Content deleted Content added
m →Tools: HTTP to HTTPS for SourceForge |
|||
(21 intermediate revisions by 17 users not shown) | |||
Line 1:
In [[formal verification]],
finite state [[model checking]] needs to find a [[Büchi automaton]] (BA) equivalent to a given [[linear temporal logic]] (LTL) formula, i.e., such that the LTL formula and the BA recognize the same [[ω-language]]. There are algorithms that translate an LTL formula to a BA.<ref name=VW94>M.Y. Vardi and P. Wolper, Reasoning about infinite computations, [[Information and Computation]], 115(1994), 1–37.</ref><ref name=KMMP93>Y. Kesten, Z. Manna, H. McGuire, [[Amir Pnueli|A. Pnueli]], A decision algorithm for full propositional temporal logic, CAV’93, Elounda, Greece, LNCS 697, Springer–Verlag, 97-109.</ref><ref name=GPVW93>R. Gerth, D. Peled, M.Y. Vardi and P. Wolper, "Simple On-The-Fly Automatic Verification of Linear Temporal Logic," Proc. IFIP/WG6.1 Symp. Protocol Specification, Testing, and Verification (PSTV95), pp. 3-18, Warsaw, Poland, Chapman & Hall, June 1995.
</ref><ref name=GOCAV01>▼
</ref>▼
▲<ref name=GOCAV01>
P. Gastin and D. Oddoux, Fast LTL to Büchi automata translation, Thirteenth Conference on Computer Aided Verification (CAV ′01), number 2102 in LNCS, Springer-Verlag (2001), pp. 53–65.
</ref> This transformation is normally done in two steps. The first step produces a [[generalized Büchi automaton]] (GBA) from a LTL formula. The second step translates this GBA into a BA, which involves a relatively [[Büchi automaton#Transforming from other models of description to non-deterministic B.C3.BCchi automata|easy construction]]. Since LTL is strictly less expressive than BA, the reverse construction is not always possible.
The algorithms for transforming LTL to GBA differ in their construction strategies but they all have a common underlying principle, i.e., each state in the constructed automaton represents a set of LTL formulas that are ''expected'' to be satisfied by the remaining input word after occurrence of the state during a run.
==Transformation from LTL to GBA==
Here, two algorithms are presented for the construction. The first one provides a declarative and easy
For each LTL formula f' without ¬ as top symbol, let ''neg''(f') = ¬f'
For a special case f'='''true''', let ''neg''('''true''') = '''false'''.
Line 29 ⟶ 15:
Before describing the construction, we need to present a few auxiliary definitions.
For
{|
|
Line 43 ⟶ 29:
|}
''cl''( f ) is closure of sub-formulas of f under
Note that ''cl''( f ) may contain formulas that are not in negation normal form.
The subsets of ''cl''( f ) are going to serve as states of the equivalent GBA.
We aim to construct the GBA such that if a state ''corresponds'' to a subset M
For this reason,
we will not consider each formula set M that is clearly inconsistent
or subsumed by a
A set M
{|
|
Line 75 ⟶ 61:
if f<sub>1</sub> '''U''' f<sub>2</sub> is true in some state then eventually f<sub>2</sub> is true at some state later.
{{Hidden begin|titlestyle = background:lightblue;|contentstyle = background-color: lightgrey;
|title
}}
Let ω-word ''w''= a<sub>1</sub>, a<sub>2</sub>,... over alphabet 2<sup>''AP''</sup>. Let ''w''<sup>i</sup> = a<sub>i</sub>, a<sub>i+1</sub>,... .
Line 113 ⟶ 97:
===Gerth et al. algorithm===
The following algorithm is due to Gerth, Peled, [[Moshe Y. Vardi|Vardi]], and [[Pierre Wolper|Wolper]].<ref name=GPVW93/>
▲</ref>
The previous construction creates exponentially many states upfront and many of those states may be unreachable.
The following algorithm avoids this upfront construction and has two steps.
Line 159 ⟶ 144:
For a node q, ''Now''(q) denotes the set of formulas that must be satisfied by the rest of the input word if the automaton is currently at node(state) q.
''Next''(q) denotes the set of formulas that must be satisfied by the rest of the input word if the automaton is currently at the next node(state) after q.
{{pre|1=
'''typedefs'''
'''LTL''': LTL formulas
'''LTLSet''': Sets of LTL formulas
'''NodeSet''': Sets of graph nodes ∪ {init}
'''globals'''
''Nodes'' : set of graph nodes := ∅
''Incoming'': ''Nodes'' → '''NodeSet''' := ∅
''Now'' : ''Nodes'' → '''LTLSet''' := ∅
''Next'' : ''Nodes'' → '''LTLSet''' := ∅
'''function''' ''create_graph''('''LTL''' f){▼
expand({f}, ∅, ∅, {init} )▼
'''return''' (''Nodes'', ''Now'', ''Incoming'')▼
}▼
▲ '''function''' ''create_graph''('''LTL''' f) {
▲ '''return''' (''Nodes'', ''Now'', ''Incoming'')
▲ }
}}
'''function''' expand('''LTLSet''' curr, '''LTLSet''' old, '''LTLSet''' next, '''NodeSet''' incoming){
1: '''if''' curr = ∅ '''then'''
Line 243 ⟶ 229:
* For each sub-formula g = g<sub>1</sub> '''U''' g<sub>2</sub>, let F<sub>g</sub> = { q ∈ Nodes | g<sub>2</sub> ∈ ''Now''(q) or g ∉ ''Now''(q) }, then '''F''' = { F<sub>g</sub> | g ∈ ''cl''( f ) }
Note that node labels in the algorithmic construction
==Tools==
*[
*[http://www.lsv
*[
*[https://owl.model.in.tum.de/ Owl's LTL2NBA] - LTL2NBA translator included in Java library Owl. Online translator available.
==References==
|