bisimilarity and hennessy milner logic
play

Bisimilarity and Hennessy-Milner Logic Luca Aceto ICE-TCS, School - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Introduction to Model Checking Hennessy-Milner Logic Hennessy-Milner Logic with One Recursive Definition Selection of Temporal Properties Bisimilarity and Hennessy-Milner Logic Luca Aceto ICE-TCS, School of Computer Science, Reykjavik


  1. Introduction to Model Checking Hennessy-Milner Logic Hennessy-Milner Logic with One Recursive Definition Selection of Temporal Properties Bisimilarity and Hennessy-Milner Logic Luca Aceto ICE-TCS, School of Computer Science, Reykjavik University Luca Aceto Bisimilarity and HML

  2. Introduction to Model Checking Hennessy-Milner Logic Hennessy-Milner Logic with One Recursive Definition Selection of Temporal Properties Tentative Plan 1 An introduction to Hennessy-Milner logic (HML) 2 Syntax and semantics of HML 3 Correspondence with bisimilarity 4 Hennessy-Milner logic and temporal properties 5 Hennessy-Milner logic with recursion 6 . . . ? Luca Aceto Bisimilarity and HML

  3. Introduction to Model Checking Hennessy-Milner Logic Equivalence Checking vs. Model Checking Hennessy-Milner Logic with One Recursive Definition Modal and Temporal Properties Selection of Temporal Properties Verifying Correctness of Reactive Systems Let Impl be an implementation of a system. Equivalence Checking Approach Impl ≡ Spec ≡ is a behavioural equivalence, e.g. ∼ or ≈ Spec is expressed in the same language as Impl Spec provides the full specification of the intended behaviour Model Checking Approach Impl | = Property | = is the satisfaction relation Property is a particular feature, often expressed via a logic Property is a partial specification of the intended behaviour Luca Aceto Bisimilarity and HML

  4. Introduction to Model Checking Hennessy-Milner Logic Equivalence Checking vs. Model Checking Hennessy-Milner Logic with One Recursive Definition Modal and Temporal Properties Selection of Temporal Properties Verifying Correctness of Reactive Systems Let Impl be an implementation of a system. Equivalence Checking Approach Impl ≡ Spec ≡ is a behavioural equivalence, e.g. ∼ or ≈ Spec is expressed in the same language as Impl Spec provides the full specification of the intended behaviour Model Checking Approach Impl | = Property | = is the satisfaction relation Property is a particular feature, often expressed via a logic Property is a partial specification of the intended behaviour Luca Aceto Bisimilarity and HML

  5. Introduction to Model Checking Hennessy-Milner Logic Equivalence Checking vs. Model Checking Hennessy-Milner Logic with One Recursive Definition Modal and Temporal Properties Selection of Temporal Properties Model Checking of Reactive Systems Our Aim Develop a logic in which we can express interesting properties of reactive systems. Luca Aceto Bisimilarity and HML

  6. Introduction to Model Checking Hennessy-Milner Logic Equivalence Checking vs. Model Checking Hennessy-Milner Logic with One Recursive Definition Modal and Temporal Properties Selection of Temporal Properties Logical Properties of Reactive Systems Modal Properties – what can happen now (possibility, necessity) drink a coffee (can drink a coffee now) does not drink tea drinks both tea and coffee drinks tea after coffee Temporal Properties – behaviour in time never drinks any alcohol (safety property: nothing bad can happen) eventually will have a glass of wine (liveness property: something good will happen) Can these properties be expressed using equivalence checking? Luca Aceto Bisimilarity and HML

  7. Introduction to Model Checking Hennessy-Milner Logic Equivalence Checking vs. Model Checking Hennessy-Milner Logic with One Recursive Definition Modal and Temporal Properties Selection of Temporal Properties Logical Properties of Reactive Systems Modal Properties – what can happen now (possibility, necessity) drink a coffee (can drink a coffee now) does not drink tea drinks both tea and coffee drinks tea after coffee Temporal Properties – behaviour in time never drinks any alcohol (safety property: nothing bad can happen) eventually will have a glass of wine (liveness property: something good will happen) Can these properties be expressed using equivalence checking? Luca Aceto Bisimilarity and HML

  8. Introduction to Model Checking Hennessy-Milner Logic Equivalence Checking vs. Model Checking Hennessy-Milner Logic with One Recursive Definition Modal and Temporal Properties Selection of Temporal Properties Logical Properties of Reactive Systems Modal Properties – what can happen now (possibility, necessity) drink a coffee (can drink a coffee now) does not drink tea drinks both tea and coffee drinks tea after coffee Temporal Properties – behaviour in time never drinks any alcohol (safety property: nothing bad can happen) eventually will have a glass of wine (liveness property: something good will happen) Can these properties be expressed using equivalence checking? Luca Aceto Bisimilarity and HML

  9. Syntax Introduction to Model Checking Semantics Hennessy-Milner Logic Denotational Semantics Hennessy-Milner Logic with One Recursive Definition Correspondence between HM Logic and Strong Bisimilarity Selection of Temporal Properties Temporal Properties – Invariance and Possibility Hennessy-Milner Logic – Syntax Syntax of the Formulae ( a ∈ Act ) F , G ::= tt | ff | F ∧ G | F ∨ G | � a � F | [ a ] F Intuition: tt all processes satisfy this property ff no process satisfies this property ∧ , ∨ usual logical AND and OR � a � F there is at least one a -successor that satisfies F [ a ] F all a -successors have to satisfy F Remark Temporal properties like always/never in the future or eventually are not included. Luca Aceto Bisimilarity and HML

  10. Syntax Introduction to Model Checking Semantics Hennessy-Milner Logic Denotational Semantics Hennessy-Milner Logic with One Recursive Definition Correspondence between HM Logic and Strong Bisimilarity Selection of Temporal Properties Temporal Properties – Invariance and Possibility Hennessy-Milner Logic – Syntax Syntax of the Formulae ( a ∈ Act ) F , G ::= tt | ff | F ∧ G | F ∨ G | � a � F | [ a ] F Intuition: tt all processes satisfy this property ff no process satisfies this property ∧ , ∨ usual logical AND and OR � a � F there is at least one a -successor that satisfies F [ a ] F all a -successors have to satisfy F Remark Temporal properties like always/never in the future or eventually are not included. Luca Aceto Bisimilarity and HML

  11. Syntax Introduction to Model Checking Semantics Hennessy-Milner Logic Denotational Semantics Hennessy-Milner Logic with One Recursive Definition Correspondence between HM Logic and Strong Bisimilarity Selection of Temporal Properties Temporal Properties – Invariance and Possibility Hennessy-Milner Logic – Syntax Syntax of the Formulae ( a ∈ Act ) F , G ::= tt | ff | F ∧ G | F ∨ G | � a � F | [ a ] F Intuition: tt all processes satisfy this property ff no process satisfies this property ∧ , ∨ usual logical AND and OR � a � F there is at least one a -successor that satisfies F [ a ] F all a -successors have to satisfy F Remark Temporal properties like always/never in the future or eventually are not included. Luca Aceto Bisimilarity and HML

  12. Syntax Introduction to Model Checking Semantics Hennessy-Milner Logic Denotational Semantics Hennessy-Milner Logic with One Recursive Definition Correspondence between HM Logic and Strong Bisimilarity Selection of Temporal Properties Temporal Properties – Invariance and Possibility Hennessy-Milner Logic – Semantics a Let ( Proc , Act , { − →| a ∈ Act } ) be an LTS. Validity of the logical triple p | = F ( p ∈ Proc , F a HM formula) p | = tt for each p ∈ Proc p | = ff for no p (we also write p �| = ff ) p | = F ∧ G iff p | = F and p | = G p | = F ∨ G iff p | = F or p | = G a → p ′ for some p ′ ∈ Proc such that p ′ | p | = � a � F iff p − = F = [ a ] F iff p ′ | = F , for all p ′ ∈ Proc such that p a → p ′ p | − We write p �| = F whenever p does not satisfy F . Luca Aceto Bisimilarity and HML

  13. Syntax Introduction to Model Checking Semantics Hennessy-Milner Logic Denotational Semantics Hennessy-Milner Logic with One Recursive Definition Correspondence between HM Logic and Strong Bisimilarity Selection of Temporal Properties Temporal Properties – Invariance and Possibility What about Negation? For every formula F we define the formula F c as follows: tt c = ff ff c = tt ( F ∧ G ) c = F c ∨ G c ( F ∨ G ) c = F c ∧ G c ( � a � F ) c = [ a ] F c ([ a ] F ) c = � a � F c Theorem ( F c is equivalent to the negation of F ) For any p ∈ Proc and any HM formula F 1 p | = F c = F = ⇒ p �| 2 p �| = F c = F = ⇒ p | Luca Aceto Bisimilarity and HML

  14. Syntax Introduction to Model Checking Semantics Hennessy-Milner Logic Denotational Semantics Hennessy-Milner Logic with One Recursive Definition Correspondence between HM Logic and Strong Bisimilarity Selection of Temporal Properties Temporal Properties – Invariance and Possibility What about Negation? For every formula F we define the formula F c as follows: tt c = ff ff c = tt ( F ∧ G ) c = F c ∨ G c ( F ∨ G ) c = F c ∧ G c ( � a � F ) c = [ a ] F c ([ a ] F ) c = � a � F c Theorem ( F c is equivalent to the negation of F ) For any p ∈ Proc and any HM formula F 1 p | = F c = F = ⇒ p �| 2 p �| = F c = F = ⇒ p | Luca Aceto Bisimilarity and HML

Download Presentation
Download Policy: The content available on the website is offered to you 'AS IS' for your personal information and use only. It cannot be commercialized, licensed, or distributed on other websites without prior consent from the author. To download a presentation, simply click this link. If you encounter any difficulties during the download process, it's possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.

Recommend


More recommend