Witness and Counterexample Automata for ACTL
Witnesses and counterexamples produced by model checkers provide a very useful source of diagnostic information. They are usually returned in the form of a single computation path along the model of the system. However, a single computation path is not enough to explain all reasons of a validity or a failure. Our work in this area is motivated by the application of action-based model checking algorithms to the test case generation for models formally specified with a CCS-like process algebra. There, only linear and finite witnesses and counterexamples are useful and for the given formula and model an efficient representation of the set of witnesses (counterexamples) explaining all reasons of validity (failure) is needed. This paper identifies a fragment of action computation tree logic (ACTL) that can be handled in this way. Moreover, a suitable form of witnesses and counterexamples is proposed and witness and counterexample automata are introduced, which are finite automata recognizing them. An algorithm for generating such automata is given.
KeywordsModel Check Regular Language Label Transition System Computation Path Test Case Generation
- 4.Clarke, E.M., Jha, S., Lu, Y., Veith, H.: Tree-like Counterexamples in Model Checking. In: 17th IEEE Symp. on Logic in Computer Science (LICS), pp. 19–29 (2002)Google Scholar
- 6.Časar, A., Brezočnik, Z., Kapus, T.: Exploiting Symbolic Model Checking for Sensing Stuck-at Faults in Digital Circuits. Informacije MIDEM 32(3), 171–180 (2002)Google Scholar
- 7.Fantechi, A., Gnesi, S., Maggiore, A.: Enhancing test coverage by back-tracing model-checker counterexamples. In: Int. Workshop on Test and Analysis of Component Based Syst, TACOS (2004); to appear in Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer ScienceGoogle Scholar
- 11.Ho, P.H., Shiple, T., Harer, K., Kukula, J., Damiano, R., Bertacco, V., Taylor, J., Long, J.: Smart Simulation Using Collaborative Formal and Simulation Engines. In: Int. Conf. on Computer Aided Design, ICCAD (2000)Google Scholar
- 12.Maidl, M.: The Common Fragment of CTL and LTL. In: Proc. 41th Symp. on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS), pp. 643–652 (2000)Google Scholar