Abstract
We study the need for complex circular assume-guarantee (AG) rules in formalisms that already provide the simple precongruence rule. We first investigate the question for two popular formalisms: Labeled Transition Systems (LTSs) with weak simulation and Interface Automata (IA) with alternating simulation. We observe that, in LTSs, complex circular AG rules cannot always be avoided, but, in the IA world, the simple precongruence rule is all we need. Based on these findings, we introduce modal IA with cut states, a novel formalism that not only generalizes IA and LTSs but also allows for compositional reasoning without complex AG rules.
- Martín Abadi and Leslie Lamport. 1995. Conjoining specifications. ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems 17, 3 (1995), 507--535. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Rajeev Alur and Thomas A. Henzinger. 1999. Reactive modules. Formal Methods in System Design 15 (1999), 7--48. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- C. Baier and J.-P. Katoen. 2008. Principles of Model Checking. MIT Press.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Sebastian S. Bauer, Philip Mayer, Andreas Schroeder, and Rolf Hennicker. 2010. On weak modal compatibility, refinement, and the MIO workbench. In Proceedings of TACAS’10, Javier Esparza and Rupak Majumdar (Eds.). LNCS, Vol. 6015. Springer, 175--189. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Ferenc Bujtor and Walter Vogler. 2014. Error-pruning in interface automata. In Proceedings of SOFSEM’14, Viliam Geffert, Bart Preneel, Branislav Rovan, Július Štuller, and Amin Tjoa (Eds.). LNCS, Vol. 8327. Springer, 162--173. Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Chris Chilton, Bengt Jonsson, and Marta Kwiatkowska. 2014. Compositional assume-guarantee reasoning for input/output component theories. Sci. Comput. Program. 91, A (2014), 115--137.Google Scholar
- Edmund M. Clarke, Orna Grumberg, and Doron A. Peled. 1999. Model Checking. MIT Press.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Jamieson M. Cobleigh, Dimitra Giannakopoulou, and Corina S. Păsăreanu. 2003. Learning assumptions for compositional verification. In Proceedings of TACAS’03, Hubert Garavel and John Hatcliff (Eds.). LNCS, Vol. 2619. Springer, 331--346. Google Scholar
- Luca de Alfaro and Thomas A. Henzinger. 2001a. Interface automata. ACM SIGSOFT 26, 5 (2001), 109--120. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Luca de Alfaro and Thomas A. Henzinger. 2001b. Interface theories for component-based design. In Proceedings of EMSOFT’01, Thomas A. Henzinger and Christoph M. Kirsch (Eds.). LNCS, Vol. 2211. Springer, 148--165. Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Luca de Alfaro and Thomas A. Henzinger. 2005. Interface-based design. In Engineering Theories of Software Intensive Systems, Manfred Broy, Johannes Grünbauer, David Harel, and Tony Hoare (Eds.). NATO Science Series, Vol. 195. Springer, 83--104. Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Willem-Paul de Roever, Frank S. de Boer, Ulrich Hannemann, Jozef Hooman, Yassine Lakhnech, Mannes Poel, and Job Zwiers. 2001. Concurrency Verification: Introduction to Compositional and Noncompositional Methods. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Michael Emmi, Dimitra Giannakopoulou, and Corina S. Păsăreanu. 2008. Assume-guarantee verification for interface automata. In Proceedings of FM’08, Jorge Cuéllar, Tom Maibaum, and Kaisa Sere (Eds.). LNCS, Vol. 5014. Springer, 116--131. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Goran Frehse, Zhi Han, and B. Krogh. 2004. Assume-guarantee reasoning for hybrid I/O-automata by over-approximation of continuous interaction. In Proceedings of CDC’04, Vol. 1. IEEE, 479--484. Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Orna Grumberg and David E. Long. 1994. Model checking and modular verification. ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems 16, 3 (1994), 843--871. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Thomas A. Henzinger, Shaz Qadeer, and Sriram K. Rajamani. 1998. You assume, we guarantee: Methodology and case studies. In Proceedings of CAV’98, Alan J. Hu and Moshe Y. Vardi (Eds.). LNCS, Vol. 1427. Springer, 440--451. Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Gerald Lüttgen and Walter Vogler. 2013. Modal interface automata. Logical Methods in Computer Science 9, 3, Article 4 (2013), 28 pages.Google Scholar
- Nancy A. Lynch and Mark R. Tuttle. 1989. An introduction to input/output automata. CWI Quarterly 2 (1989), 219--246.Google Scholar
- Kenneth L. McMillan. 1998. Verification of an implementation of Tomasulo’s algorithm by compositional model checking. In Proceedings of CAV’98, Alan J. Hu and Moshe Y. Vardi (Eds.). LNCS, Vol. 1427. Springer, 110--121. Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Robin Milner. 1980. A Calculus of Communicating Systems. LNCS, Vol. 92. Springer. Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Janardan Misra and K. Mani Chandy. 1981. Proofs of networks of processes. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 7, 4 (1981), 417--426. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Kedar S. Namjoshi and Richard J. Trefler. 2010. On the completeness of compositional reasoning methods. ACM Transactions on Computer Logic 11, 3, Article 16 (2010), 22 pages.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Amir Pnueli. 1985. In transition from global to modular temporal reasoning about programs. In Logics and Models of Concurrent Systems, Krzysztof R. Apt (Ed.). NATO ASI Series, Vol. 13. Springer, 123--144. Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Viorel Preoteasa and Stavros Tripakis. 2014. Refinement calculus of reactive systems. In Proceedings of EMSOFT’14, Tulika Mitra and Jan Reineke (Eds.). IEEE, 1--10. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Jean-Baptiste Raclet, Eric Badouel, Albert Benveniste, Benoît Caillaud, Axel Legay, and Roberto Passerone. 2011. A modal interface theory for component-based design. Fundamenta Informaticae 108, 1--2 (2011), 119--149.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- A. William Roscoe. 2010. Understanding Concurrent Systems. Springer. Google Scholar
- Natarajan Shankar. 1998. Lazy compositional verification. In Compositionality: The Significant Difference, Willem-Paul de Roever, Hans Langmaack, and Amir Pnueli (Eds.). LNCS, Vol. 1536. Springer, 541--564.Google Scholar
- Antti Siirtola. 2014. Parametrised interface automata. In Proceedings of ACSD’14, Andrey Mokhov, Luca Bernardinello, and Kamel Barkaoui (Eds.). IEEE, 176--185. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Antti Siirtola, Stavros Tripakis, and Keijo Heljanko. 2015. When do we (not) need complex assume-guarantee rules? In Proceedings of ACSD’15, Stefan Haar and Roland Meyer (Eds.). IEEE, 30--39. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Stavros Tripakis, Ben Lickly, Thomas A. Henzinger, and Edward A. Lee. 2011. A theory of synchronous relational interfaces. ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems 33, 4, Article 14 (2011), 41 pages.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Antti Valmari. 2001. Composition and abstraction. In Proceedings of MOVEP’00, Franck Cassez, Claude Jard, Brigitte Rozoy, and Mark Dermot Ryan (Eds.). LNCS, Vol. 2067. Springer, 58--98. Google Scholar
Cross Ref
Index Terms
When Do We Not Need Complex Assume-Guarantee Rules?
Recommendations
When Do We (Not) Need Complex Assume-Guarantee Rules?
ACSD '15: Proceedings of the 2015 15th International Conference on Application of Concurrency to System DesignAssume-guarantee (AG) reasoning is a compositional verification method where a verification task involving many processes is broken into multiple verification tasks involving fewer and/or simpler processes. Unfortunately, AG verification rules, and ...
Multi-parameterised compositional verification of safety properties
We introduce a fully automatic technique for the parameterised verification of safety properties. The technique combines compositionality and completeness with support to multiple parameters and it is implemented in a tool. We start with an LTS-based (...
Automated circular assume-guarantee reasoning
AbstractModel checking is a successful approach for verifying hardware and software systems. Despite its success, the technique suffers from the state explosion problem which arises due to the large state space of real-life systems. One solution to the ...






Comments