Simplification of CTL Formulae for Efficient Model Checking of Petri Nets

We study techniques to overcome the state space explosion problem in CTL model checking of Petri nets. Classical state space pruning approaches like partial order reductions and structural reductions become less efficient with the growing size of the CTL formula. The reason is that the more places and transitions are used as atomic propositions in a given formula, the more of the behaviour (interleaving) becomes relevant for the validity of the formula. We suggest several methods to reduce the size of CTL formulae, while preserving their validity. By these methods, we significantly increase the benefits of structural and partial order reductions, as the combination of our techniques can achive up to 60% average reduction in formulae sizes. The algorithms are implemented in the open-source verification tool TAPAAL and we document the efficiency of our approach on a large benchmark of Petri net models and queries from the Model Checking Contest 2017.

[1]  Javier Esparza,et al.  Verification of Safety Properties Using Integer Programming: Beyond the State Equation , 2000, Formal Methods Syst. Des..

[2]  Karsten Wolf,et al.  Integrating Low Level Symmetries into Reachability Analysis , 2000, TACAS.

[3]  Grégoire Sutre,et al.  Occam's Razor Applied to the Petri Net Coverability Problem , 2016, RP.

[4]  George S. Avrunin,et al.  Integer Programming in the Analysis of Concurrent Systems , 1991, CAV.

[5]  Michel Hack,et al.  ANALYSIS OF PRODUCTION SCHEMATA BY PETRI NETS , 1972 .

[6]  George L. Nemhauser,et al.  Constraint classification for mixed integer programming formulations , 1991 .

[7]  S. Thomas McCormick,et al.  Integer Programming and Combinatorial Optimization , 1996, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[8]  Jirí Srba,et al.  TAPAAL 2.0: Integrated Development Environment for Timed-Arc Petri Nets , 2012, TACAS.

[9]  Edmund M. Clarke,et al.  Design and Synthesis of Synchronization Skeletons Using Branching Time Temporal Logic , 2008, 25 Years of Model Checking.

[10]  Antti Valmari,et al.  Stubborn Set Intuition Explained , 2016, PNSE @ Petri Nets.

[11]  Fabrice Kordon,et al.  MCC'2017 - The Seventh Model Checking Contest , 2018, Trans. Petri Nets Other Model. Concurr..

[12]  Lars Michael Kristensen,et al.  Question-guided stubborn set methods for state properties , 2006, Formal Methods Syst. Des..

[13]  Tadao Murata,et al.  Petri nets: Properties, analysis and applications , 1989, Proc. IEEE.

[14]  T Murata,et al.  Reduction and expansion of live and safe marked graphs. , 1979 .

[15]  Alain Finkel,et al.  Approaching the Coverability Problem Continuously , 2016, TACAS.

[16]  Karsten Wolf,et al.  Applying CEGAR to the Petri Net State Equation , 2011, Log. Methods Comput. Sci..

[17]  Karsten Wolf.  Stubborn Sets for Standard Properties , 1999, ICATPN.

[18]  Kim G. Larsen,et al.  Extended Dependency Graphs and Efficient Distributed Fixed-Point Computation , 2017, Petri Nets.

[19]  Jirí Srba,et al.  TAPAAL and Reachability Analysis of P/T Nets , 2016, Trans. Petri Nets Other Model. Concurr..

[20]  Joseph Sifakis,et al.  Model checking , 1996, Handbook of Automated Reasoning.

[21]  Karsten Wolf.  Running LoLA 2.0 in a Model Checking Competition , 2016, Trans. Petri Nets Other Model. Concurr..

[22]  George S. Avrunin,et al.  Automated Analysis of Concurrent Systems With the Constrained Expression Toolset , 1991, IEEE Trans. Software Eng..

[23]  Karsten Wolf.  Narrowing Petri Net State Spaces Using the State Equation , 2001, Fundam. Informaticae.

[24]  Antti Valmari,et al.  Stubborn sets for reduced state space generation , 1991, Applications and Theory of Petri Nets.

[25]  George S. Avrunin,et al.  Using integer programming to verify general safety and liveness properties , 1995, Formal Methods Syst. Des..