Effective Recognizability and Model Checking of Reactive Fiffo Automata

Our work intends to verify reactive systems with event memorization specified with the reactive language Electre. For this, we define a particular behavioral model for Electre programs, Reactive Fiffo Automata (RFAs), which is close to Fifo Automata. Intuitively, a RFA is the model of a reactive system which may store event occurrences that must not be immediately taken into account. We show that, contrarily to lossy systems where the reachability set is recognizable but not effectively computable, (1) the reachability set of a RFA is recognizable, and (2) it is effectively computable. Moreover, we also study the relationships between RFAs and Finite Automata and we prove that (3) from a trace language point of view, inclusions between RFAs and Finite Automata are undecidable and (4) the linear temporal logic LTL on states without the temporal operator next is decidable for RFAs, while LTL on transitions is undecidable.

[1]  Pierre Wolper,et al.  The Power of QDDs , 1997 .

[2]  A. Prasad Sistla,et al.  The complexity of propositional linear temporal logics , 1982, STOC '82.

[3]  J. Van Leeuwen,et al.  Handbook of theoretical computer science - Part A: Algorithms and complexity; Part B: Formal models and semantics , 1990 .

[4]  Alain Finkel,et al.  Verifying Identical Communicating Processes is Undecidable , 1997, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[5]  PedestrianEDESTRIAN FacilitiesACILITIES.  Chapter 16 , 1998 .

[6]  Ahmed Bouajjani,et al.  Symbolic Reachability Analysis of FIFO-Channel Systems with Nonregular Sets of Configurations , 1999, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[7]  Thierry Jéron,et al.  Testing for Unboundedness of FIFO Channels , 1993, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[8]  David Lorge Parnas,et al.  Concurrent control with “readers” and “writers” , 1971, CACM.

[9]  Zohar Manna,et al.  The Temporal Logic of Reactive and Concurrent Systems , 1991, Springer New York.

[10]  Parosh Aziz Abdulla,et al.  Verifying Programs with Unreliable Channels , 1996, Inf. Comput..

[11]  Patrice Godefroid,et al.  Symbolic Verification of Communication Protocols with Infinite State Spaces using QDDs , 1999, Formal Methods Syst. Des..

[12]  A. Finkel.  G. Cécé and A. Finkel Programs with Quasi−stable Channels Are Effectively Recognizable Programs with Quasi-stable Channels Are Eeectively Recognizable , 1997 .

[13]  Ahmed Bouajjani,et al.  Symbolic Reachability Analysis of FIFO Channel Systems with Nonregular Sets of Configurations (Extended Abstract) , 1997, ICALP.

[14]  Leslie Lamport,et al.  What Good is Temporal Logic? , 1983, IFIP Congress.

[15]  Proof of Lemma 3 , 2022 .

[16]  Alain Finkel,et al.  Unreliable Channels are Easier to Verify Than Perfect Channels , 1996, Inf. Comput..

[17]  Patrice Godefroid,et al.  Symbolic Verification of Communication Protocols with Infinite State Spaces Using QDDs (Extended Abstract) , 1996, CAV.

[18]  Jan K. Pachl,et al.  Protocol Description and Analysis Based on a State Transition Model with Channel Expressions , 1987, PSTV.

[19]  Daniel Brand,et al.  On Communicating Finite-State Machines , 1983, JACM.

[20]  Franck Cassez,et al.  Compilation of the ELECTRE Reactive Language into Finite Transition Systems , 1995, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[21]  Alain Finkel,et al.  Programs with Quasi-Stable Channels are Effectively Recognizable (Extended Abstract) , 1997, CAV.

[22]  Parosh Aziz Abdulla,et al.  On-the-Fly Analysis of Systems with Unbounded, Lossy FIFO Channels , 1998, CAV.