skip to main content
research-article

Efficient Decentralized LTL Monitoring Framework Using Tableau Technique

Published:11 October 2019Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

This paper presents a novel framework for decentralized monitoring of Linear Temporal Logic (LTL) formulas, under the situation where processes are synchronous and the formula is represented as a tableau. The tableau technique allows one to construct a semantic tree for the input LTL formula, which can be used to optimize the decentralized monitoring of LTL in various ways. Given a system P and an LTL formula φ, we construct a tableau Tφ. The tableau Tφ is used for two purposes: (a) to synthesize an efficient round-robin communication policy for processes, and (b) to find the minimal ways to decompose the formula and communicate observations of processes in an efficient way. In our framework, processes can propagate truth values of both atomic and compound formulas (non-atomic formulas) depending on the syntactic structure of the input LTL formula and the observation power of processes. We demonstrate that this approach of decentralized monitoring based on tableau construction is more straightforward, more flexible, and more likely to yield efficient solutions than alternative approaches.

References

  1. Hamid Alavi, George Avrunin, James Corbett, Laura Dillon, Matt Dwyer, and Corina Pasareanu. 2011. Specification patterns website. http://patterns.projects.cis.ksu.edu/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Fahiem Bacchus and Froduald Kabanza. 1996. Planning for temporally extended goals. In Proceedings of the Thirteenth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence. 1215--1222.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. David Basin, Felix Klaedtke, and Eugen Zalinescu. 2015. Failure-aware runtime verification of distributed systems. In 35th IARCS Annual Conference on Foundations of Software Technology and Theoretical Computer Science (FSTTCS 2015), Vol. 45, 590--603.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Andreas Bauer, Martin Leucker, and Christian Schallhart. 2011. Runtime verification for LTL and TLTL. ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology (TOSEM) (2011), 14:1--14:64.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Andreas Klaus Bauer and Yliès Falcone. 2012. Decentralised LTL monitoring. In FM 2012: Formal Methods - 18th International Symposium, Paris, France. 85--100.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. E. Beth. 1955. Semantic Entailment and Formal Derivability. Mededelingen der Koninklijke Nederlandse Akad. van Wetensch.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Christian Colombo and Yliès Falcone. 2016. Organising LTL monitors over distributed systems with a global clock. Formal Methods in System Design 49, 1--2 (2016), 109--158.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Christian Colombo, Gordon J. Pace, and Gerardo Schneider. 2008. Dynamic event-based runtime monitoring of real-time and contextual properties. In Formal Methods for Industrial Critical Systems, 13th International Workshop, FMICS 2008, L’Aquila, Italy. 135--149.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Ben D’Angelo, Sriram Sankaranarayanan, César Sánchez, Will Robinson, Bernd Finkbeiner, Henny B. Sipma, Sandeep Mehrotra, and Zohar Manna. 2005. LOLA: Runtime monitoring of synchronous systems. In 12th International Symposium on Temporal Representation and Reasoning (TIME 2005), 23--25 June 2005, Burlington, Vermont, USA. 166--174.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Matthew B. Dwyer, George S. Avrunin, and James C. Corbett. 1999. Patterns in property specifications for finite-state verification. In Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Software Engineering. 411--420.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Antoine El-Hokayem and Yliès Falcone. 2017. Monitoring decentralized specifications. In Proceedings of the 26th ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis (ISTA). 125--135.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. E. Allen Emerson and Joseph Y. Halpern. 1982. Decision procedures and expressiveness in the temporal logic of branching time. In Proceedings of the Fourteenth Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC’82). 169--180.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Yliès Falcone, Tom Cornebize, and Jean-Claude Fernandez. 2014. Efficient and generalized decentralized monitoring of regular languages. In Formal Techniques for Distributed Objects, Components, and Systems. 66--83.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Shokoufeh Kazemlou and Borzoo Bonakdarpour. 2018. Crash-resilient decentralized synchronous runtime verification. In 37th IEEE Symposium on Reliable Distributed Systems SRDS. 207--212.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Yonit Kesten, Zohar Manna, Hugh McGuire, and Amir Pnueli. 1993. A decision algorithm for full propositional temporal logic. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Computer Aided Verification (CAV’93). 97--109.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Stephen Cole Kleene. 1952. Introduction to Metamathematics. North-Holland, Amsterdam.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Menna Mostafa and Borzoo Bonakdarpour. 2015. Decentralized runtime verification of LTL specifications in distributed systems. In 2015 IEEE International Parallel and Distributed Processing Symposium. 494--503.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Lee Pike, Sebastian Niller, and Nis Wegmann. 2012. Runtime verification for ultra-critical systems. In Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Runtime Verification (RV’11). 310--324.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Amir Pnueli. 1977. The temporal logic of programs. In Proceedings of the 18th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (SFCS’77). IEEE Computer Society, 46--57.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Mark Reynolds. 2016. A new rule for LTL tableaux. In Symposium on Games, Automata, Logics and Formal Verification, GandALF 2016. 287--301.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. Torben Scheffel and Malte Schmitz. 2014. Three-valued asynchronous distributed runtime verification. In International Conference on Formal Methods and Models for System Design (MEMOCODE), Vol. 12. IEEE.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Stefan Schwendimann. 1998. Aspects of Computational Logic. Ph.D. Dissertation. Institut für Informatik und angewandte Mathematik.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Koushik Sen, Abhay Vardhan, Gul Agha, and Grigore Rosu. 2004. Efficient decentralized monitoring of safety in distributed systems. In Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE’04). IEEE Computer Society, 418--427.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Raymond Smullyan. 1968. First Order Logic. Springer-Verlag.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Efficient Decentralized LTL Monitoring Framework Using Tableau Technique

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in

      Full Access

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader

      HTML Format

      View this article in HTML Format .

      View HTML Format
      About Cookies On This Site

      We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website.

      Learn more

      Got it!