There are two main classes of methods for checking universality and language inclusion of Büchi-automata: Rank-based methods and Ramsey-based methods. While rank-based methods have a better worst-case complexity, Ramsey-based methods have been shown to be quite competitive in practice [9, 8]. It was shown in [9] (for universality checking) that a simple subsumption technique, which avoids exploration of certain cases, greatly improves the performance of the Ramsey-based method. Here, we present a much more general subsumption technique for the Ramsey-based method, which is based on using simulation preorder on the states of the Büchi-automata. This technique applies to both universality and inclusion checking, yielding a substantial performance gain over the previous simple subsumption approach of [9].

Abstract. Checking language inclusion between two nondeterministic Büchi automata A and B is computationally hard (PSPACE-complete). However, several approaches which are efficient in many practical cases have been proposed. We build on one of these, which is known as the Ramsey-based approach. It has recently been shown that the basic Ramsey-based approach can be drastically optimized by using powerful subsumption techniques, which allow one to prune the search-space when looking for counterexamples to inclusion. While previous works only used subsumption based on set inclusion or forward simulation on A and B, we propose the following new techniques: (1) A larger subsumption relation based on a combination of backward and forward simulations on A and B.

We apply multivariate Lagrange interpolation to synthesizing polynomial quantitative loop invariants for probabilistic programs. We reduce the computation of a quantitative loop invariant to solving constraints over program variables and unknown coefficients. Lagrange interpolation allows us to find constraints with less unknown coefficients. Counterexample-guided refinement furthermore generates linear constraints that pinpoint the desired quantitative invariants. We evaluate our technique by several case studies with polynomial quantitative loop invariants in the experiments.

Learning to prove safety over parameterised concurrent systems. In: Proc. 17th International Conference on Formal Methods in Computer-AidedDesign (pp. 76-83 Abstract-We revisit the classic problem of proving safety over parameterised concurrent systems, i.e., an infinite family of finite-state concurrent systems that are represented by some finite (symbolic) means. An example of such an infinite family is a dining philosopher protocol with any number n of processes (n being the parameter that defines the infinite family). Regular model checking is a well-known generic framework for modelling parameterised concurrent systems, where an infinite set of configurations (resp. transitions) is represented by a regular set (resp. regular transducer). Although verifying safety properties in the regular model checking framework is undecidable in general, many sophisticated semi-algorithms have been developed in the past fifteen years that can successfully prove safety in many practical instances. In this paper, we propose a simple solution to synthesise regular inductive invariants that makes use of Angluin's classic L * algorithm (and its variants). We provide a termination guarantee when the set of configurations reachable from a given set of initial configurations is regular. We have tested L * algorithm on standard (as well as new) examples in regular model checking including the dining philosopher protocol, the dining cryptographer protocol, and several mutual exclusion protocols (e.g. Bakery, Burns, Szymanski, and German). Our experiments show that, despite the simplicity of our solution, it can perform at least as well as existing semi-algorithms.

Abstract. In this paper, we develop a counterexample-guided abstraction refinement (CEGAR) framework for monotonic abstraction, an approach that is particularly useful in automatic verification of safety properties for parameterized systems. The main drawback of verification using monotonic abstraction is that it sometimes generates spurious counterexamples. Our CEGAR algorithm automatically extracts from each spurious counterexample a set of configurations called a "Safety Zone" and use it to refine the abstract transition system of the next iteration. We have developed a prototype based on this idea; and our experimentation shows that the approach allows to verify many of the examples that cannot be handled by the original monotonic abstraction approach.