Learning to divide and conquer: Applying the L*algorithm to automate assume-guarantee reasoning

Formal Methods in System Design

Volumn 32, Issue 3, 2008, Pages 175-205

  Păsăreanu, Corina S ^a   Giannakopoulou, Dimitra ^a   Bobaru, Mihaela Gheorghiu ^b   Cobleigh, Jamieson M ^c   Barringer, Howard ^d  

^a NASA AMES RESEARCH CENTER   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

^c Biologically Inspired Neural and Dynamical Systems Laboratory   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF MANCHESTER   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Assume guarantee reasoning; Compositional verification; Labeled transition systems; Learning; Model checking; Proof rules; Safety properties

Indexed keywords

LEARNING SYSTEMS; LOGIC PROGRAMMING; MODEL CHECKING; NATURAL LANGUAGE PROCESSING SYSTEMS;

ASSUME-GUARANTEE REASONING; COMPOSITIONAL VERIFICATION; LABELED TRANSITION SYSTEMS; PROOF RULES; SAFETY PROPERTIES;

ALGORITHMS;

EID: 44349186195     PISSN: 09259856     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10703-008-0049-6     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Alur R, Henzinger T, Mang F, Qadeer S, Rajamani S, Tasiran S (1998) MOCHA: modularity in model checking. In: Proceedings of CAV'98. LNCS, vol 1427. Springer, New York, pp 521-525
2. Alur R, Cerny P, Madhusudan P, Nam W (2005) Synthesis of interface specifications for Java classes. In: Proceedings of POPL'05, pp 98-109
3. Alur R, Madhusudan P, Nam W (2005) Symbolic compositional verification by learning assumptions. In: Proceedings of CAV'05. LNCS, vol 3576. Springer, New York, pp 548-562
4. Angluin D (1987) Learning regular sets from queries and counterexamples. Inf Comput 75(2):87-106
5. Avrunin GS, Corbett JC, Dwyer MB, Pǎsǎreanu CS, Siegel SF (1999) Comparing finite-state verification techniques for concurrent software. TR 99-69, University of Massachusetts, Department of Computer Science, November
6. Barringer H, Giannakopoulou D, Pǎsǎreanu CS (2003) Proof rules for automated compositional verification through learning. In: Proceedings of SAVCBS'03, pp 14-21
7. Chaki S, Strichman O (2007) Optimized L*-based assume-guarantee reasoning. In: Proceedings of TACAS'07. LNCS, vol 4424. Springer, New York, pp 276-291
8. Cheung SC, Kramer J (1999) Checking safety properties using compositional reachability analysis. ACM Trans Softw Eng Methodol 8(1):49-78
9. Cimatti A, Clarke EM, Giunchiglia E, Giunchiglia F, Pistore M, Roveri M, Sebastiani R, Tacchella A (2002) NuSMV 2: an opensource tool for symbolic model checking. In: Proceedings of CAV'02. LNCS, vol 2404. Springer, New York, pp 359-364
10. Clarke EM, Long DE, McMillan KL (1989) Compositional model checking. In: Proceedings of LICS'89, pp 353-362
11. Clarke EM, Grumberg O, Jha S, Lu Y, Veith H (2000) Counterexample-guided abstraction refinement. In: Proceedings of CAV'00. LNCS, vol 1855. Springer, New York, pp 154-169
12. Clarke EM, Grumberg O, Peled D (2000) Model checking. MIT Press, Cambridge
13. Cobleigh JM, Giannakopoulou D, Pǎsǎreanu CS (2003) Learning assumptions for compositional verification. In: Proceedings of TACAS'03. LNCS, vol 2619. Springer, New York, pp 331-346
14. Cobleigh JM, Avrunin GS, Clarke LA (2006) Breaking up is hard to do: an investigation of decomposition for assume-guarantee reasoning. In: Proceedings of ISSTA'06. ACM, New York, pp 97-108
15. Dwyer MB, Clarke LA, Cobleigh JM, Naumovich G (2004) Flow analysis for verifying properties of concurrent software systems. ACM Trans Softw Eng Methodol 13(4):359-430
16. Flanagan C, Freund SN, Qadeer S (2002) Thread-modular verification for shared-memory programs. In: Proceedings of ESOP'02, pp 262-277
17. Gheorghiu M, Giannakopoulou D, Pǎsǎreanu CS (2007) Refining interface alphabets for compositional verification. In: Proceedings of TACAS'07. LNCS, vol 4424. Springer, New York, pp 292-307
18. Giannakopoulou D, Pǎsǎreanu CS, Barringer H (2005) Component verification with automatically generated assumptions. Autom Softw Eng 12(3):297-320
19. Grumberg O, Long DE (1991) Model checking and modular verification. In: Proceedings of CONCUR'91, pp 250-265
20. Helmbold D, Luckham D (1985) Debugging Ada tasking programs. IEEE Softw 2(2):47-57
21. Henzinger TA, Jhala R, Majumdar R (2005) Permissive interfaces. In: Proceedings of ESEC/SIGSOFT FSE'05, pp 31-40
22. Jones CB (1983) Specification and design of (parallel) programs. In: Information processing 83: proceedings of the IFIP 9th world congress. IFIP: North-Holland, Amsterdam, pp 321-332
23. Keller RK, Cameron M, Taylor RN, Troup DB (May 1991) User interface development and software environments: the Chiron-1 system. In: Proceedings of ICSE'91, pp 208-218
24. Magee J, Kramer J (1999) Concurrency: state models & Java programs. Wiley, New York
25. Maier P (2003) Compositional circular assume-guarantee rules cannot be sound and complete. In: Proceedings of FOSSACS
26. Nam W, Alur R (2006) Learning-based symbolic assume-guarantee reasoning with automatic decomposition. In: Proceedings of ATVA'06. LNCS, vol 4218. Springer, New York
27. Pǎsǎreanu CS, Giannakopoulou D (2006) Towards a compositional SPIN. In: Proceedings of SPIN'06. LNCS, vol 3925. Springer, New York, pp 234-251
28. Pnueli A (1984) In transition from global to modular temporal reasoning about programs. Log Models Concurr Syst 13:123-144
29. Rivest RL, Shapire RE (1993) Inference of finite automata using homing sequences. Inf Comput 103(2):299-347
30. Sharygina N, Chaki S, Clarke EM, Sinha N (2005) Dynamic component substitutability analysis. In: Proceedings of FM'05. LNCS, vol 3582. Springer, New York, pp 512-528
31. Sinha N, Clarke EM (2007) SAT-based compositional verification using lazy learning. In: Proceedings of CAV'07. LNCS, vol 4590. Springer, New York, pp 39-54