There is, I think, something ethereal about i —the square root of minus one. I remember first hearing about it at school. It seemed an odd beast at that time—an intruder hovering on the edge of reality.

Usually familiarity dulls this sense of the bizarre, but in the case of i it was the reverse: over the years the sense of its surreal nature intensified. It seemed that it was impossible to write mathematics that described the real world in …

I and i

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.

/pdf/principles-of-model-checking-249iimickz.pdf

Principles of Model Checking

ing WS1S Systems to Verify Parameterized Networks . . . . . . . . . . . . 188 Kai Baukus, Saddek Bensalem, Yassine Lakhnech and Karsten Stahl FMona: A Tool for Expressing Validation Techniques over Infinite State Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 204 J.-P. Bodeveix and M. Filali Transitive Closures of Regular Relations for Verifying Infinite-State Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 220 Bengt Jonsson and Marcus Nilsson Diagnostic and Test Generation Using Static Analysis to Improve Automatic Test Generation . . . . . . . . . . . . . 235 Marius Bozga, Jean-Claude Fernandez and Lucian Ghirvu Efficient Diagnostic Generation for Boolean Equation Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . 251 Radu Mateescu Efficient Model-Checking Compositional State Space Generation with Partial Order Reductions for Asynchronous Communicating Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 266 Jean-Pierre Krimm and Laurent Mounier Checking for CFFD-Preorder with Tester Processes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 283 Juhana Helovuo and Antti Valmari Fair Bisimulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 299 Thomas A. Henzinger and Sriram K. Rajamani Integrating Low Level Symmetries into Reachability Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . 315 Karsten Schmidt Model-Checking Tools Model Checking Support for the ASM High-Level Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 331 Giuseppe Del Castillo and Kirsten Winter Table of

Tools and Algorithms for the Construction and Analysis of Systems. Proc. TACAS 2009

BIST is a viable approach to test today's digital systems. Constraints, such as power, noise, area overhead, and others, limit the possibilities of parallel BIST execution in complex VLSI devices. This paper presents a BIST scheduling process that takes into consideration such constraints, and introduces a new BIST control methodology, that implements the BIST schedule with a highly modular architecture. In fact, due to the uniformity of interface, the BIST control elements are independent of the BIST scheme used in the embedded blocks of a device. This BIST control architecture can provide block level diagnostic information. >

A distributed BIST control scheme for complex VLSI devices

ion and Compositional Techniques From Asymmetry to Full Symmetry: New Techniques for Symmetry Reduction in Model Checking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142 E.Allen Emerson, Richard J. Trefler Automatic Error Correction of Large Circuits Using Boolean Decomposition and Abstraction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157 Dirk W. Hoffmann, Thomas Kropf Abstract BDDs: A Technique for Using Abstraction in Model Checking . . . 172 Edmund Clarke, Somesh Jha, Yuan Lu, Dong WangBDDs: A Technique for Using Abstraction in Model Checking . . . 172 Edmund Clarke, Somesh Jha, Yuan Lu, Dong Wang Theorem Proving Related Approaches Formal Synthesis at the Algorithmic Level . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 187 Christian Blumenröhr, Viktor Sabelfeld Xs Are for Trajectory Evaluation, Booleans Are for Theorem Proving . . . . . 202 Mark Aagaard, Thomas Melham, John O’Leary Verification of Infinite State Systems by Compositional Model Checking . . 219 K.L.McMillan Symbolic Simulation/Symbolic Traversal Formal Verification of Designs with Complex Control by Symbolic Simulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 234 Gerd Ritter, Hans Eveking, Holger Hinrichsen Hints to Accelerate Symbolic Traversal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 250 Kavita Ravi, Fabio Somenzi Specification Languages and Methodologies Modeling and Checking Networks of Communicating Real-Time Processes . 265 Jürgen Ruf, Thomas Kropf ”Have I Written Enough Properties?” A Method of Comparison between Specification and Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 280 Sagi Katz, Orna Grumberg, Danny Geist Program Slicing of Hardware Description Languages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 298 E.Clarke, M.Fujita, S.P.Rajan, T.Reps, S.Shankar, T.Teitelbaum Table of

/pdf/correct-hardware-design-and-verification-methods-1ukbancx0m.pdf

Correct Hardware Design and Verification Methods

Introduction.- Boolean Functions.- Finite State Machine Based Approaches.- Propositional Temporal Logics.- Higher Order Logic.- Appendix.- References.- Index.A more detailed table of contents can be found on our web site: http://www.springer.de

Introduction to formal hardware verification

We present a rigorous but transparent semantics definition of SystemC that covers method, thread, and clocked thread behavior as well as their interaction with the simulation kernel process. The semantics includes watching statements, signal assignment, and wait statements as they are introduced in SystemC V1.O. We present our definition in form of distributed Abstract State Machines (ASMs) rules reflecting the view given in the SystemC User's Manual and the reference implementation. We mainly see our formal semantics as a concise, unambiguous, high-level specification for SystemC-based implementations and for standardization. Additionally, it can be used as a sound basis to investigate SystemC interoperability with Verilog and VHDL.

/pdf/the-simulation-semantics-of-systemc-d8rt35wn19.pdf

The simulation semantics of systemC

The verification of digital designs, i.e., hardware or embedded hardware/software systems, is an important task in the design process. Often more than 70% of the development time is spent for locating and correcting errors in the design. Therefore, many techniques have been proposed to support the debugging process. Recently, simulation and test methods have been accompanied by formal methods such as equivalence checking and property checking. However their industrial applicability is currently restricted to small or medium sized designs or to a specific phase in the design cycle. In this paper, we present a method for verifying temporal properties of systems described in an executable description language. Our method allows the user to specify properties about the system in finite linear time temporal logic. These properties are translated to a special kind of finite state machines which are then efficiently checked on-the-fly during each simulation run. Properties may be placed anywhere in the system description and violations are immediately indicated to the designer.

/pdf/simulation-guided-property-checking-based-on-a-multi-valued-2sjwwqxjy0.pdf

Simulation-guided property checking based on a multi-valued AR-automata

In this paper we present a new model checking algorithm for interval based timed structures and temporal logic formulas. Besides the treatment of time intervals the new algorithm leads to a significant performance gain compared to previous approaches.

Symbolic model checking for a discrete clocked temporal logic with intervals

Symbolic trajectory evaluation.- Automated verification with abstract state machines using multiway decision graphs.- Design verification using Synchronized Transitions.- Hardware verification using PVS.- Verifying VHDL designs with COSPAN.- The C@S system: Combining proof strategies for system verification.- Appendix: The common book examples.

Thomas Kropf

Papers

Introduction to formal hardware verification

The simulation semantics of systemC

Simulation-guided property checking based on a multi-valued AR-automata

Symbolic model checking for a discrete clocked temporal logic with intervals

Formal Hardware Verification: Methods and Systems in Comparison