Model Checking LTL over (discrete time) Controllable Linear System is Decidable P. Tabuada and G. J. Pappas Michael, Roozbeh Ph.D. Course November 2005.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Recognising Languages We will tackle the problem of defining languages by considering how we could recognise them. Problem: Is there a method of recognising.
Advertisements

Completeness and Expressiveness
Auto-Generation of Test Cases for Infinite States Reactive Systems Based on Symbolic Execution and Formula Rewriting Donghuo Chen School of Computer Science.
M ODEL CHECKING -Vasvi Kakkad University of Sydney.
Algorithmic Software Verification VII. Computation tree logic and bisimulations.
CS 267: Automated Verification Lecture 8: Automata Theoretic Model Checking Instructor: Tevfik Bultan.
Partial Order Reduction: Main Idea
1 Model checking. 2 And now... the system How do we model a reactive system with an automaton ? It is convenient to model systems with Transition systems.
ECE Synthesis & Verification - L271 ECE 697B (667) Spring 2006 Synthesis and Verification of Digital Systems Model Checking basics.
Temporal Logic and the NuSMV Model Checker CS 680 Formal Methods Jeremy Johnson.
Game-theoretic approach to the simulation checking problem Peter Bulychev Vladimir Zakharov Lomonosov Moscow State University.
CS6133 Software Specification and Verification
Hybrid Systems Presented by: Arnab De Anand S. An Intuitive Introduction to Hybrid Systems Discrete program with an analog environment. What does it mean?
Model Checking Genetic Regulatory Networks with Parameter Uncertainty Grégory Batt, Calin Belta, Ron Weiss HSCC 2007 Presented by Spring Berman ESE :
Basic Structures: Sets, Functions, Sequences, Sums, and Matrices
Basic Structures: Sets, Functions, Sequences, Sums, and Matrices
Symbolic dynamics of Markov chains P S Thiagarajan School of Computing National University of Singapore Joint work with: Manindra Agrawal, S Akshay, Blaise.
Winter 2007SEG2101 Chapter 41 Chapter 4 SDL – Structure and Behavior.
Discrete Abstractions of Hybrid Systems Rajeev Alur, Thomas A. Henzinger, Gerardo Lafferriere and George J. Pappas.
Bisimulation Relation A lecture over E. Hagherdi, P. Tabuada, G. J. Pappas Bisimulation relation for dynamical, control, and hybrid systems Rafael Wisniewski.
1 On Generating Safe Controllers for Discrete-Time Linear Systems By Adam Cataldo EE 290N Project UC Berkeley December 10, 2004 unsafe state disable this.
FSM Decomposition using Partitions on States 290N: The Unknown Component Problem Lecture 24.
Specification Formalisms Book: Chapter 5. Properties of formalisms Formal. Unique interpretation. Intuitive. Simple to understand (visual). Succinct.
Review of the automata-theoretic approach to model-checking.
Embedded Systems Laboratory Department of Computer and Information Science Linköping University Sweden Formal Verification and Model Checking Traian Pop.
ESE601: Hybrid Systems Introduction to verification Spring 2006.
Witness and Counterexample Li Tan Oct. 15, 2002.
Automata and Formal Lanugages Büchi Automata and Model Checking Ralf Möller based on slides by Chang-Beom Choi Provable Software Lab, KAIST.
1 Formal Engineering of Reliable Software LASER 2004 school Tutorial, Lecture1 Natasha Sharygina Carnegie Mellon University.
Abstract Verification is traditionally done by determining the truth of a temporal formula (the specification) with respect to a timed transition system.
Flavio Lerda 1 LTL Model Checking Flavio Lerda. 2 LTL Model Checking LTL –Subset of CTL* of the form: A f where f is a path formula LTL model checking.
Antoine Girard VAL-AMS Project Meeting April 2007 Behavioral Metrics for Simulation-based Circuit Validation.
Daniel Kroening and Ofer Strichman 1 Decision Procedures in First Order Logic Decision Procedures for Equality Logic.
Approximation Metrics for Discrete and Continuous Systems Antoine Girard and George J. Pappas VERIMAG Workshop.
Introduction to Software Testing Chapter 9.4 Model-Based Grammars Paul Ammann & Jeff Offutt
Benjamin Gamble. What is Time?  Can mean many different things to a computer Dynamic Equation Variable System State 2.
Some Probability Theory and Computational models A short overview.
1 Bisimulations as a Technique for State Space Reductions.
CIS 540 Principles of Embedded Computation Spring Instructor: Rajeev Alur
LDK R Logics for Data and Knowledge Representation Modal Logic Originally by Alessandro Agostini and Fausto Giunchiglia Modified by Fausto Giunchiglia,
Verification & Validation By: Amir Masoud Gharehbaghi
Constraints Assisted Modeling and Validation Presented in CS294-5 (Spring 2007) Thomas Huining Feng Based on: [1]Constraints Assisted Modeling and Validation.
2G1516 Formal Methods2005 Mads Dam IMIT, KTH 1 CCS: Processes and Equivalences Mads Dam Reading: Peled 8.5.
Symbolic Algorithms for Infinite-state Systems Rupak Majumdar (UC Berkeley) Joint work with Luca de Alfaro (UC Santa Cruz) Thomas A. Henzinger (UC Berkeley)
Classifications LanguageGrammarAutomaton Regular, right- linear Right-linear, left-linear DFA, NFA Context-free PDA Context- sensitive LBA Recursively.
1 CSEP590 – Model Checking and Automated Verification Lecture outline for July 9, 2003.
1 Temporal logic. 2 Prop. logic: model and reason about static situations. Example: Are there truth values that can be assigned to x,y simultaneously.
About Alternating Automata Daniel Choi Provable Software Laboratory KAIST.
Today’s Agenda  Quiz 4  Temporal Logic Formal Methods in Software Engineering1.
CS5270 Lecture 41 Timed Automata I CS 5270 Lecture 4.
MA/CSSE 474 Theory of Computation Decision Problems, Continued DFSMs.
Counterexample-Guided Abstraction Refinement By Edmund Clarke, Orna Grumberg, Somesh Jha, Yuan Lu, and Helmut Veith Presented by Yunho Kim Provable Software.
Simple Logic.
Formal methods: Lecture
Copyright © Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.
High-Level Abstraction of Concurrent Finite Automata
Logics for Data and Knowledge Representation
Formal Methods in software development
Department of Computer Science
Formal Methods in software development
Discrete Controller Synthesis
Logics for Data and Knowledge Representation
2) For each of the finite state machines above, use the sets derived in part 1) to produce the following:   i.                  a set of sequences that.
Linear Time Properties
Translating Linear Temporal Logic into Büchi Automata
Introduction to verification
Formal Methods in software development
Program correctness Linear Time Temporal Logic
Formal Methods in software development
Presentation transcript:

Model Checking LTL over (discrete time) Controllable Linear System is Decidable P. Tabuada and G. J. Pappas Michael, Roozbeh Ph.D. Course November 2005

Overview Transition system with observations Linear Temporal Logic (LTL) Simulation/bisimulation relations Construction of finite abstraction –Transform system into Brunovsky normal form –Bisimulation with denumerable state space Z n LTL control of linear control systems

Transition Systems - Revisited Notation: X  : set of all infinte strings formed by elements of X

Transition Systems as LTL Models Formally represents temporal properties of dynamical and control systems. Specification formulas are built from atomic propositions belonging to a finite Set Use of LTL formulas to specify the sequency of observations (desired behavior) Means ”next”: The formula  1 will be true in the next time step Means ”until”: The formula  1 must hold until  2 holds

Transition Systems as LTL Models PS: O can be infinte while is finite. The sequence  satisfies formula  iff  (0) ² 

LTL Example

Relationship between Transition Systems

Relationship between Transitiom Systems - II Important: Language equivalence preserves properties expressible in LTL Important: Bisimilarity also preserves properties expressible in LTL

Linear Control Systems as Transition Systems Requirement: The (discrete time) linear systems that are controllable are considered Note: The set of observations O and the observation map h are defined later.

Brunovsky Normal Form 0 r = rank(B)

Brunovski Normal Form This is refered to as shift register form

Example Consider the controllable linear system with n=3 and m=2 Shift register form Brunovsky normal form

Bisimulation I between T  and T  ’ T  bisimilar to T  ’ (  ’ and  are isomorphic) Observation map

New Transition System - I The new transition system T , (with state-space Z n ) which is bisimilar to T  ´, is constructed where Quantization map: where

New Transition Map - II Controlled evolution on the space of blocks – under appropiate inputs blocks will move into other blocks of the grid Example:

Bisimulation II between T  ’ and T  T  ’ bisimilar to T  Observation map

Pre Operator Given a state q 2 Q, we denote by Pre(q) the set of states in Q that can reach q in one step, that is

Example – Pre Operator

Language Equivalent Finite Abstraction Assumption: Set of observations O is finite.

Language Equivalent Finite Abstraction - II This finite abstraction requires the following subset of the state space, defined for any a 2 S Covers the state-space

Language Equivalent Finite Abstraction - III The finite transition system Where the transition relationis constructed as follows

Language Equivalent Finite Abstraction - IV

Decidability of Model Checking

Canonical Projection

Example - Construction of T  Finite set of atomic propositions S = a = {(0,0)} 2 Z 2 Finite observation space O = S [ {  } Since k 1 = 2 we need to compute the following sets:

Construction of T 

Summary Relationship between transition systems Relationship between observation space Atomic proposition (Brunovsky Set) (Quantization Block) (Point)

LTL Control of Linear Control Systems

Implementation Brunovsky normal form Original linear control system Supervisor (FSM) Symbols Continuous input