Latticed Simulation Relations and Games

Multi-valued Kripke structures are Kripke structures in which the atomic propositions and the transitions are not Boolean and can take values from some set. In particular, latticed Kripke structures, in which the elements in the set are partially ordered, are useful in abstraction, query checking, and reasoning about multiple view-points. The challenges that formal methods involve in the Boolean setting are carried over, and in fact increase, in the presence of multivalued systems and logics. We lift to the latticed setting two basic notions that have been proven useful in the Boolean setting. We first define latticed simulation between latticed Kripke structures. The relation maps two structures M1 and M2 to a lattice element that essentially denotes the truth value of the statement "every behavior of M1 is also a behavior of M2". We show that latticed-simulation is logically characterized by the universal fragment of latticed µ-calculus, and can be calculated in polynomial time. We then proceed to defining latticed two-player games. Such games are played along graphs in which each transition have a value in the lattice. The value of the game essentially denotes the truth value of the statement "the ∨-player can force the game to computations that satisfy the winning condition". An earlier definition of such games involved a zigzagged traversal of paths generated during the game. Our definition involves a forward traversal of the paths, and it leads to better understanding of multi-valued games. In particular, we prove a min-max property for such games, and relate latticed simulation with latticed games.

[1]  Joseph Sifakis,et al.  Property Preserving Simulations , 1992, CAV.

[2]  Hassen Saïdi,et al.  Construction of Abstract State Graphs with PVS , 1997, CAV.

[3]  Albert R. Meyer,et al.  Word problems requiring exponential time(Preliminary Report) , 1973, STOC.

[4]  Marsha Chechik,et al.  A framework for multi-valued reasoning over inconsistent viewpoints , 2001, Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Software Engineering. ICSE 2001.

[5]  Patrice Godefroid,et al.  Temporal logic query checking , 2001, Proceedings 16th Annual IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science.

[6]  William Chan Temporal-logic queries , 2000 .

[7]  Marsha Chechik,et al.  Model-checking infinite state-space systems with fine-grained abstractions using SPIN , 2001, SPIN '01.

[8]  William Chan Temporal-Locig Queries , 2000, CAV.

[9]  Orna Grumberg,et al.  Model checking and modular verification , 1994, TOPL.

[10]  Michael Huth,et al.  Consistent Partial Model Checking , 2004, Workshop on Domains.

[11]  Orna Kupferman,et al.  Lattice Automata , 2007, VMCAI.

[12]  Dexter Kozen,et al.  RESULTS ON THE PROPOSITIONAL’p-CALCULUS , 2001 .

[13]  Thomas A. Henzinger,et al.  Computing simulations on finite and infinite graphs , 1995, Proceedings of IEEE 36th Annual Foundations of Computer Science.

[14]  Rajeev Alur,et al.  Ranking Automata and Games for Prioritized Requirements , 2008, CAV.

[15]  Kim G. Larsen,et al.  A modal process logic , 1988, [1988] Proceedings. Third Annual Information Symposium on Logic in Computer Science.

[16]  Patrice Godefroid,et al.  Model Checking Partial State Spaces with 3-Valued Temporal Logics , 1999, CAV.

[17]  Radha Jagadeesan,et al.  Automatic Abstraction Using Generalized Model Checking , 2002, CAV.

[18]  Marsha Chechik,et al.  Model-Checking over Multi-valued Logics , 2001, FME.

[19]  Dexter Kozen,et al.  Results on the Propositional µ-Calculus , 1982, ICALP.

[20]  Robin Milner,et al.  An Algebraic Definition of Simulation Between Programs , 1971, IJCAI.

[21]  Thomas A. Henzinger,et al.  Fair Simulation , 1997, Inf. Comput..

[22]  Melvin Fitting,et al.  Many-valued modal logics , 1991, Fundam. Informaticae.

[23]  Patrice Godefroid,et al.  Model Checking with Multi-valued Logics , 2004, ICALP.

[24]  Rance Cleaveland,et al.  The concurrency workbench: a semantics-based tool for the verification of concurrent systems , 1993, TOPL.

[25]  Amir Pnueli,et al.  Linear and Branching Structures in the Semantics and Logics of Reactive Systems , 1985, ICALP.

[26]  Reiner Hähnle,et al.  Automated deduction in multiple-valued logics , 1993, International series of monographs on computer science.

[27]  Orna Grumberg,et al.  Abstract interpretation of reactive systems , 1997, TOPL.

[28]  Viorica Sofronie-Stokkermans,et al.  Automated Theorem Proving by Resolution for Finitely-Valued Logics Based on Distributive Lattices with Operators , 2001 .

[29]  Marsha Chechik,et al.  Implementing a Multi-valued Symbolic Model Checker , 2001, TACAS.