain
[2] Univ Malaga, Dept LCC, E-29071 Malaga, Spain
关键词
Tinted Concurrent Constraint programming; abstract interpretation; model checking;
D O I
10.1016/j.tcs.2005.08.009
中图分类号
TP301 [理论、方法];
学科分类号
081202 ;
摘要
The Timed Concurrent Constraint programming language (tccp) introduces time aspects into the Concurrent Constraint paradigm. This makes tccp especially appropriate for analyzing timing properties of concurrent systems by model checking. However, even if very compact state representations are obtained thanks to the use of constraints in tccp, large state spaces can still be generated, which may prevent model-checking tools from verifying tccp programs completely. Model checking tccp programs is a difficult task due to the subtleties of the underlying operational semantics, which combines constraints, concurrency, non-determinism and time. Currently, there is no practical model-checking tool that is applicable to tccp. In this work, we introduce an abstract methodology which is based on over- and under-approximating tccp models and which mitigates the state explosion problem that is common to traditional model-checking algorithms. We ascertain the conditions for the correctness of the abstract technique and show that this preliminary abstract semantics does not correctly simulate the suspension behavior, which is a key feature of tccp. Then, we present a refined abstract semantics which correctly models suspension. Finally, we complete our methodology by approximating the temporal properties that must be verified. (c) 2005 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:58 / 95
页数:38
相关论文
共 32 条
[1]  
Ball T, 2002, LECT NOTES COMPUT SC, V2280, P158
[2]  
BALL T, 2002, POPL, P1
[3]  
BRUNS G, 2001, LECT NOTES COMPUTER, V1877, P168
[4]   Counterexample-guided abstraction refinement for symbolic model checking [J].
Clarke, E ;
Grumberg, O ;
Jha, S ;
Lu, Y ;
Veith, H .
JOURNAL OF THE ACM, 2003, 50 (05) :752-794
[5]  
Clarke Edmund, 2000, Computer Aided Verification, P154, DOI [10.1007/10722167_15, DOI 10.1007/10722167_15]
[6]   MODEL CHECKING AND ABSTRACTION [J].
CLARKE, EM ;
GRUMBERG, O ;
LONG, DE .
ACM TRANSACTIONS ON PROGRAMMING LANGUAGES AND SYSTEMS, 1994, 16 (05) :1512-1542
[7]   AUTOMATIC VERIFICATION OF FINITE-STATE CONCURRENT SYSTEMS USING TEMPORAL LOGIC SPECIFICATIONS [J].
CLARKE, EM ;
EMERSON, EA ;
SISTLA, AP .
ACM TRANSACTIONS ON PROGRAMMING LANGUAGES AND SYSTEMS, 1986, 8 (02) :244-263
[8]  
Cousot P., 1977, P 4 ACM SIGACT SIGPL, DOI DOI 10.1145/512950.512973
[9]  
Cousot Patrick, 1979, POPL, P269, DOI DOI 10.1145/567752.567778
[10]   Abstract interpretation of reactive systems [J].
Dams, D ;
Gerth, R ;
Grumberg, O .
ACM TRANSACTIONS ON PROGRAMMING LANGUAGES AND SYSTEMS, 1997, 19 (02) :253-291