Download presentation

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Published byDavin Bragg Modified over 2 years ago

1
Monte Carlo Model Checking Radu Grosu SUNY at Stony Brook Joint work with Scott A. Smolka

2
Model Checking ? Is system S a model of formula φ?

3
Model Checking S is a nondeterministic/concurrent system. is a temporal logic formula. –in our case Linear Temporal Logic (LTL).

4
LTL Model Checking Every LTL formula can be translated to a Büchi automaton B such that L( ) = L(B ) Automata-theoretic approach: S |= iff L ( B S ) L ( B ) iff L ( B S B ) Checking non-emptiness is equivalent to finding a reachable accepting cycle (lasso).

5
recurrence diameter Lassos Computation tree (CT) Explore all lassos in the CT DDFS,SCC: time efficient DFS: memory efficient Checking Non-Emptiness LTL

6
Randomized Algorithms Huge impact on CS: (distributed) algorithms, complexity theory, cryptography, etc. Takes of next step algorithm may depend on random choice (coin flip). Benefits of randomization include simplicity, efficiency, and symmetry breaking.

7
Randomized Algorithms Monte Carlo: may produce incorrect result but with bounded error probability. –Example: Election’s result prediction Las Vegas: always gives correct result but running time is a random variable. –Example: Randomized Quick Sort

8
recurrence diameter Explore N( , ) independent lassos in the CT Error margin and confidence ratio Monte Carlo Approach LTL … flip a k-sided coin Lassos Computation tree (CT)

9
Lassos Probability Space Sample Space: lassos in B S B Bernoulli random variable Z : –Outcome = 1 if randomly chosen lasso accepting –Outcome = 0 otherwise p Z = ∑ p i Z i (expectation of an accepting lasso) where p i is lasso prob. (uniform random walk)

10
Example: Lassos Probability Space 1 2 3 4 1 1 2 4 3 44 1 4 ½ ¼⅛ ⅛ q Z = 7/8 p Z = 1/8

11
Geometric Random Variable Value of geometric RV X with parameter p z : No. of independent lassos until success. Probability mass function: p(N) = P[X = N] = q z N-1 p z Cumulative Distribution Function: F(N) = P[X N] = ∑ i N p(i) = 1 - q z N

12
How Many Lassos? Requiring P[X N] = 1- δ yields : N = ln (δ) / ln (1- p z ) Lower bound on number of trials N needed to achieve success with confidence ratio δ.

13
What If p z Unknown? Requiring p z ε yields : M = ln (δ) / ln (1- ε) N = ln (δ) / ln (1- p z ) and therefore P[X M] 1- δ Lower bound on number of trials M needed to achieve success with confidence ratio δ and error margin ε.

14
Statistical Hypothesis Testing Null hypothesis H 0 : p z ε Alternative hypothesis H 1 : p z < ε If no success after N trials, then reject H 0 Type I error: α = P[ X > M | H 0 ] < δ Since: P[ X M | H 0 ] 1- δ

15
Monte Carlo Model Checking (MC 2 ) input: B=(Σ,Q,Q 0,δ,F), ε, δ N = ln (δ) / ln (1- ε) for (i = 1; i N; i++) if (RL(B) == 1) return (1, error-trace ); return (0, “reject H 0 with α = Pr[ X>N | H 0 ] < δ”); where RL(B) performs a uniform random walk through B to obtain a random lasso.

16
Correctness of MC 2 Theorem: Given a Büchi automaton B, error margin ε, and confidence ratio δ, if MC 2 rejects H 0, then its type I error has probability α = P[ X > M | H 0 ] < δ

17
Complexity of MC 2 Theorem: Given a Büchi automaton B having diameter D, error margin ε, and confidence ratio δ, MC 2 runs in time O(N∙D) and uses space O(D), where N = ln(δ) / ln(1- ε) Cf. DDFS which runs in O(2 |S|+|φ| ) time for B = B S B .

18
Implementation Implemented DDFS and MC 2 in jMocha model checker for synchronous systems specified using Reactive Modules. Performance and scalability of MC 2 compares very favorably to DDFS.

19
(Deadlock freedom) DPh: Symmetric Unfair Version

20
(Starvation freedom) DPh: Symmetric Unfair Version

21
DPh: Asymmetric Fair Version (Deadlock freedom) δ = 10 -1 ε = 1.8*10 -3 N = 1278

22
DPh: Asymmetric Fair Version (Starvation freedom) δ = 10 -1 ε = 1.8*10 -3 N = 1278

23
Related Work Random walk testing: –Heimdahl et al: Lurch debugger. Random walks to sample system state space: –Mihail & Papadimitriou (and others) Monte Carlo Model Checking of Markov Chains: –Herault et al: LTL-RP, bonded MC, zero/one ET –Younes et al: Time-Bounded CSL, sequential analysis –Sen et al: Time-Bounded CSL, zero/one ET Probabilistic Model Checking of Markov Chains: – ETMCC, PRISM, PIOAtool, and others.

24
Conclusions MC 2 is first randomized, Monte Carlo algorithm for the classical problem of temporal-logic model checking. Future Work: Use BDDs to improve run time. Also, take samples in parallel! Open Problem: Branching-Time Temporal Logic (e.g. CTL, modal mu-calculus).

25
Talk Outline 1.Model Checking 2.Randomized Algorithms 3.LTL Model Checking 4.Probability Theory Primer 5.Monte Carlo Model Checking 6.Implementation & Results 7.Conclusions & Open Problem

26
Model Checking S is a nondeterministic/concurrent system. is a temporal logic formula. –in our case Linear Temporal Logic (LTL). Basic idea: intelligently explore S ’s state space in attempt to establish S |= .

27
Linear Temporal Logic LTL formula: made up inductively of atomic propositions p, boolean connectives , , temporal modalities X (neXt) and U (Until). Safety: “nothing bad ever happens” E.g. G( (pc 1 =cs pc 2 =cs)) where G is a derived modality (Globally). Liveness: “something good eventually happens” E.g. G( req F serviced ) where F is a derived modality (Finally).

28
Emptiness Checking Checking non-emptiness is equivalent to finding an accepting cycle reachable from initial state (lasso). Double Depth-First Search (DDFS) algorithm can be used to search for such cycles, and this can be done on-the-fly! s1s1 s2s2 s3s3 sksk s k-2 s k-1 s k+1 s k+2 s k+3 snsn DFS 2 DFS 1

29
Bernoulli Random Variable (coin flip) Value of Bernoulli RV Z: Z = 1 (success) & Z = 0 (failure) Probability mass function: p(1) = Pr[Z=1] = p z p(0) = Pr[Z=0] = 1- p z = q z Expectation: E[Z] = p z

30
Statistical Hypothesis Testing Example: Given a fair and a biased coin. –Null hypothesis H 0 - fair coin selected. –Alternative hypothesis H 1 - biased coin selected. Hypothesis testing: Perform N trials. –If number of heads is LOW, reject H 0. –Else fail to reject H 0.

31
Statistical Hypothesis Testing H 0 is TrueH 0 is False reject H 0 Type I error w/prob. α Correct to reject H 0 fail to reject H 0 Correct to fail to reject H 0 Type II error w/prob. β

32
Random Lasso (RL) Algorithm

33
Randomized Algorithms Huge impact on CS: (distributed) algorithms, complexity theory, cryptography, etc. Takes of next step algorithm may depend on random choice (coin flip). Benefits of randomization include simplicity, efficiency, and symmetry breaking.

34
Randomized Algorithms Monte Carlo: may produce incorrect result but with bounded error probability. –Example: Rabin’s primality testing Las Vegas: always gives correct result but running time is a random variable. –Example: Randomized Quick Sort

35
Lassos Probability Space L 1 = 11 L 2 = 1244 L 3 = 1231 L 4 = 12344 Pr[L 1 ]= ½ Pr[L 2 ]= ¼ Pr[L 3 ]= ⅛ Pr[L 4 ]= ⅛ q Z = L 1 + L 2 = ¾ p Z = L 3 + L 4 = ¼ 12 3 4

36
Alternative Sampling Strategies 01 n n-1 Multilasso sampling: ignores backedges that do not lead to an accepting lasso. Pr[L n ]= O(2 -n ) Probabilistic systems: there is a natural way to assign a probability to a RL. Input partitioning: partition input into classes that trigger the same behavior (guards).

Similar presentations

OK

Randomized Algorithms Introduction Rom Aschner & Michal Shemesh.

Randomized Algorithms Introduction Rom Aschner & Michal Shemesh.

© 2017 SlidePlayer.com Inc.

All rights reserved.

Ads by Google

Ppt on building information modeling Ppt on prepositions for grade 5 Ppt online open bank Ppt on content management system Ppt on varactor diode modulator Ppt on medical termination of pregnancy Ppt on viruses and bacteria video Ppt on statistics and probability problems Ppt on bill gates leadership Ppt on relations and functions for class 11th result