Modalities for model checking: branching time logic strikes back

Emerson, E. Allen; Lei, Chin-Laung

doi:10.1016/0167-6423(87)90036-0

Cited by 267 publications

(187 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

186

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There is a similar algorithm of Emerson and Lei [21,22] that appears at a first glance similar to the one presented here. However, in their approach the formulas ϕ i were state (LTL) formulas such that we can successively compute the sets of states in K where ϕ i holds and relabel these states with i .…”

Section: Model Checking On Product Structuresmentioning

confidence: 89%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Model Checking on Product Structures

Schneider

1998

Formal Methods in Computer-Aided Design

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We present an algorithm for checking CTL formulas in Kripke structures with side conditions, where the side conditions define new variables in terms of path formulas. Given any CTL formula where the defined variables may occur, the presented algorithm will determine the set of states where the CTL * formula holds that is obtained by replacing each new variable defined by a side condition by its definition. The basic idea of our algorithm is to translate each side condition to a Kripke structure that encodes precisely the definition of the new variable. After that, we compute the products of these structures with the given structure and use a generalization of the well-known CTL model checking procedure. The presented model checking procedure can still be implemented as a symbolic model checking procedure (e.g. with BDDs). We moreover show how each CTL * model checking problem can be translated efficiently to a CTL model checking problem with side conditions, and hence show that the method can be used to construct efficient CTL * and LTL model checking procedures. Moreover, it is shown that for LTL model checking, we can still use standard CTL model checking procedures instead of our generalized version.

show abstract

Section: Model Checking On Product Structuresmentioning

confidence: 89%

“…This has already been suggested by the algorithm of Emerson and Lei [21,22] to reduce CTL * model checking problems to LTL model checking problems. However, the algorithms given in figure 5 only generate side conditions i = ϕ i , where ϕ i are path formulas.…”

Section: Ctl * and Ltl Model Checking By Extraction Of Leftctl *mentioning

confidence: 99%

Model Checking on Product Structures

Schneider

1998

Formal Methods in Computer-Aided Design

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The reason is that DCCA uses computational tree logic (CTL) the logic behind CTL is branching time logic [27] whereas FFTA rely on linear time logic. DCCA considers "existential properties of concurrent program in addition to its universal properties" [28] and secondly inner nodes of a FTA are formalized in FTA which is quite complicated task and some time too hard to incorporate but DCCA doesn't require formalization of the inner nodes of a tree.…”

Section: B Formal Techniquesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Alternatively, Fault trees can be automated to reduce the time required to carry out the safety analysis and eventually reduce the error or manual shortcomings of conventional FMEA. The tool that uses model for generation of fault trees, are discussed in [27], can be refined to improve the generation of quality trees. Formalization of FMEA is possible and it should be made a necessary part of comprehensive and detailed safety analysis to improve its quality aspects.…”

Section: A Informal (Traditional Techniques)mentioning

confidence: 99%

A Survey of Safety Analysis Techniques for Safety Critical Systems

Haider¹,

Nadeem²

2013

IJFCC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract-This paper is mainly focused on the study of the techniques available for the safety analysis of critical systems. It is never possible to build a completely safe system. There is a possibility to bring the behavior of these systems within acceptable limits. For safety evaluation of such systems both formal and informal techniques are available. Both techniques have their own prospects and consequences. Informal techniques are simpler to learn and easier to interpret and have more space for creativity and imagination of the analyst. Formal techniques due to their rigorousness ensure completeness. In this paper, we have analyzed both techniques after defining few parameters. Our study found it that formal techniques are better but usage of informal techniques can never be overlooked. Some approaches combine formal and informal techniques to reap the benefits of both. In some cases, informal techniques can be used as pre-requisite to narrow down the input of minimal critical set for formal techniques and reduce the effort required for formalization of the entire system.

show abstract

“…For instance, ∀CTL [10,12] and the universal fragment of Fair CTL [16] can be verified by embedding them into the universal fragment of µ-calculus. Our framework gives a unified theory of completeness criteria, which cannot be found in previous works.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Proving ∀μ-Calculus Properties with SAT-Based Model Checking

Wang

2005

Formal Techniques for Networked and Distributed Systems - FORTE 2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. In this paper, we present a complete bounded model checking algorithm for the universal fragment of µ-calculus. The new algorithm checks the completeness of bounded proof of each property on the fly and does not depend on prior knowledge of the completeness thresholds. The key is to combine both local and bounded model checking techniques and use SAT solvers to perform local model checking on finite Kripke structures. Our proof-theoretic approach works for any property in the specification logic and is more general than previous work on specific properties. We report experimental results to compare our algorithm with the conventional BDD-based algorithm.

show abstract

Modalities for model checking: branching time logic strikes back

Cited by 267 publications

References 15 publications

Model Checking on Product Structures

Model Checking on Product Structures

A Survey of Safety Analysis Techniques for Safety Critical Systems

Proving ∀μ-Calculus Properties with SAT-Based Model Checking

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About