Kenneth L. McMillan

Bio: Kenneth L. McMillan is an academic researcher from Microsoft. The author has contributed to research in topics: Model checking & Mathematical proof. The author has an hindex of 60, co-authored 150 publications receiving 20835 citations. Previous affiliations of Kenneth L. McMillan include University of Texas at Austin & Cadence Design Systems.

Symbolic Model Checking

Abstract: Symbolic model checking is a powerful formal specification and verification method that has been applied successfully in several industrial designs. Using symbolic model checking techniques it is possible to verify industrial-size finite state systems. State spaces with up to 1030 states can be exhaustively searched in minutes. Models with more than 10120 states have been verified using special techniques.

Symbolic model checking: 10/sup 20/ states and beyond

Abstract: A general method that represents the state space symbolically instead of explicitly is described. The generality of the method comes from using a dialect of the mu-calculus as the primary specification language. A model-checking algorithm for mu-calculus formulas which uses R.E. Bryant's (1986) binary decision diagrams to represent relations and formulas symbolically is described. It is then shown how the novel mu-calculus model checking algorithm can be used to derive efficient decision procedures for CTL model checking, satisfiability of linear-time temporal logic formulas, strong and weak observational equivalence of finite transition systems, and language containment of finite omega -automata. This eliminates the need to describe complicated graph-traversal or nested fixed-point computations for each decision procedure. The authors illustrate the practicality of their approach to symbolic model checking by discussing how it can be used to verify a simple synchronous pipeline. >

Symbolic model checking: an approach to the state explosion problem

Abstract: Finite state models of concurrent systems grow exponentially as the number of components of the system increases. This is known widely as the state explosion problem in automatic verification, and has limited finite state verification methods to small systems. To avoid this problem, a method called symbolic model checking is proposed and studied. This method avoids building a state graph by using Boolean formulas to represent sets and relations. A variety of properties characterized by least and greatest fixed points can be verified purely by manipulations of these formulas using Ordered Binary Decision Diagrams. Theoretically, a structural class of sequential circuits is demonstrated whose transition relations can be represented by polynomial space OBDDs, though the number of states is exponential. This result is born out by experimental results on example circuits and systems. The most complex of these is the cache consistency protocol of a commercial distributed multiprocessor. The symbolic model checking technique revealed subtle errors in this protocol, resulting from complex execution sequences that would occur with very low probability in random simulation runs. In order to model the cache protocol, a language was developed for describing sequential circuits and protocols at various levels of abstraction. This language has a synchronous dataflow semantics, but allows nondeterminism and supports interleaving processes with shared variables. A system called SMV can automatically verify programs in this language with respect to temporal logic formulas, using the symbolic model checking technique. A technique for proving properties of inductively generated classes of finite state systems is also developed. The proof is checked automatically, but requires a user supplied process called a process invariant to act as an inductive hypothesis. An invariant is developed for the distributed cache protocol, allowing properties of systems with an arbitrary number of processors to be proved. Finally, an alternative method is developed for avoiding the state explosion in the case of asynchronous control circuits. This technique is based on the unfolding of Petri nets, and is used to check for hazards in a distributed mutual exclusion circuit.

Interpolation and SAT-Based Model Checking

Abstract: We consider a fully SAT-based method of unbounded symbolic model checking based on computing Craig interpolants. In benchmark studies using a set of large industrial circuit verification instances, this method is greatly more efficient than BDD-based symbolic model checking, and compares favorably to some recent SAT-based model checking methods on positive instances.

Interpolation and SAT-based model checking

Abstract: We consider a fully SAT-based method of unbounded symbolic model checking based on computing Craig interpolants. In benchmark studies using a set of large industrial circuit verification instances, this method is greatly more efficient than BDD-based symbolic model checking, and compares favorably to some recent SAT-based model checking methods on positive instances.

Machine learning

Abstract: Machine Learning is the study of methods for programming computers to learn. Computers are applied to a wide range of tasks, and for most of these it is relatively easy for programmers to design and implement the necessary software. However, there are many tasks for which this is difficult or impossible. These can be divided into four general categories. First, there are problems for which there exist no human experts. For example, in modern automated manufacturing facilities, there is a need to predict machine failures before they occur by analyzing sensor readings. Because the machines are new, there are no human experts who can be interviewed by a programmer to provide the knowledge necessary to build a computer system. A machine learning system can study recorded data and subsequent machine failures and learn prediction rules. Second, there are problems where human experts exist, but where they are unable to explain their expertise. This is the case in many perceptual tasks, such as speech recognition, hand-writing recognition, and natural language understanding. Virtually all humans exhibit expert-level abilities on these tasks, but none of them can describe the detailed steps that they follow as they perform them. Fortunately, humans can provide machines with examples of the inputs and correct outputs for these tasks, so machine learning algorithms can learn to map the inputs to the outputs. Third, there are problems where phenomena are changing rapidly. In finance, for example, people would like to predict the future behavior of the stock market, of consumer purchases, or of exchange rates. These behaviors change frequently, so that even if a programmer could construct a good predictive computer program, it would need to be rewritten frequently. A learning program can relieve the programmer of this burden by constantly modifying and tuning a set of learned prediction rules. Fourth, there are applications that need to be customized for each computer user separately. Consider, for example, a program to filter unwanted electronic mail messages. Different users will need different filters. It is unreasonable to expect each user to program his or her own rules, and it is infeasible to provide every user with a software engineer to keep the rules up-to-date. A machine learning system can learn which mail messages the user rejects and maintain the filtering rules automatically. Machine learning addresses many of the same research questions as the fields of statistics, data mining, and psychology, but with differences of emphasis. Statistics focuses on understanding the phenomena that have generated the data, often with the goal of testing different hypotheses about those phenomena. Data mining seeks to find patterns in the data that are understandable by people. Psychological studies of human learning aspire to understand the mechanisms underlying the various learning behaviors exhibited by people (concept learning, skill acquisition, strategy change, etc.).

Model checking

Abstract: Turing Lecture from the winners of the 2007 ACM A.M. Turing Award. In 1981, Edmund M. Clarke and E. Allen Emerson, working in the USA, and Joseph Sifakis working independently in France, authored seminal papers that founded what has become the highly successful field of model checking. This verification technology provides an algorithmic means of determining whether an abstract model---representing, for example, a hardware or software design---satisfies a formal specification expressed as a temporal logic (TL) formula. Moreover, if the property does not hold, the method identifies a counterexample execution that shows the source of the problem. The progression of model checking to the point where it can be successfully used for complex systems has required the development of sophisticated means of coping with what is known as the state explosion problem. Great strides have been made on this problem over the past 28 years by what is now a very large international research community. As a result many major hardware and software companies are beginning to use model checking in practice. Examples of its use include the verification of VLSI circuits, communication protocols, software device drivers, real-time embedded systems, and security algorithms. The work of Clarke, Emerson, and Sifakis continues to be central to the success of this research area. Their work over the years has led to the creation of new logics for specification, new verification algorithms, and surprising theoretical results. Model checking tools, created by both academic and industrial teams, have resulted in an entirely novel approach to verification and test case generation. This approach, for example, often enables engineers in the electronics industry to design complex systems with considerable assurance regarding the correctness of their initial designs. Model checking promises to have an even greater impact on the hardware and software industries in the future. ---Moshe Y. Vardi, Editor-in-Chief

Principles of Model Checking

Abstract: Our growing dependence on increasingly complex computer and software systems necessitates the development of formalisms, techniques, and tools for assessing functional properties of these systems. One such technique that has emerged in the last twenty years is model checking, which systematically (and automatically) checks whether a model of a given system satisfies a desired property such as deadlock freedom, invariants, and request-response properties. This automated technique for verification and debugging has developed into a mature and widely used approach with many applications. Principles of Model Checking offers a comprehensive introduction to model checking that is not only a text suitable for classroom use but also a valuable reference for researchers and practitioners in the field. The book begins with the basic principles for modeling concurrent and communicating systems, introduces different classes of properties (including safety and liveness), presents the notion of fairness, and provides automata-based algorithms for these properties. It introduces the temporal logics LTL and CTL, compares them, and covers algorithms for verifying these logics, discussing real-time systems as well as systems subject to random phenomena. Separate chapters treat such efficiency-improving techniques as abstraction and symbolic manipulation. The book includes an extensive set of examples (most of which run through several chapters) and a complete set of basic results accompanied by detailed proofs. Each chapter concludes with a summary, bibliographic notes, and an extensive list of exercises of both practical and theoretical nature.