Petri games are a multiplayer game model for the automatic synthesis of distributed systems. We compare two fundamentally different approaches for solving Petri games. The symbolic approach decides the existence of a winning strategy via a reduction to a two-player game over a finite graph, which in turn is solved by a fixed point iteration based on binary decision diagrams (BDDs). The bounded synthesis approach encodes the existence of a winning strategy, up to a given bound on the size of the strategy, as a quantified Boolean formula (QBF). In this paper, we report on initial experience with a prototype implementation of the bounded synthesis approach. We compare bounded synthesis to the existing implementation of the symbolic approach in the synthesis tool ADAM. We present experimental results on a collection of benchmarks, including one new benchmark family, modeling manufacturing and workflow scenarios with multiple concurrent processes.
The correctness of networks is often described in terms of the individual data flow of components instead of their global behavior. In software-defined networks, it is far more convenient to specify the correct behavior of packets than the global behavior of the entire network. Petri nets with transits extend Petri nets and Flow-LTL extends LTL such that the data flows of tokens can be tracked. We present the tool AdamMC as the first model checker for Petri nets with transits against Flow-LTL. We describe how AdamMC can automatically encode concurrent updates of software-defined networks as Petri nets with transits and how common network specifications can be expressed in Flow-LTL. Underlying AdamMC is a reduction to a circuit model checking problem. We introduce a new reduction method that results in tremendous performance improvements compared to a previous prototype. Thereby, AdamMC can handle software-defined networks with up to 82 switches.
Many verification and synthesis approaches rely on solving techniques for quantified Boolean formulas (QBF). Consequently, solution witnesses, in the form of Boolean functions, become more and more important as they represent implementations or counterexamples. We present a recursive counterexample guided abstraction and refinement algorithm (CEGAR) for solving and certifying QBFs that exploits structural reasoning on the formula level. The algorithm decomposes the given QBF into one propositional formula for every block of quantifiers that abstracts from assignments of variables not bound by this quantifier block. Further, we show how to derive an efficient certification extraction method on top of the algorithm. We report on experimental evaluation of this algorithm in the solver QUABS (Quantified Abstraction Solver) which won the most recent QBF competition (QBFEVAL'18). Further, we show the effectiveness of the certification approach using synthesis benchmarks and a case study for synthesizing winning strategies in Petri Games.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.