## Journal of Applied Mathematics

• J. Appl. Math.
• Volume 2013, Special Issue (2013), Article ID 462532, 12 pages.

### Bounded Model Checking of ETL Cooperating with Finite and Looping Automata Connectives

#### Abstract

As a complementary technique of the BDD-based approach, bounded model checking (BMC) has been successfully applied to LTL symbolic model checking. However, the expressiveness of LTL is rather limited, and some important properties cannot be captured by such logic. In this paper, we present a semantic BMC encoding approach to deal with the mixture of ${\text{ETL}}_{f}$ and ${\text{ETL}}_{l}$. Since such kind of temporal logic involves both finite and looping automata as connectives, all regular properties can be succinctly specified with it. The presented algorithm is integrated into the model checker ENuSMV, and the approach is evaluated via conducting a series of imperial experiments.

#### Article information

Source
J. Appl. Math., Volume 2013, Special Issue (2013), Article ID 462532, 12 pages.

Dates
First available in Project Euclid: 9 May 2014

https://projecteuclid.org/euclid.jam/1399645325

Digital Object Identifier
doi:10.1155/2013/462532

Mathematical Reviews number (MathSciNet)
MR3074337

Zentralblatt MATH identifier
1311.68090

#### Citation

Wang, Rui; Liu, Wanwei; Li, Tun; Mao, Xiaoguang; Wang, Ji. Bounded Model Checking of ETL Cooperating with Finite and Looping Automata Connectives. J. Appl. Math. 2013, Special Issue (2013), Article ID 462532, 12 pages. doi:10.1155/2013/462532. https://projecteuclid.org/euclid.jam/1399645325

#### References

• R. E. Bryant, “Graph-based algorithms for Boolean function manipulation,” IEEE Transactions on Computers C, vol. 35, no. 8, pp. 677–691, 1986.
• K. L. McMillan, Symbolic model checking, an approach to the state explosion problem [Ph.D. thesis], Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pa, USA; Kluwer Academic, Boston, Mass, USA, 1993.
• A. Biere, A. Cimatti, E. M. Clarke, and Y. Zhu, “Symbolic model checking without BDDs,” in Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Tools and Algorithms for the Construction and Analysis of Systems (TACAS '99), vol. 1579 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 193–207, Springe, Berlin, Germany, 1999.
• P. Wolper, “Temporal logic can be more expressive,” Information and Control, vol. 56, no. 1-2, pp. 72–99, 1983.
• A. Pnueli, “Linear and branching structures in the semantics and logics of reactive systems,” in International Colloquium on Automata, Language and Programming, W. Brauer, Ed., vol. 194 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 15–32, Springer, Berlin, Germany, 1985.
• O. Lichtenstein, A. Pnueli, and L. Zuck, “The glory of the past,” in Proceedings of the Workshop on Logics of Programs, vol. 193 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 97–107, Springer, Brooklyn, NY, USA, 1985.
• Accellera, “Accellera property languages reference manual,” June 2004, http://www.eda.org/vfv/docs/PSL-v1.1.pdf.
• B. Banieqbal and H. Barringer, “Temporal logic with fixed points,” in Temporal Logic in Specification, vol. 398 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 62–74, Springer, Berlin, Germany, 1987.
• A. P. Sistla, M. Y. Vardi, and P. Wolper, “The complementation problem for Büchi automata with applications to temporal logic,” Theoretical Computer Science, vol. 49, no. 2-3, pp. 217–237, 1987.
• M. Leucker and C. Sanchez, “Regular linear temporal logic,” in Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Theoretical Aspects of Computing, vol. 4711 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 291–305, Springer, Berlin, Germany, 2007.
• R. Armoni, L. Fix, A. Flaisher et al., “The ForSpec temporal logic: a new temporal property-specification language,” in Proceedings of the International Conference on Tools and Algorithms for Construction and Analysis of Systems (TACAS '02), vol. 2280 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 296–311, Springer, Berlin, Germany, 2002.
• I. Beer, S. Ben-David, C. Eisner, D. Fisman, A. Gringauze, and Y. Rodeh, “The temporal logic sugar,” in Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Computer Aided Verification, G. Berry, H. Comon, and A. Frinkel, Eds., vol. 2102 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 363–367, Springer, London, UK, 2001.
• M. Y. Vardi and P. Wolper, “Reasoning about infinite computations,” Information and Computation, vol. 115, no. 1, pp. 1–37, 1994.
• J. R. Büchi, “On a decision method in restricted second order arithmetic,” in Proceedings of the International Congresses in Logic, Methodology and Philosophy of Science 1960, pp. 1–12, Stanford University Press, Palo Alto, Calif, USA, 1962.
• W. Liu, J. Wang, and Z. Wang, “Symbolic model checking of ETL,” Journal of Software, vol. 20, no. 8, pp. 2015–2025, 2009.
• W. Liu, J. Wang, H. Chen, X. Ma, and Z. Wang, “Symbolic model checking APSL,” Frontiers of Computer Science in China, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 130–141, 2009.
• M. Jehle, J. Johannsen, M. Lange, and N. Rachinsky, “Bounded model checking for all regular properties,” Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science, vol. 144, no. 1, pp. 3–18, 2006.
• A. Pnueli and A. Zaks, “PSL model checking and run-time verification via testers,” Formal Methods, Springer, Berlin, Germany, vol. 4085, pp. 573–586, 2006.
• A. Cimatti, M. Roveri, S. Semprini, and S. Tonetta, “From PSL to NBA: a modular symbolic encoding,” in Formal Methods in Computer Aided Design (FMCAD '06), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 125–133, Springer, 2006.
• E. M. Clarke, O. Grumberg, and K. Hamaguchi, “Another look at LTL model checking,” in Computer Aided Verification, 6th International Conference (CAV '94), vol. 818 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 415–427, Springer, Berlin, Germany, 1994.
• A. Biere, K. Heljanko, T. Junttila, T. Latvala, and V. Schuppan, “Linear encodings of bounded LTL model checking,” Logical Methods in Computer Science, vol. 2, no. 5, article 5, 2006.
• E. Clarke, D. Kroening, J. Ouaknine, and O. Strichman, “Completeness and complexity of bounded model checking,” in Verification, Model Checking, and Abstract Interpretation (VMCAI '04), vol. 2937 of Lecutre Notes in Computer Science, pp. 85–96, Springer, Berlin, Germany, 2004.
• T. Latvala, A. Biere, K. Heljanko, and T. Junttila, “Simple bounded LTL model checking,” in Formal Methods in Computer-Aided Design (FMCAD '04), A. Hu and A. Martin, Eds., vol. 3312 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 186–200, Springer, Berlin, Germany, 2004.
• T. Latvala, A. Biere, K. Heljanko, and T. Junttila, “Simple is better: efficient bounded model checking for past LTL,” in Verification, Model Checking, and Abstract Interpretation (VMCAI '05), vol. 3385 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 380–395, Springer, Berlin, Germany, 2005.
• R. Cavada, A. Cimatti, C. A. Jochim et al., “NuSMV 2. 5 user manual,” April 2010, http://nusmv.fbk.eu/NuSMV/userman/ v25/nusmv.pdf.
• K. Heljanko, T. Junttila, and T. Latvala, “Incremental and complete bounded model checking for full PLTL,” in Proceedings of the 17th International Conference of Computer Aided Verification (CAV '05), K. Etessami and S. K. Rajamani, Eds., vol. 3576 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 98–111, Springer, Berlin, Germany, 2005.
• Q. Yan, “Lower bounds for complementation of $\omega$-automata via the full automata technique,” Journal of Logical Methods in Computer Science, vol. 4, no. 1, article 5, 2008.
• O. Kupferman and M. Y. Vardi, “Weak alternating automata are not that weak,” ACM Transactions on Computational Logic, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 408–429, 2001.
• E. Friedgut, O. Kupferman, and M. Y. Vardi, “Büchi complementation made tighter,” in Automated Technology for Verification and Analysis (ATVA '06), vol. 3299 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 64–78, Springer, Berlin, Germany, 2004.
• S. Schewe, “Büchi complementation made tight,” in STACS 2009: 26th International Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Computer Science, vol. 3, pp. 661–672, IBFI, 2009.