Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]

Skip to main content

An Assume-Guarantee Rule for Checking Simulation

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Formal Methods in Computer-Aided Design (FMCAD 1998)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 1522))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

The simulation preorder on state transition systems is widely accepted as a useful notion of refinement, both in its own right and as an efficiently checkable sufficient condition for trace containment. For composite systems, due to the exponential explosion of the state space, there is a need for decomposing a simulation check of the form P< s Q into simpler simulation checks on the components of P and Q. We present an assume-guarantee rule that enables such a decomposition. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first assume-guarantee rule that applies to a refinement relation different from trace containment. Our rule is circular, and its soundness proof requires induction on trace trees. The proof is constructive: given simulation relations that witness the simulation preorder between corresponding components of P and Q, we provide a procedure for constructing a witness relation for P< s Q. We also extend our assume-guarantee rule to account for fairness assumptions on transition systems.

This research was supported in part by the Office of Naval Research Young Investigator award N00014-95-1-0520, by the National Science Foundation CAREER award CCR-9501708, by the National Science Foundation grant CCR-9504469, by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency grant NAG2-1214, by the Army Research Office MURI grant DAAH-04-96-1-0341, and by the Semiconductor Research Corporation contract 97-DC-324.041.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. R. Alur and T.A. Henzinger. Reactive modules. In Proceedings of the 11th Annual Symposium on Logic in Computer Science, pages 207–218. IEEE Computer Society Press, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  2. M. Abadi and L. Lamport. The existence of refinement mappings. Theoretical Computer Science, 82(2):253–284, 1991.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  3. M. Abadi and L. Lamport. Conjoining specifications. ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems, 17(3):507–534, 1995.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. E.M. Clarke, D.E. Long, and K.L. McMillan. Compositional model checking. In Proceedings of the 4th Annual Symposium on Logic in Computer Science, pages 353–362. IEEE Computer Society Press, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  5. D.L. Dill. Trace Theory for Automatic Hierarchical Verification of Speed-independent Circuits. The MIT Press, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  6. O. Grumberg and D.E. Long. Model checking and modular verification. ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems, 16(3):843–871, 1994.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. T.A. Henzinger, O. Kupferman, and S. K. Rajamani. Fair simulation. In CONCUR 97: Theories of Concurrency, Lecture Notes in Computer Science 1243, pages 273–287. Springer-Verlag, July 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  8. R.P. Kurshan. Computer-aided Verification of Coordinating Processes. Princeton University Press, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  9. N.A. Lynch. Distributed Algorithms. Morgan-Kaufmann, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  10. K.L. McMillan. A compositional rule for hardware design refinement. In CAV 97: Computer-Aided Verification, Lecture Notes in Computer Science1254, pages 24–35. Springer-Verlag, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  11. R. Milner. An algebraic definition of simulation between programs. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 481–489. The British Computer Society, 1971.

    Google Scholar 

  12. E.W. Stark. A proof technique for rely/guarantee properties. In Proceedings of the 5th Conference on Foundations of Software Technology and Theoretical Computer Science, Lecture Notes in Computer Science 206, pages 369–391. Springer-Verlag, 1985.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1998 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Henzinger, T.A., Qadeer, S., Rajamani, S.K., TaŞiran, S. (1998). An Assume-Guarantee Rule for Checking Simulation. In: Gopalakrishnan, G., Windley, P. (eds) Formal Methods in Computer-Aided Design. FMCAD 1998. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 1522. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-49519-3_27

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-49519-3_27

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-65191-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-49519-2

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics