Abstract
The paper presents a new approach to computing the abstract state and a maximum weight heuristic method for finding the shortest counter-example in verification of imperative programs. The strategy is incorporated in a verification system based on the counterexample-guided abstraction refinement method. The proposed method slashes both the size of the abstract state space and the number of invokes of a decision procedure. A number of benchmarks are employed to evaluate the effectiveness of the approach.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Graf S, Saidi H. Construction of abstract state graphs with PVS. In: CAV97, Haifa, Isreal, 1997, 1254: 72–83
Das S, Dill D, Park P. Experience with predicate abstraction. CAV99, 1999, 1166: 187–201
Clarke E M, Grumberg O, Peled D A. Model Checking. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 1999. 122–124
Cousot P, Cousot R. Abstract interpretation: a unified lattice model for static analysis of programs by construction or approximation of fix points. In: POPL77, Los Angeles, California, 1977. 238–252
Loiseaux C, Graf S, Sifakis J, et al. Property preserving abstractions for the verification of concurrent systems. J FMSD, 1995, 6: 11–44
Ranzato F. On the completeness of model checking. ESOP’2001, 2001, 2028: 137–154
Clarke E M, Grumberg O, Jha S, et al. Counterexample-guided abstraction refinement. CAV00, 2000, 1855: 154–169
Henzinger T A, Jhala R, Majumdar R, et al. Lazy abstraction. POPL 2002, 2002, 37: 58–70
Ball T, Majumdar R, Millstein T, et al. Automatic predicate abstraction of C programs. PLDI01, 2001, 36: 203–213
Ball T, Cook B, Das S, et al. Refining approximations in software predicate abstraction. TACAS04, 2004, 2988: 388–403
Henzinger T A, Majumdar R. A classification of symbolic transition systems. STACS00, 2000, 1770: 13–34
Schmidt D A. Underapproximating predicate transformers. SAS06, 2006, 4134: 127–143
Dijkstra E W. A Discipline of Programming. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall 1976. 32–35
Huth M, Ryan M. Logic in Computer Science: Modelling and Reasoning about Systems. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001. 189–193
Fitting M. Kleene’s logic, generalized. J LC, 1991, 1: 797–810
Beyer D, Chlipala A J, Henzinger T A, et al. The blast query language for software verification. SAS04, 2004, 3148: 2–18
Rosenblum D S. A practical approach to programming with assertions. J IEEE TSE, 1995, 21: 265–265
McMillan K L. Application of craig interpolants in model checking. APN05, 2005, 3440: 1–12
McMillan K L. An interpolating theorem prover. J TCS, 2005, 345: 101–121
Li L, He K D, Li J, et al. Jckecher: A software model checker. http://code.google.com/p/jchecker/.
Blei D, Harrelson C, Jhala R, et al. Vampyre: a proof generating theorem prover. http://www.eecs.berkeley.edu/~rupak/Vampyre.
Henzinger T A, Majumdar R, Beyer D, et al. BLAST: Berkeley lazy abstraction software verification tool. http://mtc.epfl.ch/software-tools/blast/
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Li, L., Song, X., Gu, M. et al. Competent predicate abstraction in model checking. Sci. China Inf. Sci. 54, 258–267 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11432-010-4150-2
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11432-010-4150-2