Download presentation
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
1
Hierarchical and Recursive State Machines with Context- Dependent Properties Salvatore La Torre, Margherita Napoli, Mimmo Parente and Gennaro Parlato Dipartimento di Informatica ed Applicazioni Università degli Studi di Salerno
2
Given : –A system model M (Kripke structure) –A high-level specification (logic formula) Is M a model of ? System Verification (Model Checking) Complexity of model checking O ( ·2 | | ) |M||M| State-Space Explosion O (| M |·2 | | )
3
Our Target Propose a “new model” to represent models succintly And solve model cheching problems efficiently on it –Reachability –Cycle detection –L TL -ModelChecking
4
Recursive State Machine A RSM M =(M 1,…, M k ) is composed by –k machines modelling k procedures –machines can call each other recursively –Machines are represented through graphs
5
Vertices Machines has two kind of vertices: Nodes (internal state) Boxes (procedure-call)
6
Entry and Exit Nodes parameters e3e3 e2e2 e1e1 ex 3 ex 4 ex 2 ex 1 Entry nodes Exit nodes return values
7
Edges Node-to-Node Box-to-NodeNode-to-Box Box-to-Box
8
Labelling Given a set of Atomic Proposition We associates to both nodes and boxes set of AP p,q,r t,r,p
9
M1M1 M2M2 M3M3 second 0 second 59 minute 0 minute 59 hour 0 hour 23 Seconds Minutes Hours Example: Digital Clock modelled by Hierarchical State Machine min 59 min 0 out 3 start 3 h 23 h0h0 start 2 out 2 sec 0 out 1 sec 59 start 1
10
sec 0 sec 60 Flat Model M1FM1F out 2 start 2 M2FM2F min 59 min 0 minute 0 minute 59 sec 0 sec 60 sec 0 sec 60 The flat model has 24·60·60=86,400 states Our model has 24+60+60+6=150 vertices. sec 0 sec 60 M1FM1F
11
HSMs in [AY98] Only nodes are labeled with atomic propositions: a model and its flat have the same number of different labels To check properties with a precise time (i.e., check for time 10:20: 45 ) the model must have at least a node for each possible hh.mm.ss. Our model can be exponentially more succinct
12
Related Work Model checking of hierarchical state machines. [Alur, Yannakakis 1998] Analysis of recursive state machines. [Alur, Etessami, Yannakakis 2001] Model checking of unrestricted hierarchical state machines. [Benedikt, Godefroid, Reps 2001] Visibly pushdown languages [Alur, Madhusudan 2004] A temporal logic of nested calls and returns[Alur,Etessami,Madhusudan 2004]
13
Outline Overview Reachability problem LTL-Model Checking Conclusion
14
MFMF [in k ] Reachability Problem Given a HSM M and a propositional boolean formula , the Reachability Problem is: Is there a reachable state (in the flat of M ) on which holds ? X (label(X))=TRUE
15
Computational Complexity The reachability problem is NP-complete –NP-hardness 3-CNF-SAT Reachability (with AND of literals) –NP-membership 1.guess a state X of M F 2.check if X is reachable in M F 3.verify on X We can solve Reachability in O (| M |·| |·2 |AP| ) time
16
A Solution in O (λ·|M|·| |) MiFMiF Start i q (L(q)UP)=TRUE Reach (i,P)=TRUE a reachable state of M i F satisfying (assume propositions P hold TRUE on all states of M i F ) Reach (k,Ø) P
17
Reach (expand(b), )=TRUE Start i q (L(q)UP)=TRUE How to compute Reach (i,P) MiMi b L(b) PP U
18
Our Algorithm Reach (i,P) = = V (P U label (u)) V u is a reachable node of M i V Reach (expand (b),P U label (b)) b is reachable box of M i Reach (i,P) takes O(|M i |·|φ|) time + time for calls Reach (expand (b),P U label (b)) Total time is O(λ·|M|·| |) (λ is the max # of different sets P for machine)
19
Good cases Reach (k,Ø) takes O(λ·|M|·| |) with λ≤2 |AP| If λ is bounded by a costant, then Reach (k,Ø) takes O(|M|·| |) In particular, if M is a Alur and Yannakakis machine, every M i inherits only the empty set (λ =1)
20
u p Restricted HSM p
21
Efficient Solution on Restricted HSM Reachability on Restricted HSM and formulas in DNF is decidable in O(|M|·| |) time Reachability is NP-hard if either: –M is a nonrestricted HSM or – is a (general) boolean formula Reachability is decidable in O(|M|·2 | | ) time on Restricted HSM
22
Outline Overview Reachability problem L TL -Model Checking Conclusion
23
L TL Model Checking We use the automata-theoretic approach Given a HSM M and an L TL -formula , the problem is: Does every trace of the flat model of M satisfy ?
24
Automata-Theoretic Approach 1. Given an L TL -formula , we build a Büchi automaton A ¬ . 3. is satisfied on M L ( M ‘)=Ø. O (2 | | ) [Vardi and Wolper] O (| M |·16 | | ) O ( M‘ ) [Alur at al.] 2. We build a new HSM M ‘ as a product of M and A ¬ . Main Result LTL Model-Checking can be solved in O (| M |·16 | | ) time
25
Structures of M ’ M ‘ consists of graphs M (i,j,P) M (i,j,P) is contained in the Cartesian product of M i and A ¬ : –start i is coupled with j (A ¬ state) –the set of atomic propositions P is inherited from its ancestors
26
Nodes of M (i,j,P) PUP u =P q Node of M (i,j,P) [u,q,j,P] PuPu State of A ¬ q PqPq Node of M i u PuPu
27
Boxes of M (i,j,P) State of A ¬ q PqPq PUP b U P start h =P q Box of M i b start h P start h PbPb Box of M (i,j,P) [b,q,j,P] PbPb M (h,q,PUP b )
28
Edges from node of M (i,j,P) Edge from node of M i u v Node of M (i,j,P) [u,q’,j,P] [v,q’’,j,P] Edge of A ¬ q’ q’’
29
Edges from box of M (i,j,P) A edge of A ¬ q’’q’ A edge from box of M i b v o A edge from box of M (i,j,P) [b,q,j,P] [v,q’’,j,P] [o,q’,h,P’]
30
Outline Overview Reachability problem L TL -Model Checking Conclusion
31
Cycle Detection Cycle detection problem: Is there a cycle in M F containing a reachable state on which holds? Computational complexity: –NP-complete –solution in time O(| M |·| |·2 | | ) (same as reachability)
32
Conclusion Decision problems: –Reachability –Cycle detection –LTL model-checking Restricted HSMs Recursive Finite State Machines (Expansions model recursive calls)
33
Recursive Finite State Machines RSM = HSM with recursive expansions b MiMi MiMi b
34
Main results Reachability Cycle detection L TL Model Cheching RSM NP-complete O(| M |·| |·2 | | ) Pspace-complete O(|M|·16 | | ) restricted HSM in DNF O(|M|·| |) Pspace-complete O(|M|·8 | | )
Similar presentations
© 2025 SlidePlayer.com. Inc.
All rights reserved.