Abstract
Synthesizing monitor circuits for LTL formulas is expensive, because the number of flip-flops in the circuit is exponential in the length of the formula. As a result, the IEEE standard PSL recommends to restrict monitoring to the simple subset and use the full logic only for static verification. We present a novel construction for the synthesis of monitor circuits from specifications in LTL. In our construction, only subformulas with unbounded-future operators contribute to the exponential blowup. We split the specification into a bounded and an unbounded part, apply specialized constructions for each part, and then compose the results into a monitor for the original specification. Since the unbounded part in practical specifications is often very small, we argue that, with the new construction, it is no longer necessary to restrict runtime verification to the simple subset.
This work was partly supported by the German Research Foundation (DFG) as part of the Transregional Collaborative Research Center “Automatic Verification and Analysis of Complex Systems” (SFB/TR 14 AVACS).
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Kupferman, O., Vardi, M.: Model checking of safety properties. In: Halbwachs, N., Peled, D.A. (eds.) CAV 1999. LNCS, vol. 1633, pp. 172–183. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)
IEEE Std 1850-2007: Standard for Property Specification Language (PSL). IEEE, New York (2007)
Cohen, B., Venkataramanan, S., Kumari, A.: Using PSL/Sugar for Formal and Dynamic Verification. VhdlCohen Publishing, Los Angeles (2004)
Kleene, S.: Representation of events in nerve nets and finite automata. In: Automata Studies. Princeton University Press, Princeton (1956)
McNaughton, R., Papert, S.: Counter-Free Automata. Research Monograph, vol. 65. MIT Press, Cambridge (1971)
Eisner, C., Fisman, D., Havlicek, J., Lustig, Y., McIsaac, A., Campenhout, D.V.: Reasoning with temporal logic on truncated paths. In: Hunt Jr., W.A., Somenzi, F. (eds.) CAV 2003. LNCS, vol. 2725, pp. 27–39. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)
Finkbeiner, B., Sipma, H.B.: Checking finite traces using alternating automata. In: Havelund, K., Roşu, G. (eds.) Runtime Verification 2001. Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science, vol. 55, pp. 44–60. Elsevier, Amsterdam (2001)
Geilen, M.: On the construction of monitors for temporal logic properties. Electr. Notes Theor. Comput. Sci. 55(2) (2001)
Giannakopoulou, D., Havelund, K.: Automata-based verification of temporal properties on running programs. In: ASE, pp. 412–416. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2001)
Havelund, K., Rosu, G.: Monitoring programs using rewriting. In: ASE, pp. 135–143. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2001)
Bauer, A., Leucker, M., Schallhart, C.: The good, the bad, and the ugly, but how ugly is ugly? In: Sokolsky, O., Taşıran, S. (eds.) RV 2007. LNCS, vol. 4839, pp. 126–138. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)
Dahan, A., Geist, D., Gluhovsky, L., Pidan, D., Shapir, G., Wolfsthal, Y., Benalycherif, L., Kamdem, R., Lahbib, Y.: Combining system level modeling with assertion based verification. In: ISQED 2005, pp. 310–315. IEEE Comp. Soc., Los Alamitos (2005)
Boule, M., Zilic, Z.: Automata-based assertion-checker synthesis of PSL properties. ACM Transactions on Design Automation of Electronic Systems (TODAES) 13(1) (2008)
Armoni, R., Korchemny, D., Tiemeyer, A., Vardi, M.Y., Zbar, Y.: Deterministic dynamic monitors for linear-time assertions. In: Havelund, K., Núñez, M., Roşu, G., Wolff, B. (eds.) FATES 2006 and RV 2006. LNCS, vol. 4262, pp. 163–177. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)
Ruah, S., Fisman, D., Ben-David, S.: Automata construction for on-the-fly model checking PSL safety simple subset. Technical report, IBM Research (2005)
Ben-David, S., Bloem, R., Fisman, D., Griesmayer, A., Pill, I., Ruah, S.: Automata construction algorithm optimized for PSL. Technical report, PROSYD (July 2005)
Pnueli, A., Zaks, A.: PSL model checking and run-time verification via testers. In: Misra, J., Nipkow, T., Sekerinski, E. (eds.) FM 2006. LNCS, vol. 4085, pp. 573–586. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)
Cimatti, A., Roveri, M., Semprini, S., Tonetta, S.: From PSL to NBA: a modular symbolic encoding. In: FMCAD 2006: Proceedings of the Formal Methods in Computer Aided Design, Washington, DC, USA, pp. 125–133. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2006)
Ben-David, S., Fisman, D., Ruah, S.: The safety simple subset. In: Ur, S., Bin, E., Wolfsthal, Y. (eds.) HVC 2005. LNCS, vol. 3875, pp. 14–29. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)
d’Amorim, M., Rosu, G.: Efficient monitoring of omega-languages. In: Etessami, K., Rajamani, S.K. (eds.) CAV 2005. LNCS, vol. 3576, pp. 364–378. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)
Brzozowski, J., Simon, I.: Characterizations of locally testable events. Discrete Math. 4, 243–271 (1973)
Wike, T.: Locally threshold testable languages of infinite words. In: Enjalbert, P., Wagner, K.W., Finkel, A. (eds.) STACS 1993. LNCS, vol. 665, pp. 607–616. Springer, Heidelberg (1993)
Kupferman, O., Lustig, Y., Vardi, M.: On locally checkable properties. In: Hermann, M., Voronkov, A. (eds.) LPAR 2006. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 4246, pp. 302–316. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)
Etessami, K., Holzmann, G.: Optimizing Büchi automata. In: Palamidessi, C. (ed.) CONCUR 2000. LNCS, vol. 1877, pp. 153–167. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2009 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Finkbeiner, B., Kuhtz, L. (2009). Monitor Circuits for LTL with Bounded and Unbounded Future. In: Bensalem, S., Peled, D.A. (eds) Runtime Verification. RV 2009. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 5779. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-04694-0_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-04694-0_5
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-04693-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-04694-0
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)