A hybrid of counterexample-based and proof-based abstraction

Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics)

Volumn 3312, Issue , 2004, Pages 260-274

  Amla, Nina ^a   McMillan, Ken L ^a  

^a CADENCE DESIGN SYSTEMS   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER AIDED DESIGN; FORMAL METHODS; ITERATIVE METHODS;

HYBRID APPROACH; NUMBER OF ITERATIONS; PERFORMANCE BOTTLENECKS; REFINEMENT PHASE; REFINEMENT STEP; VERIFICATION PROBLEMS;

ABSTRACTING;

EID: 35048854573     PISSN: 03029743     EISSN: 16113349     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-540-30494-4_19     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. F. Balarin and A. Sangiovanni-Vincentelli. An iterative approach to language containment. In Computer Aided Verification (CAV'93), pages 29-40, 1993.
2. J. R. Burch, E. M. Clarke, K. L. McMillan, D. L. Dill, and J. Hwang. Symbolic model checking: 1020 states and beyond. In LICS, June 1990.
3. P. Chauhan, E. Clarke, J. Kukula, S. Sapra, H. Veith, and D. Wang. Automated abstraction refinement for model checking large state spaces using sat based conflict analysis. In FMCAD, November 2002.
4. E. M. Clarke, O. Grumberg, S. Jha, Y. Lu, and H. Veith. Counterexample-guided abstraction refinement. In Computer Aided Verification, pages 154-169, 2000.
5. E. M. Clarke, A. Gupta, J. Kukula, and O. Strichman. SAT based abstractionrefinement using ILP and machine learning techniques. In CAV, 2002.
6. M. Glusman, G. Kamhi, S. Mador-Haim, R. Fraer, and M. Y. Vardi. Multiple-counterexample guided iterative abstraction refinement. In TACAS, 2003.
7. S. G. Govindaraju and D. L. Dill. Counterexample-Guided choice of projections in approximate symbolic model checking. In ICC AD, 2000.
8. A. Gupta, M. Ganai, Z. Yang, and P. Ashar. Iterative abstraction using sat-based bmc with proof analysis. In ICCAD, 2003.
9. O. Kupferman and M. Y. Vardi. Model checking of safety properties. Formal Methods in System Design, 19(3):291-314, 2001.
10. R. P. Kurshan. Computer-Aided-Verification of Coordinating Processes. Princeton University Press, 1994.
11. K. L. McMillan and N. Amla. Automatic abstraction without counterexamples. In TACAS, 2003.
12. M. W. Moskewicz, C. F. Madigan, Y. Z., L. Z., and S. Malik. Chaff: Engineering an efficient SAT solver. In Design Automation Conference, pages 530-535, 2001.
13. A. Pnueli O. Lichtenstein. Checking that finite state concurrent programs satisfy their linear specification. In POPL, 1985.
14. J. P. M. Silva and K. A. Sakallah. GRASP-a new search algorithm for satisfiability. In ICCAD, 1996.
15. M.Y. Vardi and P. Wolper. An automata-theoretic approach to automatic program verification. In Logic in Computer Science (LICS '86), pages 322-331, 1986.
16. C. Wang, B. Li, H. Jin, G. Hachtel, and F. Somenzi. Improving ariadne's bundle by following multiple threads in abstraction refinement. In ICCAD, 2003.
17. D. Wang, P. Ho, J. Long, J. H. Kukula, Y. Zhu, H. Tony Ma, and R. Damiano. Formal property verification by abstraction refinement with formal, simulation and hybrid engines. In Design Automation Conference, pages 35-40, 2001.