The 4th Reactive Synthesis Competition - SYNTCOMP 2017
|
|
|
- Brianne York
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 The 4th Reactive Synthesis Competition - SYNTCOMP 2017 Swen Jacobs Saarland University Roderick Bloem TU Graz 22 July 2017 SYNT Workshop, Heidelberg
2 SYNTCOMP: Goals Make reactive synthesis tools comparable: - establish benchmark format - collect benchmark library - provide platform for fair and comprehensive evaluation Guide development of reactive synthesis tools: - encourage implementation of mature, push-button tools - improve state of the art through challenging benchmarks Swen Jacobs SYNTCOMP
3 SYNTCOMP: History First Call: 2013 (discussion at SYNT 2013, St. Petersburg) Design Choices: low entry-barrier only safety properties, low-level format (AIGER) need verifiable correctness hardware model checkers output quality is important ranking based on solution size First Competition: 2014 (SYNT/FLoC, Vienna Summer of Logic) 5 participating groups, >500 benchmarks collected Second Competition: 2015 (SYNT/CAV, San Francisco) essentially same setup, >2000 benchmarks collected, comparison to 2014 tools Third Competition: 2016 (SYNT/CAV, Toronto) extension to LTL specs in TLSF, parameterized benchmarks, 6 new tools (3 safety, 3 LTL) Swen Jacobs SYNTCOMP
4 AIGER-based Safety Track of SYNTCOMP synthesis problem defined by AIGER circuit A, with controllable (C) and uncontrollable (U) inputs, and single output error solution of synthesis problem is an AIG that includes original AIG A, and adds control structure B for inputs C such that resulting system never raises error Swen Jacobs SYNTCOMP
5 TLSF-based LTL Track of SYNTCOMP synthesis problem defined by TLSF specification (LTL formula, input/output signals, meta-information and parameterization) solution of synthesis problem is an AIG model checking by combination with an AIG for the spec Swen Jacobs SYNTCOMP
6 Lessons Learned from Previous Competitions SYNTCOMP with verified results is (in principle) feasible verification not always easy safety tools can give winning region (since 2016) SYNTCOMP is well-received (8 safety tools, 3 LTL tools until 2016) safety tools improved significantly from 2014 to 2016 Swen Jacobs SYNTCOMP
7 Mostly Stable Rules for SYNTCOMP 2017 No new tracks No new solver features Quality ranking re-introduced. New scheme: - every benchmark has a reference size ref (~best known solution, measured in gates of AIG) - if solver returns a correct solution of size n, then it gains n+1 2 log 10 quality points. ref+1 Swen Jacobs SYNTCOMP
8 SYNTCOMP 2017: AIGER/SAFETY TRACK
9 AIGER/Safety: Participants 2017 Re-entry: Demiurge (Könighofer, Seidl): SAT-based, different cooperating strategies [VMCAI14] SafetySynth (Tentrup): BDD-based, implements all optimizations from SYNTCOMP 2014 [STTT17] except abstraction Simple BDD Solver (Walker, Ryzhyk): BDD-based, abstraction, CUDD TermiteSAT (Legg, Narodytska, Ryzhyk, (Walker)): SAT-based, portfolio with Simple BDD Solver, hybrid mode that shares information [CAV16a] Updated: AbsSynthe (Brenguier, Perez, Raskin, Sankur): BDD-based, compositional, abstraction; updates on BDD minimization and compositionality [SYNT14,15] Tools that only support realizability check (no synthesis): Simple BDD Solver, TermiteSAT Swen Jacobs SYNTCOMP
10 AIGER/Safety Results 2017: Realizability Sequential execution mode: Rank Tool (conf) Solved Unique Number of Benchmarks: 234 Parallel execution mode: Rank Tool (conf) Solved Unique* 1 Simple BDD Solver (w/ Abstraction) SafetySynth SafetySynth (alt.) Simple BDD Solver Simple BDD Solver (w/ Abstraction 2) AbsSynthe (SC3) AbsSynthe (SC2) AbsSynthe (SC1) Demiurge (D1real) TermiteSAT (Hybrid) TermiteSAT (Portfolio) AbsSynthe (PC1) Demiurge (P3real) AbsSynthe (PC3) AbsSynthe (PC2) *: including sequential solutions Not solved: TermiteSAT Not solved: 22 Swen Jacobs SYNTCOMP
11 AIGER/Safety Results: By Benchmark Class 18 A few benchmark classes (not necessarily representative): Solved Instances by Class AMBA HWMCC Cycle Scheduling Driver Factory Assembly Line Load Balancer Moving Obstacle AbsSynthe SC2 Demiurge D1real SafetySynth Simple BDD Solver Simple BDD Solver w/ Abs. TermiteSAT 2016 AbsSynthe PC1 Demiurge P3real TermiteSAT Hybrid Swen Jacobs SYNTCOMP
12 AIGER/Safety Results 2017: Synthesis Sequential execution mode: Number of benchmarks: 234 Parallel execution mode: Rank Tool (conf) Solved Unique MC TO Quality 1 SafetySynth SafetySynth (alt.) AbsSynthe (SSC2) AbsSynthe (SSC3) Rank Tool (conf) Solved Unique MC TO Quality 1 AbsSynthe (PSC1) Demiurge (P3Synt) AbsSynthe (PSC3) AbsSynthe (PSC2) AbsSynthe (SSC1) Demiurge (D1Synt) not solved: 48 not solved: 27 Swen Jacobs SYNTCOMP
13 AIGER/Safety Results 2017: Synthesis Swen Jacobs SYNTCOMP
14 AIGER/Safety Results 2017: Synthesis Swen Jacobs SYNTCOMP
15 SYNTCOMP 2017: TLSF/LTL TRACK
16 TLSF/LTL: New Benchmarks 2017 Parameterized benchmarks: Decomposed AMBA benchmarks from Felix Klein Unrealizable variants of existing benchmarks (additional requirement forces violation after fixed number of steps, or eventually) Swen Jacobs SYNTCOMP
17 TLSF/LTL: Participants 2017 Updated: BoSy (Tentrup): bounded synthesis, SAT/QBF solving, new: automata translation by spot [CAV17] Acacia4Aiger (Brenguier, Perez, Raskin, Sankur): reduction to safety game, solved by antichains, uses compositionality, new: parallel mode Party (Khalimov): bounded synthesis, SMT solving, new modes: reduction to AIGER/safety game (kid aiger), portfolio of three configurations New entrants: Bowser (Klein): bounded synthesis, SAT solving, additional bounded cycle synthesis [CAV16b] and aggressive circuit optimizations spot-ltlsynt (Colange, Michaud): translation to turn-based parity games with edge acceptance conditions, solving by Zielonka or Calude algorithm, BDD solving Swen Jacobs SYNTCOMP
18 TLSF/LTL Results 2017: Realizability Number of benchmarks: 244 Sequential Execution Mode: Rank Tool (conf) Solved Unique 1 Party (kid aiger) spot-ltlsynt Bosy (spot) Bosy (ltl3ba) Party (int) Parallel Execution Mode: Rank Tool (conf) Solved Unique 1 Party (portfolio) Bosy (spot, par) Bowser (par) Bosy (ltl3ba, par) Acacia 4 Aiger (par) Bowser Party (bool) Acacia 4 Aiger Not Solved: 10 Not Solved: 13 Swen Jacobs SYNTCOMP
19 TLSF/LTL Results 2017: Parameterized Benchmarks Number of solved instances for increasing parameter AMBA Dec. Arbiter AMBA Dec. Lock Generalized Buffer Load Balancer Full Arbiter Unreal (1_2) Load Balancer Unreal (1_4) Acacia 4 Aiger BoSy (ltl3ba) BoSy (spot) Bowser Party (int) Party (kid aiger) spot-ltlsynt Acacia 4 Aiger (par) Bowser par Party (portfolio) Swen Jacobs SYNTCOMP
20 TLSF/LTL Results 2017: Synthesis Number of benchmarks: 244 Sequential execution mode: Parallel execution mode: Rank Tool (conf) Solved Unique MC TO Quality Rank Tool (conf) Solved Unique MC TO Quality 1 Party (kid aiger) spot-ltlsynt BoSy (spot) Party (int) BoSy (ltl3ba) Party (bool) Bowser (c0) Bowser (c1) Acacia 4 Aiger Party (portfolio) BoSy (spot, par) BoSy (ltl3ba, par) Bowser (c0, par) Bowser (c1, par) Bowser (c2,par) Acacia 4 Aiger not solved: Bowser (c2) not solved: 29 Swen Jacobs SYNTCOMP
21 TLSF/LTL Results 2017: Synthesis Swen Jacobs SYNTCOMP
22 TLSF/LTL Results 2017: Synthesis Average Quality Bowser (c2, par): 1.73 BoSy (ltl3ba,par): 1.69 Party (portfolio): 1.52 Party (int): 1.49 Party (kid aiger): 1.09 spot-ltlsynt: 0.99 Acacia 4 Aiger (par): 0.9 Number of solutions that are smaller than reference size: Bowser (c2, par): 50 BoSy (ltl3ba, par): 31 Party (portfolio): 27 spot-ltlsynt: 8 Acacia 4 Aiger (par): 0 Swen Jacobs SYNTCOMP
23 SYNTCOMP 2017: Summary Winners of AIGER/Safety Track: Sequential Parallel Realizability Simple BDD Solver TermiteSAT Synthesis SafetySynth AbsSynthe Synthesis Quality SafetySynth Demiurge Winners of TLSF/LTL Track: Sequential Parallel Realizability Party Party Synthesis Party Party Synthesis Quality BoSy Party Detailed data online: News and announcements on Swen Jacobs SYNTCOMP
24 References [CAV13] Khalimov, A., Jacobs, S., & Bloem, R. PARTY parameterized synthesis of token rings. In CAV 2013, LNCS 8044 (pp ). [CAV16a] Legg, A., Narodytska, N., & Ryzhyk, L. A SAT-Based Counterexample Guided Method for Unbounded Synthesis. In CAV 2016 (II), LNCS 9780 (pp ). [CAV16b] Finkbeiner, B., & Klein, F. Bounded cycle synthesis. In CAV 2016 (I), LNCS 9779 (pp ). [CAV17] [SYNT14] Faymonville, P., Finkbeiner, B. & Tentrup, L. BoSy: An experimentation framework for Bounded Synthesis. In CAV 2017 (II), LNCS (pp ). Brenguier, R., Pérez, G. A., Raskin, J. F., & Sankur, O. AbsSynthe: abstract synthesis from succinct safety specifications. In SYNT 2014, EPTCS 157 (pp ). [SYNT15a] Brenguier, R., Pérez, G. A., Raskin, J. F., & Sankur, O. Compositional Algorithms for Succinct Safety Games. In SYNT 2015, EPTCS 202 (pp ). [SYNT15b] Jacobs, S., Bloem, R., Brenguier, R., Könighofer, R., Pérez, G. A., Raskin, J. F.,... & Walker, A. The second reactive synthesis competition (SYNTCOMP 2015). In SYNT 2015, EPTCS 202 (pp ) [SYNT16] Jacobs, S., Bloem, R., Brenguier, R., Khalimov, A., Klein, F., Könighofer, R.,... & Raskin, J. F. The 3rd reactive synthesis competition (SYNTCOMP 2016): Benchmarks, participants & results. In SYNT 2016, EPTCS 229 (pp ). [VMCAI14] Bloem, R., Könighofer, R., & Seidl, M. SAT-based synthesis methods for safety specs. In VMCAI 2014, LNCS 8318 (pp. 1-20). [STTT17] Jacobs, S., Bloem, R., Brenguier, R., Ehlers, R., Hell, T., Könighofer, R.,... & Seidl, M. The first reactive synthesis competition (SYNTCOMP 2014). In STTT, 19(3), 2017 (pp ). Swen Jacobs SYNTCOMP
PARTY Parameterized Synthesis of Token Rings
PARTY Parameterized Synthesis of Token Rings Ayrat Khalimov, Swen Jacobs, and Roderick Bloem Graz University of Technology, Austria Abstract. Synthesis is the process of automatically constructing an implementation
PARTY Parameterized Synthesis of Token Rings
PARTY Parameterized Synthesis of Token Rings Ayrat Khalimov, Swen Jacobs, and Roderick Bloem Graz University of Technology, Austria Abstract. Synthesis is the process of automatically constructing an implementation
Dr Leonid Ryzhyk. Researcher, Samsung Research America. Research interests. Employment. Education. Awards
Dr Leonid Ryzhyk Researcher, Samsung Research America Apt 1722, 100 N Whisman Road Mountain View, CA 94043 USA +1 412 425 2100 leonid@ryzhyk.net ryzhyk.net Research interests The main theme of my research
SAT-Based Synthesis Methods for Safety Specs
SAT-Based Synthesis Methods for Safety Specs Roderick Bloem 1, Robert Könighofer 1, and Martina Seidl 2 1 Institute for Applied Information Processing and Communications (IAIK) Graz University of Technology,
Symbolically Synthesizing Small Circuits
Symbolically Synthesizing Small Circuits Rüdiger Ehlers 1, Robert Könighofer 2, and Georg Hofferek 2 1 Reactive Systems Group, Saarland University, Germany 2 Institute for Applied Information Processing
Xuandong Li. BACH: Path-oriented Reachability Checker of Linear Hybrid Automata
BACH: Path-oriented Reachability Checker of Linear Hybrid Automata Xuandong Li Department of Computer Science and Technology, Nanjing University, P.R.China Outline Preliminary Knowledge Path-oriented Reachability
PROGRAM ANALYSIS & SYNTHESIS
Lecture Partial Programs, Program Repair, and Sketching PROGRAM ANALYSIS & SYNTHESIS EranYahav Previously Synthesis from examples SMARTEdit String processing in spreadsheet from examples (a little bit)
HECTOR: Formal System-Level to RTL Equivalence Checking
ATG SoC HECTOR: Formal System-Level to RTL Equivalence Checking Alfred Koelbl, Sergey Berezin, Reily Jacoby, Jerry Burch, William Nicholls, Carl Pixley Advanced Technology Group Synopsys, Inc. June 2008
Tutorial on Model Checking Modelling and Verification in Computer Science
Tutorial on Model Checking Modelling and Verification in Computer Science Armin Biere Institute for Formal Models and Verification Johannes Kepler University, Linz, Austria Abstract. This paper serves
Synthesis of Synchronization using Uninterpreted Functions
Synthesis of Synchronization using Uninterpreted Functions* October 22, 2014 Roderick Bloem, Georg Hofferek, Bettina Könighofer, Robert Könighofer, Simon Außerlechner, and Raphael Spörk * This work was
Automatic Hardware Synthesis from Specifications: A Case Study
Automatic Hardware Synthesis from Specifications: A Case Study Roderick Bloem 1 Stefan Galler 1 Barbara Jobstmann 1 Nir Piterman 2 Amir Pnueli 3 Martin Weiglhofer 1 1 Graz University of Technology 2 EPFL
Model Checking and Its Applications
Model Checking and Its Applications Orna Grumberg Technion, Israel Verification and Deduction Mentoring Workshop July 13, 2018 1 Personal data Ph.d. in (non-automated) verification Postdoc in Model Checking
Bounded Model Checking with Parametric Data Structures
Bounded Model Checking with Marc Herbstritt (joint work with Erika Ábrahám, Bernd Becker, Martin Steffen) www.avacs.org August 15 2006 4th International Workshop on Bounded Model Checking Context Automated
A Toolbox for Counter-Example Analysis and Optimization
A Toolbox for Counter-Example Analysis and Optimization Alan Mishchenko Niklas Een Robert Brayton Department of EECS, University of California, Berkeley {alanmi, een, brayton}@eecs.berkeley.edu Abstract
ALASKA Antichains for Logic, Automata and Symbolic Kripke structures Analysis
ALASKA Antichains for Logic, Automata and Symbolic Kripke structures Analysis M. De Wulf 1, L. Doyen 2, N. Maquet 1 and J.-F. Raskin 1 1 Université Libre de Bruxelles (ULB), Belgium 2 École Polytechnique
Efficiently Solving Bit-Vector Problems Using Model Checkers
Efficiently Solving Bit-Vector Problems Using Model Checkers Institute for Formal Models and Verification Johannes Kepler University, Linz, Austria http://fmv.jku.at SMT 2013 July 8 - July 9, 2013 Helsinki,
BOOSTER: Speeding Up RTL Property Checking of Digital Designs by Word-Level Abstraction
BOOSTER: Speeding Up RTL Property Checking of Digital Designs by Word-Level Abstraction Peer Johannsen Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, Design Automation, CT SE 4 81730 Munich, Germany peer.johannsen@mchp.siemens.de
Sciduction: Combining Induction, Deduction and Structure for Verification and Synthesis
Sciduction: Combining Induction, Deduction and Structure for Verification and Synthesis (abridged version of DAC slides) Sanjit A. Seshia Associate Professor EECS Department UC Berkeley Design Automation
Verifying Concurrent Programs
Verifying Concurrent Programs Daniel Kroening 8 May 1 June 01 Outline Shared-Variable Concurrency Predicate Abstraction for Concurrent Programs Boolean Programs with Bounded Replication Boolean Programs
Network Verification: Reflections from Electronic Design Automation (EDA)
Network Verification: Reflections from Electronic Design Automation (EDA) Sharad Malik Princeton University MSR Faculty Summit: 7/8/2015 $4 Billion EDA industry EDA Consortium $350 Billion Semiconductor
ABC basics (compilation from different articles)
1. AIG construction 2. AIG optimization 3. Technology mapping ABC basics (compilation from different articles) 1. BACKGROUND An And-Inverter Graph (AIG) is a directed acyclic graph (DAG), in which a node
NuSMV 2: An OpenSource Tool for Symbolic Model Checking
NuSMV 2: An OpenSource Tool for Symbolic Model Checking Alessandro Cimatti, Edmund Clarke, Enrico Giunchiglia, Fausto Giunchiglia, Marco Pistore, Marco Roveri, Roberto Sebastiani, and Armando Tacchella
Lecture 2: Symbolic Model Checking With SAT
Lecture 2: Symbolic Model Checking With SAT Edmund M. Clarke, Jr. School of Computer Science Carnegie Mellon University Pittsburgh, PA 15213 (Joint work over several years with: A. Biere, A. Cimatti, Y.
NuSMV 2: An OpenSource Tool for Symbolic Model Checking
Carnegie Mellon University Research Showcase @ CMU Computer Science Department School of Computer Science 2002 NuSMV 2: An OpenSource Tool for Symbolic Model Checking Alessandro Cimatti ITC-IRST Edmund
Cut-Based Inductive Invariant Computation
Cut-Based Inductive Invariant Computation Alan Mishchenko 1 Michael Case 1,2 Robert Brayton 1 1 Department of EECS, University of California, Berkeley, CA 2 IBM Systems and Technology Group, Austin, TX
Finding bugs in the LHC: Verification methods for PLC programs
Dániel Darvas (CERN) Finding bugs in the LHC: Verification methods for PLC programs Alpine Verification Meeting 18 21/09/2017, Visegrád Contains joint work with B. Fernández, E. Blanco, Gy. Sallai, I.
Parallel Model Checking of ω-automata
Parallel Model Checking of ω-automata Vincent Bloemen Formal Methods and Tools, University of Twente v.bloemen@utwente.nl Abstract. Specifications for non-terminating reactive systems are described by
arxiv: v1 [cs.lo] 2 Feb 2018
![arxiv: v1 [cs.lo] 2 Feb 2018](/thumbs/74/71263888.jpg "arxiv: v1 [cs.lo] 2 Feb 2018")
Strategy Representation by Decision Trees in Reactive Synthesis Tomáš Brázdil 1, Krishnendu Chatterjee 2, Jan Křetínský 3, and Viktor Toman 2 1 Masaryk University, Brno, Czech Republic 2 Institute of Science
F-Soft: Software Verification Platform
F-Soft: Software Verification Platform F. Ivančić, Z. Yang, M.K. Ganai, A. Gupta, I. Shlyakhter, and P. Ashar NEC Laboratories America, 4 Independence Way, Suite 200, Princeton, NJ 08540 fsoft@nec-labs.com
Efficient Circuit to CNF Conversion
Efficient Circuit to CNF Conversion Panagiotis Manolios and Daron Vroon College of Computing, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, 30332, USA http://www.cc.gatech.edu/home/{manolios,vroon} Abstract.
Research Collection. Formal background and algorithms. Other Conference Item. ETH Library. Author(s): Biere, Armin. Publication Date: 2001
Research Collection Other Conference Item Formal background and algorithms Author(s): Biere, Armin Publication Date: 2001 Permanent Link: https://doi.org/10.3929/ethz-a-004239730 Rights / License: In Copyright
Symbolic vs. Bounded Synthesis for Petri Games
Symbolic vs. Bounded Synthesis for Petri Games Bernd Finkbeiner Universität des Saarlandes Saarbrücken, Germany finkbeiner@react.uni-saarland.de Jesko Hecking-Harbusch Universität des Saarlandes Saarbrücken,
StateClock: a Tool for Timed Reactive Modules
StateClock: a Tool for Timed Reactive Modules Jonathan S. Ostroff Department Of Computer Science, York University, Toronto, Canada, M3J 1P3. Email: jonathan@yorku.ca Abstract: We provide an overview of
Towards Synthesis from Assume-Guarantee Contracts involving Infinite Theories: A Preliminary Report
Towards Synthesis from Assume-Guarantee Contracts involving Infinite Theories: A Preliminary Report Andreas Katis Department of Computer Science and Engineering University of Minnesota 200 Union Street
Configurable Software Model Checking
Configurable Software Model Checking CPAchecker Dirk Beyer Dirk Beyer 1 / 26 Software Verification C Program int main() { int a = foo(); int b = bar(a); } assert(a == b); Verification Tool TRUE i.e., specification
Decidability in Parameterized Verification1
Decidability in Parameterized Verification1 Roderick Bloem Swen Jacobs TU Graz Universita t des Saarlandes Graz, Austria Saarbru cken, Germany roderick.bloem@iaik.tugraz.at jacobs@react.uni-saarland.de
More on Verification and Model Checking
More on Verification and Model Checking Wednesday Oct 07, 2015 Philipp Rümmer Uppsala University Philipp.Ruemmer@it.uu.se 1/60 Course fair! 2/60 Exam st October 21, 8:00 13:00 If you want to participate,
Computer Lab 1: Model Checking and Logic Synthesis using Spin (lab)
Computer Lab 1: Model Checking and Logic Synthesis using Spin (lab) Richard M. Murray Nok Wongpiromsarn Ufuk Topcu Calornia Institute of Technology AFRL, 25 April 2012 Outline Spin model checker: modeling
Model Checking. Automatic Verification Model Checking. Process A Process B. when not possible (not AI).
Sérgio Campos scampos@dcc.ufmg.br Why? Imagine the implementation of a complex hardware or software system: A 100K gate ASIC perhaps 100 concurrent modules; A flight control system dozens of concurrent
Model Checking: Back and Forth Between Hardware and Software
Model Checking: Back and Forth Between Hardware and Software Edmund Clarke 1, Anubhav Gupta 1, Himanshu Jain 1, and Helmut Veith 2 1 School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University {emc, anubhav,
Model Checking with Automata An Overview
Model Checking with Automata An Overview Vanessa D Carson Control and Dynamical Systems, Caltech Doyle Group Presentation, 05/02/2008 VC 1 Contents Motivation Overview Software Verification Techniques
XEVE, an ESTEREL Verification Environment
XEVE, an ESTEREL Verification Environment Amar Bouali INRIA, B.P. 93, F-06902 Sophia-Antipolis cedex amar@sophia, inria, fr Abstract. We describe the verification methods and tools we are currently developing
Abstraction Refinement for Bounded Model Checking
Abstraction Refinement for Bounded Model Checking Anubhav Gupta 1 and Ofer Strichman 2 1 School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University, USA anubhav@cs.cmu.edu 2 Information Systems Engineering,
CS 267: Automated Verification. Lecture 13: Bounded Model Checking. Instructor: Tevfik Bultan
CS 267: Automated Verification Lecture 13: Bounded Model Checking Instructor: Tevfik Bultan Remember Symbolic Model Checking Represent sets of states and the transition relation as Boolean logic formulas
Combining Induction, Deduction and Structure for Synthesis
Combining Induction, Deduction and Structure for Synthesis Sanjit A. Seshia Associate Professor EECS Department UC Berkeley Students: S. Jha, B. Brady, J. Kotker, W.Li Collaborators: R. Bryant, S. Gulwani,
Acceleration of SAT-based Iterative Property Checking
Acceleration of SAT-based Iterative Property Checking Daniel Große Rolf Drechsler Institute of Computer Science University of Bremen 28359 Bremen, Germany {grosse, drechsle}@informatik.uni-bremen.de Abstract
OpenMath and SMT-LIB
James, Matthew England, Roberto Sebastiani & Patrick Trentin 1 Universities of Bath/Coventry/Trento/Trento J.H.@bath.ac.uk 17 July 2017 1 Thanks to EU H2020-FETOPEN-2016-2017-CSA project SC 2 (712689)
Verifying Temporal Properties via Dynamic Program Execution. Zhenhua Duan Xidian University, China
Verifying Temporal Properties via Dynamic Program Execution Zhenhua Duan Xidian University, China Main Points Background & Motivation MSVL and Compiler PPTL Unified Program Verification Tool Demo Conclusion
Computing State Matching in Sequential Circuits in Application to Temporal Parallel Simulation
Computing State Matching in Sequential Circuits in Application to Temporal Parallel Simulation Dusung Kim 1 Daniel Gomez-Prado 1 Seiyang Yang 2 Maciej Ciesielski 1 1 Department of Electrical and Computer
The Maude LTL Model Checker and Its Implementation
The Maude LTL Model Checker and Its Implementation Steven Eker 1,José Meseguer 2, and Ambarish Sridharanarayanan 2 1 Computer Science Laboratory, SRI International Menlo Park, CA 94025 eker@csl.sri.com
Model Checking Revision: Model Checking for Infinite Systems Revision: Traffic Light Controller (TLC) Revision: 1.12
Model Checking mc Revision:.2 Model Checking for Infinite Systems mc 2 Revision:.2 check algorithmically temporal / sequential properties fixpoint algorithms with symbolic representations: systems are
PLDI 2016 Tutorial Automata-Based String Analysis
PLDI 2016 Tutorial Automata-Based String Analysis Tevfik Bultan, Abdulbaki Aydin, Lucas Bang Verification Laboratory http://vlab.cs.ucsb.edu Department of Computer Science Common Usages of Strings } Input
Duet: Static Analysis for Unbounded Parallelism
Duet: Static Analysis for Unbounded Parallelism Azadeh Farzan and Zachary Kincaid University of Toronto Abstract. Duet is a static analysis tool for concurrent programs in which the number of executing
CAQE: A Certifying QBF Solver
CAQE: A Certifying QBF Solver Markus N. Rabe University of California, Berkeley rabe@berkeley.edu Leander Tentrup Saarland University tentrup@cs.uni-saarland.de Abstract We present a new CEGAR-based algorithm
NO WARRANTY. Use of any trademarks in this presentation is not intended in any way to infringe on the rights of the trademark holder.
NO WARRANTY THIS MATERIAL OF CARNEGIE MELLON UNIVERSITY AND ITS SOFTWARE ENGINEERING INSTITUTE IS FURNISHED ON AN AS-IS" BASIS. CARNEGIE MELLON UNIVERSITY MAKES NO WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESSED
Action Language Verifier, Extended
Action Language Verifier, Extended Tuba Yavuz-Kahveci 1, Constantinos Bartzis 2, and Tevfik Bultan 3 1 University of Florida 2 Carnegie Mellon University 3 UC, Santa Barbara 1 Introduction Action Language
COUNTEREXAMPLE-GUIDED MODEL SYNTHESIS
COUNTEREXAMPLE-GUIDED MODEL SYNTHESIS Mathias Preiner?y, Aina Niemetz?y and Armin Biere?? Johannes Kepler University y Stanford University SMT Workshop July 22-23, 2017 Heidelberg, Germany Introduction
Symbolic Synthesis of Observability Requirements for Diagnosability
Symbolic Synthesis of Observability Requirements for Diagnosability B. Bittner 1,2 M.Bozzano 2 A. Cimatti 2 X. Olive 3 1 University of Amsterdam, Science Park 904, 1098XH Amsterdam, The Netherlands bittner@science.uva.nl
Automated Refinement Checking of Asynchronous Processes. Rajeev Alur. University of Pennsylvania
Automated Refinement Checking of Asynchronous Processes Rajeev Alur University of Pennsylvania www.cis.upenn.edu/~alur/ Intel Formal Verification Seminar, July 2001 Problem Refinement Checking Given two
COUNTEREXAMPLE-GUIDED MODEL SYNTHESIS
COUNTEREXAMPLE-GUIDED MODEL SYNTHESIS Mathias Preiner, Aina Niemetz and Armin Biere Johannes Kepler University Stanford University SMT Workshop July 22-23, 2017 Heidelberg, Germany Introduction Counterexample-Guided
Temporal logic-based decision making and control. Jana Tumova Robotics, Perception, and Learning Department (RPL)
Temporal logic-based decision making and control Jana Tumova Robotics, Perception, and Learning Department (RPL) DARPA Urban Challenge 2007 2 Formal verification Does a system meet requirements? System
What You Always Wanted to Know about Model Checking of Fault-Tolerant Distributed Algorithms
What You Always Wanted to Know about Model Checking of Fault-Tolerant Distributed Algorithms Igor Konnov, Helmut Veith, and Josef Widder TU Wien (Vienna University of Technology) Abstract. Distributed
DSVerifier: A Bounded Model Checking Tool for Digital Systems
DSVerifier: A Bounded Model Checking Tool for Digital Systems Hussama I. Ismail, Iury V. Bessa, Lucas C. Cordeiro, Eddie B. de Lima Filho and João E. Chaves Filho Electronic and Information Research Center
SAT-Based Area Recovery in Technology Mapping
SAT-Based Area Recovery in Technology Mapping Bruno Schmitt Ecole Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne (EPFL) bruno@oschmitt.com Alan Mishchenko Robert Brayton Department of EECS, UC Berkeley {alanmi, brayton}@berkeley.edu
UNDERSTANDING PROGRAMMING BUGS IN ANSI-C SOFTWARE USING BOUNDED MODEL CHECKING COUNTER-EXAMPLES
FEDERAL UNIVERSITY OF AMAZONAS INSTITUTE OF COMPUTING GRADUATE PROGRAM IN COMPUTER SCIENCE UNDERSTANDING PROGRAMMING BUGS IN ANSI-C SOFTWARE USING BOUNDED MODEL CHECKING COUNTER-EXAMPLES Herbert Oliveira
Model Checking Software Programs with. First Order Logic Specifications using AIG Solvers
Model Checking Software Programs with 1 First Order Logic Specifications using AIG Solvers Fadi A. Zaraket, Mohamad Noureddine arxiv:1409.6825v1 [cs.se] 24 Sep 2014 Abstract Static verification techniques
Ufo: A Framework for Abstraction- and Interpolation-Based Software Verification
Ufo: A Framework for Abstraction- and Interpolation-Based Software Verification Aws Albarghouthi 1, Yi Li 1, Arie Gurfinkel 2, and Marsha Chechik 1 1 Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto,
CSE507. Practical Applications of SAT. Computer-Aided Reasoning for Software. Emina Torlak
Computer-Aided Reasoning for Software CSE507 Practical Applications of SAT courses.cs.washington.edu/courses/cse507/18sp/ Emina Torlak emina@cs.washington.edu Today Past 2 lectures The theory and mechanics
Automated Formal Methods for Embedded Systems
Automated Formal Methods for Embedded Systems Bernd Finkbeiner Universität des Saarlandes Reactive Systems Group 2011/02/03 Bernd Finkbeiner (UdS) Embedded Systems 2011/02/03 1 / 48 Automated Formal Methods
Benchmarking of Java Verification Tools at the Software Verification Competition (SV-COMP) Lucas Cordeiro Daniel Kroening Peter Schrammel
Benchmarking of Java Verification Tools at the Software Verification Competition (SV-COMP) Lucas Cordeiro Daniel Kroening Peter Schrammel JPF Workshop 2018 What is SV-COMP? https://sv-comp.sosy-lab.org
SAT-Based Area Recovery in Structural Technology Mapping
SAT-Based Area Recovery in Structural Technology Mapping Bruno Schmitt Alan Mishchenko Robert Brayton Ecole Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne (EPFL) bruno.schmitt@epfl.ch Department of EECS, UC Berkley
KRATOS A Software Model Checker for SystemC
KRATOS A Software Model Checker for SystemC A. Cimatti, A. Griggio, A. Micheli, I. Narasamdya, and M. Roveri Fondazione Bruno Kessler Irst {cimatti,griggio,amicheli,narasamdya,roveri}@fbk.eu Abstract.
Owl: A Library for ω-words, Automata, and LTL
Owl: A Library for ω-words, Automata, and LTL Jan Křetínský, Tobias Meggendorfer, and Salomon Sickert Technical University of Munich Abstract. We present the library Owl (Omega-Words, automata, and LTL)
Linking Natural Language to Action. Advisors: George Pappas and Norm Badler
Linking Natural Language to Action Hadas Kress-Gazit Jan M. Allbeck Advisors: George Pappas and Norm Badler SUBTLE MURI LTL and PAR Integration Pragmatics->PAR->LTL->PAR Commands in the form of PARs will
Checking Equivalence for Partial Implementations
Checking Equivalence for Partial Implementations Christoph Scholl Institute of Computer Science Albert Ludwigs University D 79110 Freiburg im Breisgau, Germany email: scholl@informatik.uni-freiburg.de
Combining Abstraction Refinement and SAT-Based Model Checking
Combining Abstraction Refinement and SAT-Based Model Checking Nina Amla and Kenneth L. McMillan Cadence Design Systems Abstract. Unbounded model checking methods based on Boolean satisfiability (SAT) solvers
Hyperkernel: Push-Button Verification of an OS Kernel
Hyperkernel: Push-Button Verification of an OS Kernel Luke Nelson, Helgi Sigurbjarnarson, Kaiyuan Zhang, Dylan Johnson, James Bornholt, Emina Torlak, and Xi Wang The OS Kernel is a critical component Essential
Binary Decision Diagrams and Symbolic Model Checking
Binary Decision Diagrams and Symbolic Model Checking Randy Bryant Ed Clarke Ken McMillan Allen Emerson CMU CMU Cadence U Texas http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~bryant Binary Decision Diagrams Restricted Form of
Efficient Modeling and Verification of Analog/Mixed-Signal Circuits
Efficient Modeling and Verification of Analog/Mixed-Signal Circuits Scott R. Little University of Utah Motivation 1 About 75 percent of all chips include analog circuits. These circuits make up 2 percent
A Fast Reparameterization Procedure
A Fast Reparameterization Procedure Niklas Een, Alan Mishchenko {een,alanmi}@eecs.berkeley.edu Berkeley Verification and Synthesis Research Center EECS Department University of California, Berkeley, USA.
Factored Boolean Functional Synthesis
Factored Boolean Functional Synthesis Lucas M. Tabajara Department of Computer Science, Rice University Houston, USA lucasmt@rice.edu Moshe Y. Vardi Department of Computer Science, Rice University Houston,
Mechanically-Verified Validation of Satisfiability Solvers
Mechanically-Verified Validation of Satisfiability Solvers Nathan Wetzler The University of Texas at Austin Dissertation Proposal October 18, 2013 Outline Motivation and Proposal Satisfiability and Proofs
JPF SE: A Symbolic Execution Extension to Java PathFinder
JPF SE: A Symbolic Execution Extension to Java PathFinder Saswat Anand 1,CorinaS.Păsăreanu 2, and Willem Visser 2 1 College of Computing, Georgia Institute of Technology saswat@cc.gatech.edu 2 QSS and
Embedded Software Verification Challenges and Solutions. Static Program Analysis
Embedded Software Verification Challenges and Solutions Static Program Analysis Chao Wang chaowang@nec-labs.com NEC Labs America Princeton, NJ ICCAD Tutorial November 11, 2008 www.nec-labs.com 1 Outline
INF672 Protocol Safety and Verification. Karthik Bhargavan Xavier Rival Thomas Clausen
INF672 Protocol Safety and Verication Karthik Bhargavan Xavier Rival Thomas Clausen 1 Course Outline Lecture 1 [Today, Sep 15] Introduction, Motivating Examples Lectures 2-4 [Sep 22,29, Oct 6] Network
Modeling a Cache Coherence Protocol with the Guarded Action Language
Modeling a Cache Coherence Protocol with the Guarded Action Language Quentin Meunier, Yann Thierry-Mieg, Emmanuelle Encrenaz Laboratoire d Informatique de Paris 6, Sorbonne Université, Paris. The TeraScale
Busy Man s Synthesis: Combinational Delay Optimization With SAT
Busy Man s Synthesis: Combinational Delay Optimization With SAT Mathias Soeken 1 Giovanni De Micheli 1 Alan Mishchenko 2 1 Integrated Systems Laboratory, EPFL, Lausanne, Switzerland 2 Department of EECS,
BDD-based software verification
Int J Softw Tools Technol Transfer (2014) 16:507 518 DOI 10.1007/s10009-014-0334-1 RERS BDD-based software verification Applications to event-condition-action systems Dirk Beyer Andreas Stahlbauer Published
Formal Deadlock Analysis of SpecC Models Using Satisfiability Modulo Theories
Formal Deadlock Analysis of SpecC Models Using Satisfiability Modulo Theories Che-Wei Chang and Rainer Dömer Center for Embedded Computer Systems University of California, Irvine Irvine, CA 92697-2625,
Improved BDD-based Discrete Analysis of Timed Systems
Improved BDD-based Discrete Analysis of Timed Systems Truong Khanh Nguyen 1, Jun Sun 2, Yang Liu 1, Jin Song Dong 1 and Yan Liu 1 1 School of Computing National University of Singapore 2 Information System
On Resolution Proofs for Combinational Equivalence Checking
On Resolution Proofs for Combinational Equivalence Checking Satrajit Chatterjee Alan Mishchenko Robert Brayton Department of EECS U. C. Berkeley {satrajit, alanmi, brayton}@eecs.berkeley.edu Andreas Kuehlmann
Part II. Hoare Logic and Program Verification. Why specify programs? Specification and Verification. Code Verification. Why verify programs?
Part II. Hoare Logic and Program Verification Part II. Hoare Logic and Program Verification Dilian Gurov Props: Models: Specs: Method: Tool: safety of data manipulation source code logic assertions Hoare
Software verification for ubiquitous computing
Software verification for ubiquitous computing Marta Kwiatkowska Computing Laboratory, University of Oxford QA 09, Grenoble, June 2009 Software everywhere Electronic devices, ever smaller Laptops, phones,
PRISM-games 2.0: A Tool for Multi-Objective Strategy Synthesis for Stochastic Games
PRISM-games 2.0: A Tool for Multi-Objective Strategy Synthesis for Stochastic Games Marta Kwiatkowska 1, David Parker 2, and Clemens Wiltsche 1 1 Department of Computer Science, University of Oxford, UK
The SPIN Model Checker
The SPIN Model Checker Metodi di Verifica del Software Andrea Corradini Lezione 1 2013 Slides liberamente adattate da Logic Model Checking, per gentile concessione di Gerard J. Holzmann http://spinroot.com/spin/doc/course/
Temporal Refinement Using SMT and Model Checking with an Application to Physical-Layer Protocols
Temporal Refinement Using SMT and Model Checking with an Application to Physical-Layer Protocols Lee Pike (Presenting), Galois, Inc. leepike@galois.com Geoffrey M. Brown, Indiana University geobrown@cs.indiana.edu
Finding Bugs in an Alpha Microprocessor Using Satisfiability Solvers
Finding Bugs in an Alpha Microprocessor Using Satisfiability Solvers Per Bjesse 1, Tim Leonard 2, and Abdel Mokkedem 2 1 Chalmers University of Technology, Sweden bjesse@cs.chalmers.se 2 Compaq Computer
Verification of Behavior-Based Control Systems in their Physical Environment
Verification of Behavior-Based Control Systems in their Physical Environment Thorsten Ropertz, Prof. Dr. Karsten Berns Robotics Research Lab Department of Computer Science University of Kaiserslautern,
BDD-Based Software Verification
Software Tools for Technology Transfer manuscript No. (will be inserted by the editor) BDD-Based Software Verification Applications to Event-Condition-Action Systems Dirk Beyer and Andreas Stahlbauer University
Checking Equivalence for Circuits Containing Incompletely Specified Boxes
Freiburg, Germany, September 00 Checking Equivalence for Circuits Containing Incompletely Specified Boxes Christoph Scholl Bernd Becker Institute of Computer Science Albert Ludwigs University D 79110 Freiburg