Abstract
In this work, novel symbolic step encodings of the transition relation for object based communicating state machines are presented. This class of systems is tailored to capture the essential data manipulation features of UML state machines when enriched with a Java-like object oriented action language. The main contribution of the work is the generalization of the \(\exists\)-step semantics approach, which Rintanen has used for improving the efficiency of SAT based AI planning, to a much more complex class of systems. Furthermore, the approach is extended to employ a dynamic notion of independence. To evaluate the encodings, UML state machine models are automatically translated into NuSMV models and then symbolically model checked with NuSMV. Especially in bounded model checking (BMC), the \(\exists\)-step semantics often significantly outperforms the traditional interleaving semantics without any substantial blowup in the BMC encoding as a SAT formula.
Work financially supported by Helsinki Graduate School in Computer Science and Engineering, Tekes — Finnish Funding Agency for Technology and Innovation, Nokia, Conformiq Software, Mipro, the Academy of Finland (projects 112016, 211025, and 213113), and Technology Industries of Finland Centennial Foundation.
Chapter PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Keywords
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
References
Cimatti, A., Clarke, E., Giunchiglia, E., Giunchiglia, F., Pistore, M., Roveri, M., Sebastiani, R., Tacchella, A.: NuSMV version 2: An opensource tool for symbolic model checking. In: Brinksma, E., Larsen, K.G. (eds.) CAV 2002. LNCS, vol. 2404, pp. 359–364. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)
Holzmann, G.J.: The Spin Model Checker. Addison-Wesley, Reading (2004)
Biere, A., Cimatti, A., Clarke, E.M., Zhu, Y.: Symbolic model checking without BDDs. In: Cleaveland, W.R. (ed.) ETAPS 1999 and TACAS 1999. LNCS, vol. 1579, pp. 193–207. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)
Valmari, A.: The state explosion problem. In: Reisig, W., Rozenberg, G. (eds.) APN 1998. LNCS, vol. 1491, pp. 429–528. Springer, Heidelberg (1998)
Jussila, T., Dubrovin, J., Junttila, T., Latvala, T., Porres, I.: Model checking dynamic and hierarchical UML state machines. In: Proc. MoDeV2a: Model Development, Validation and Verification, pp. 94–110 (2006)
Rintanen, J., Heljanko, K., Niemelä, I.: Planning as satisfiability: parallel plans and algorithms for plan search. Artificial Intelligence 170(12-13), 1031–1080 (2006)
Heljanko, K.: Bounded reachability checking with process semantics. In: Larsen, K.G., Nielsen, M. (eds.) CONCUR 2001. LNCS, vol. 2154, pp. 218–232. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)
Best, E., Devillers, R.R.: Sequential and concurrent behaviour in Petri net theory. Theoretical Computer Science 55(1), 87–136 (1987)
Kautz, H.A., Selman, B.: Pushing the envelope: Planning, propositional logic and stochastic search. In: AAAI 1996/IAAI 1996, vol. 2, pp. 1194–1201. AAAI Press, Menlo Park (1996)
Dimopoulos, Y., Nebel, B., Koehler, J.: Encoding planning problems in nonmonotonic logic programs. In: Steel, S. (ed.) ECP 1997. LNCS, vol. 1348, pp. 169–181. Springer, Heidelberg (1997)
Wehrle, M., Rintanen, J.: Planning as satisfiability with relaxed \(\exists\)-step plans. In: Orgun, M.A., Thornton, J. (eds.) AI 2007. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 4830, pp. 244–253. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)
Ogata, S., Tsuchiya, T., Kikuno, T.: SAT-based verification of safe Petri nets. In: Wang, F. (ed.) ATVA 2004. LNCS, vol. 3299, pp. 79–92. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)
Jussila, T.: BMC via dynamic atomicity analysis. In: ACSD 2004, pp. 197–206. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2004)
Jussila, T., Heljanko, K., Niemelä, I.: BMC via on-the-fly determinization. International Journal on Software Tools for Technology Transfer 7(2), 89–101 (2005)
Jussila, T.: On Bounded Model Checking of Asynchronous Systems. Doctoral dissertation, Helsinki Univ.of Technology (2005)
Dubrovin, J., Junttila, T., Heljanko, K.: Symbolic step encodings for object based communicating state machines. Technical Report B24, Helsinki Univ.of Technology, Lab.for Theoretical Computer Science (2007)
Dubrovin, J.: Jumbala — An action language for UML state machines. Research Report A101, Helsinki Univ.of Technology, Lab.for Theoretical Computer Science (2006)
Gosling, J., Joy, B., Steele, G., Bracha, G.: The Java Language Specification, 3rd edn. Addison-Wesley, Reading (2005)
Dubrovin, J., Junttila, T.: Symbolic model checking of hierarchical UML state machines. In: ACSD (to appear, 2008)
Kamel, M., Leue, S.: Formalization and validation of the General Inter-ORB Protocol (GIOP) using PROMELA and SPIN. International Journal on Software Tools for Technology Transfer 2(4), 394–409 (2000)
Heljanko, K., Junttila, T., Latvala, T.: Incremental and complete bounded model checking for full PLTL. In: Etessami, K., Rajamani, S.K. (eds.) CAV 2005. LNCS, vol. 3576, pp. 98–111. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)
Biere, A., Heljanko, K., Junttila, T., Latvala, T., Schuppan, V.: Linear encodings of bounded LTL model checking. Logical Methods in Computer Science 2(5:5) (2006)
Heljanko, K., Niemelä, I.: Bounded LTL model checking with stable models. Theory and Practice of Logic Programming 3(4&5), 519–550 (2003)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2008 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Dubrovin, J., Junttila, T., Heljanko, K. (2008). Symbolic Step Encodings for Object Based Communicating State Machines. In: Barthe, G., de Boer, F.S. (eds) Formal Methods for Open Object-Based Distributed Systems. FMOODS 2008. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 5051. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-68863-1_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-68863-1_7
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-68862-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-68863-1
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)