Proving sequential consistency by model checking

Braun, Tobias; Condon, Anne; Hu, Alan J.; Juse, K.S.; Laza, M.; Leslie, M.P.; Sharma, Rita

doi:10.1109/hldvt.2001.972815

Cited by 5 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Sequential consistency is a multiprocessor memory model of both practical and theoretical significance, Braun et al. [17] presented experimental results on a methodology for proving sequential consistency of memory protocols by using model checking; Consistency property checking among design models and their components is one of the software design severe issues since the conflict may occur among design models which will bring an incorrect result, Chancheaw et al. [18] presented a consistency verification method based on the proposed rules constructed from the relationship among design models, functional model and their components; Aiming at the issue that different enabled rules update the same system variable, Qu et al.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In recent years, some researchers have noticed the importance of logical consistency checking for safety decisions. Sequential consistency is a multiprocessor memory model of both practical and theoretical significance, Braun et al [17] presented experimental results on a methodology for proving sequential consistency of memory protocols by using model checking; Consistency property checking among design models and their components is one of the software design severe issues since the conflict may occur among design models which will bring an incorrect result, Chancheaw et al [18] presented a consistency verification method based on the proposed rules constructed from the relationship among design models, functional model and their components; Aiming at the issue that different enabled rules update the same system variable, Qu et al [19] solved the problem of logical consistency checks of robots by symbolic model checking based on binary decision diagrams, introduced two new algorithms to perform the real-time consistency and stability checking respectively; Al-Nuaimi et al [20] presented a computational framework for verifying an autonomous vehicle, which is used to check the instability and inconsistency in high-level decisions.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Logical consistency verification of state sensing in safety‐critical decision: A case study of train routing selection

Wang

et al. 2022

IET Intelligent Trans Sys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Reliable decision‐making in a safety‐critical system depends on the consistency of the state of the system process. Based on the decision‐makeing properties of safety‐critical systems, the definition of the critical component, Boolean evolution system, and cognate variables are presented here. By exploring the two lemmas of the critical components, the consistency of the safety‐critical system is defined, then a new process of a safety‐critical decision of consistency checking is proposed. In order to check the consistency properties of the decision, two computation tree logic formulas derived from the lemmas of the consistency checking are developed. The case of the train routing selection is modelled and verified by model checking, which shows the decision prototype guarantees the safety of the critical process. As the turnout is the critical component in the process of the train routing selection, a multi‐sensor‐based unit of state monitoring is developed, and a real‐world test shows the accuracy of the monitoring unit. This study confirms that the state consistency verification ensures the reliability of the safety‐critical system's decision output. The case can enlighten the development of the intelligent control system which has a critical component of decision‐making.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Logical consistency verification of state sensing in safety‐critical decision: A case study of train routing selection

Wang

et al. 2022

IET Intelligent Trans Sys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…With reasonably detailed protocol models, tiny configurations with only a few caches and a few blocks per cache are the limit of the state-of-the-art. [8] cites numerous other case studies.) (4) We are not aware of any published work that has reported model checking a detailed model of a hierarchical protocol as a hierarchical protocol.…”

Section: Complexity Discussion and Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Improving Multiple-CMP Systems Using Token Coherence

Marty

Bingham

Hill

et al.

11th International Symposium on High-Performance Computer Architecture

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Improvements in semiconductor technology now enable Chip Multiprocessors (CMPs). As many future computer systems will use one or more CMPs and support shared memory, such systems will have caches that must be kept coherent.Coherence is a particular challenge for Multiple-CMP (M-CMP) systems. One approach is to use a hierarchical protocol that explicitly separates the intra-CMP coherence protocol from the inter-CMP protocol, but couples them hierarchically to maintain coherence. However, hierarchical protocols are complex, leading to subtle, difficult-to-verify race conditions. Furthermore, most previous hierarchical protocols use directories at one or both levels, incurring indirections-and thus extra latency-for sharing misses, which are common in commercial workloads.In contrast, this paper exploits the separation of correctness substrate and performance policy in the recentlyproposed token coherence protocol to develop the first M-CMP coherence protocol that is flat for correctness, but hierarchical for performance. Via model checking studies, we show that flat correctness eases verification. Via simulation with micro-benchmarks, we make new protocol variants more robust under contention. Finally, via simulation with commercial workloads on a commercial operating system, we show that new protocol variants can be 10-50% faster than a hierarchical directory protocol. This material is posted here with permission of the IEEE. Such permission of the IEEE does not in any way imply IEEE endorsement of any of the University of Pennsylvania's products or services. Internal or personal use of this material is permitted. However, permission to reprint/republish this material for advertising or promotional purposes or for creating new collective works for resale or redistribution must be obtained from the IEEE by writing to pubs-permissions@ieee.org. By choosing to view this document, you agree to all provisions of the copyright laws protecting it. Author(s)Michael

show abstract

Automatable Verification of Sequential Consistency

Condon

2003

Theory Comput Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Proving sequential consistency by model checking

Abstract: Abstract

Cited by 5 publications

References 27 publications

Logical consistency verification of state sensing in safety‐critical decision: A case study of train routing selection

Logical consistency verification of state sensing in safety‐critical decision: A case study of train routing selection

Improving Multiple-CMP Systems Using Token Coherence

Automatable Verification of Sequential Consistency

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About