The RERS Grey-Box Challenge 2012: Analysis of Event-Condition-Action Systems

Howar, Falk; Isberner, Malte; Merten, Maik; Steffen, Bernhard; Beyer, Dirk

doi:10.1007/978-3-642-34026-0_45

Cited by 36 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This paper applies BDDs as representation of state sets in the verification of C programs, with a focus on event-condition-action (ECA) systems that use a very limited set of operations. Such ECA programs were used as benchmarks in a recent verification challenge [15] 1 . For such a special sub-class of ECA programs, BDDs seem to be promising as representation for two reasons.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

BDD-Based Software Model Checking with CPAchecker

Beyer

Stahlbauer

2013

Mathematical and Engineering Methods in Computer Science

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. In symbolic software model checking, most approaches use predicates as symbolic representation of the state space, and SMT solvers for computations on the state space; BDDs are sometimes used as auxiliary data structure. The representation of software state spaces by BDDs was not yet thoroughly investigated, although BDDs are successful in hardware verification. The reason for this is that BDDs do not efficiently support all operations that are needed in software verification. In this work, we evaluate the use of a pure BDD representation of integer variable values, and focus on a particular class of programs: event-conditionaction systems with limited operations. A symbolic representation using BDDs seems appropriate for this particular class of programs. We implement a program analysis based on BDDs and experimentally compare three symbolic techniques to verify reachability properties of ECA programs. The results show that BDDs are efficient, which yields the insight that BDDs could be used selectively for some variables (to be determined by a pre-analysis), even in general software model checking.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

BDD-Based Software Model Checking with CPAchecker

Beyer

Stahlbauer

2013

Mathematical and Engineering Methods in Computer Science

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…CONTROL FLOW AND INTEGER VARIABLES (94) LOOPS (79) DEVICE DRIVERS LINUX 64-BIT (1 237) SYSTEMC (62) ECA (366) PRODUCT LINES (597) All verification tasks of the benchmark sets have been used in international competitions of software-verification tools [9,30]; they are publicly available via the competition repository or the CPACHECKER repository 4 . The SV-COMP benchmark suite is the most comprehensive and diverse suite of this kind that currently exists.…”

Section: Verification Tasksmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The benchmark set ECA contains event-conditionaction (ECA) programs, a kind of systems that is often used in sensor-actor systems. The verification tasks in our benchmark set have been used in the RERS Grey-Box Challenge 2012 [30] on verifying ECA systems. The LOOPS benchmark set consists of verification tasks that require the analysis of loops with non-static loop bounds.…”

Section: Verification Tasksmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Abstract domains can be based on explicit representations (e.g., hash tables for integers, memory graphs for the heap) and symbolic representations (predicates, binary decision diagrams (BDD)). For example, using an explicitvalue domain [14] was efficient on many benchmarks from the recent competition on software verification [9], while using a BDD domain [15] was more efficient on eventcondition-action (ECA) systems that involve only simple operations over integers in an ECA competition [30]. In the context of product-line verification, it has been shown that BDD-encodings of feature variables improve verification performance [5,24].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We evaluate our approach on six sets of verification tasks from different application domains (a total of 2 435 files) that have been used by recent international competitions on software model checking (SV-COMP 2013 [9], RERS Challenge 2012 [30]). …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Domain Types: Abstract-Domain Selection Based on Variable Usage

Apel

Beyer

Friedberger

et al. 2013

Hardware and Software: Verification and Testing

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. The success of software model checking depends on finding an appropriate abstraction of the program to verify. The choice of the abstract domain and the analysis configuration is currently left to the user, who may not be familiar with the tradeoffs and performance details of the available abstract domains. We introduce the concept of domain types, which classify the program variables into types that are more fine-grained than standard declared types (e.g., 'int' and 'long') to guide the selection of an appropriate abstract domain for a model checker. Our implementation on top of an existing verification framework determines the domain type for each variable in a pre-analysis step, based on the usage of variables in the program, and then assigns each variable to an abstract domain. Based on a series of experiments on a comprehensive set of verification tasks from international verification competitions, we demonstrate that the choice of the abstract domain per variable (we consider one explicit and one symbolic domain) can substantially improve the verification in terms of performance and precision.

show abstract