LINEAR TEMPORAL LOGIC Fall 2013 Dr. Eric Rozier.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

Model Checking Lecture 3. Specification Automata Syntax, given a set A of atomic observations: Sfinite set of states S 0 Sset of initial states S S transition.

Advertisements

Model Checking Lecture 2. Three important decisions when choosing system properties: 1automata vs. logic 2branching vs. linear time 3safety vs. liveness.

1 Reasoning with Promela Safety properties bad things do not happen can check by inspecting finite behaviours Liveness properties good things do eventually.

Tutorial I – An Introduction to Model Checking Peng WU INRIA Futurs LIX, École Polytechnique.

Metodi formali dello sviluppo software a.a.2013/2014 Prof.Anna Labella.

M ODEL CHECKING -Vasvi Kakkad University of Sydney.

CS 267: Automated Verification Lecture 8: Automata Theoretic Model Checking Instructor: Tevfik Bultan.

Partial Order Reduction: Main Idea

Part 3: Safety and liveness

1 Computation Tree Logic (CTL). 2 CTL Syntax P - a set of atomic propositions, every p  P is a CTL formula. f, g, CTL formulae, then so are  f, f 

Automatic Verification Book: Chapter 6. What is verification? Traditionally, verification means proof of correctness automatic: model checking deductive:

Temporal Logic and the NuSMV Model Checker CS 680 Formal Methods Jeremy Johnson.

CS6133 Software Specification and Verification

Introduction to Embedded Systems Chapter 14 Reachability Analysis (14.1, – ) Hao Zheng U of South Florida.

Using a Power EXAMPLE 3 Cliff Height A stone falls over the edge of a cliff next to a waterfall. The stone hits the water 5 seconds later. How tall is.

CIS 540 Principles of Embedded Computation Spring Instructor: Rajeev Alur

1 Temporal Logic u Classical logic:  Good for describing static conditions u Temporal logic:  Adds temporal operators  Describe how static conditions.

Model-based Testing and Automated Test Case Generation

Infinite Automata -automata is an automaton that accepts infinite strings A Buchi automaton is similar to a finite automaton: S is a finite set of states,

CSE 555 Protocol Engineering Dr. Mohammed H. Sqalli Computer Engineering Department King Fahd University of Petroleum & Minerals Credits: Dr. Abdul Waheed.

1 2. Constraint Databases Next level of data abstraction: Constraint level – finitely represents by constraints the logical level.

Witness and Counterexample Li Tan Oct. 15, 2002.

Specification Formalisms Book: Chapter 5. Properties of formalisms Formal. Unique interpretation. Intuitive. Simple to understand (visual). Succinct.

Specification and Verification of Aspects Shmuel Katz.

Review of the automata-theoretic approach to model-checking.

Witness and Counterexample Li Tan Oct. 15, 2002.

Automata and Formal Lanugages Büchi Automata and Model Checking Ralf Möller based on slides by Chang-Beom Choi Provable Software Lab, KAIST.

System Design Research Laboratory Specification-based Testing with Linear Temporal Logic Li Tan Oleg Sokolsky Insup Lee University of Pennsylvania.

1 Formal Engineering of Reliable Software LASER 2004 school Tutorial, Lecture1 Natasha Sharygina Carnegie Mellon University.

1 Translating from LTL to automata. 2 Why translating? Want to write the specification in some logic. Want to check that an automaton (or a Kripke structure)

Abstract Verification is traditionally done by determining the truth of a temporal formula (the specification) with respect to a timed transition system.

Model Checking LTL over (discrete time) Controllable Linear System is Decidable P. Tabuada and G. J. Pappas Michael, Roozbeh Ph.D. Course November 2005.

LTL – model checking Jonas Kongslund Peter Mechlenborg Christian Plesner Kristian Støvring Sørensen.

Flavio Lerda 1 LTL Model Checking Flavio Lerda. 2 LTL Model Checking LTL –Subset of CTL* of the form: A f where f is a path formula LTL model checking.

1 Temporal Logic-Overview FM Temporal Logic u Classical logic: Good for describing static conditions u Temporal logic: Adds temporal operators Describe.

1 Carnegie Mellon UniversitySPINFlavio Lerda Bug Catching SPIN An explicit state model checker.

15-820A 1 LTL to Büchi Automata Flavio Lerda A 2 LTL to Büchi Automata LTL Formulas Subset of CTL* –Distinct from CTL AFG p  LTL  f  CTL. f.

Model Checking Lecture 3 Tom Henzinger. Model-Checking Problem I |= S System modelSystem property.

CSE 522 Model-based Development (2)

CIS 842: Specification and Verification of Reactive Systems Lecture Specifications: LTL Model Checking Copyright , Matt Dwyer, John Hatcliff,

CIS 540 Principles of Embedded Computation Spring Instructor: Rajeev Alur

2015 Concurrency: logical properties 1 ©Magee/Kramer 2 nd Edition Chapter 14 Logical Properties Satisfied? Not satisfied?

VIS Technology Transfer Course Session 7 Fairness Constraints and Monitors Serdar Tasiran.

CIS 540 Principles of Embedded Computation Spring Instructor: Rajeev Alur

1 CSEP590 – Model Checking and Automated Verification Lecture outline for July 9, 2003.

1 Temporal logic. 2 Prop. logic: model and reason about static situations. Example: Are there truth values that can be assigned to x,y simultaneously.

Variants of LTL Query Checking Hana ChocklerArie Gurfinkel Ofer Strichman IBM Research SEI Technion Technion - Israel Institute of Technology.

Bounded Model Checking A. Biere, A. Cimatti, E. Clarke, Y. Zhu, Symbolic Model Checking without BDDs, TACAS’99 Presented by Daniel Choi Provable Software.

About Alternating Automata Daniel Choi Provable Software Laboratory KAIST.

Today’s Agenda  Quiz 4  Temporal Logic Formal Methods in Software Engineering1.

Section 5.1. Climbing an Infinite Ladder Suppose we have an infinite ladder: 1.We can reach the first rung of the ladder. 2.If we can reach a particular.

6/12/20161 a.a.2015/2016 Prof. Anna Labella Formal Methods in software development.

CIS 540 Principles of Embedded Computation Spring Instructor: Rajeev Alur

Model Checking Lecture 2. Model-Checking Problem I |= S System modelSystem property.

Model Checking Lecture 2 Tom Henzinger. Model-Checking Problem I |= S System modelSystem property.

15-820A 1 LTL Model Checking A Flavio Lerda.

Semantically Equivalent Formulas

Formal Methods in software development

Use summation notation to write the series

Generating Optimal Linear Temporal Logic Monitors by Coinduction

Formal Methods in software development

Formal Methods in software development

Translating Linear Temporal Logic into Büchi Automata

Formal Methods in software development

Program correctness Linear Time Temporal Logic

Formal Methods in software development

Program correctness Branching-time temporal logics

Model Checking CS 680 Formal Methods Jeremy Johnson.

CSE 503 – Software Engineering

Presentation transcript:

LINEAR TEMPORAL LOGIC Fall 2013 Dr. Eric Rozier

Propositional Temporal Logic Does the following hold? yes

Propositional Temporal Logic Does the following hold? no

Examples: What do they mean? Remember: Gp p holds in all states Fp p holds eventually Xp p holds in the next state G F p p holds infinitely often F G p Eventually, p holds henceforth G( p => F q ) Every p is eventually followed by a q F( p => (X X q) ) Every p is followed by a q two reactions later

Examples: Write in Temporal Logic “Whenever the iRobot is at the ramp-edge (cliff), eventually it moves 5 cm away from the cliff.” p – iRobot is at the cliff q – iRobot is 5 cm away from the cliff G (p => F q) “Whenever the distance between cars is less than 2m, cruise control is deactivated” p – distance between cars is less than 2 m q – cruise control is active G (p => X ! q) 1. G (p => F q) 2. G (p => X \neg q)

Remember, LTL Formulas are Formulas Suppose the robot must visit a set of n locations l1, l2, …, ln. Let pi be an atomic formula that is true if and only if the robot visits location li. Express the following: The robot must eventually visit at least one of the n locations.

Remember, LTL Formulas are Formulas Suppose the robot must visit a set of n locations l1, l2, …, ln. Let pi be an atomic formula that is true if and only if the robot visits location li. Express the following: The robot must eventually visit all n locations, but in any order.

Remember, LTL Formulas are Formulas Suppose the robot must visit a set of n locations l1, l2, …, ln. Let pi be an atomic formula that is true if and only if the robot visits location li. Express the following: The robot must eventually visit all n locations, in numeric order.

What does this property mean? F(p => Xq) Is it satisfied by this trace? p -> p -> p -> __ -> q -> p -> …

What does this property mean? F(p => Xq) Is it satisfied by this trace? p -> p -> p -> __ -> q -> p -> q -> …

Does this automaton satisfy the property? pUq

Does this automaton satisfy the property? pUq

Does this automaton satisfy the property? qRp

Does this automaton satisfy the property? qRp

Does this automaton satisfy the property? qRp

Does this automaton satisfy the property? qRp

Does this automaton satisfy the property? F(p & XXX !q)

Does this automaton satisfy the property? F(p & XXX !q)

Does this automaton satisfy the property? F(p & XXX !q)