skip to main content
research-article

A Novel GAPG Approach to Automatic Property Generation for Formal Verification: The GAN Perspective

Authors Info & Claims
Published:05 January 2023Publication History
Skip Editorial Notes Section

Editorial Notes

The authors have requested minor, non-substantive changes to the VoR and, in accordance with ACM policies, a Corrected Version of Record was published on March 14, 2023. For reference purposes, the VoR may still be accessed via the Supplemental Material section on this citation page.

Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

Formal methods have been widely used to support software testing to guarantee correctness and reliability. For example, model checking technology attempts to ensure that the verification property of a specific formal model is satisfactory for discovering bugs or abnormal behavior from the perspective of temporal logic. However, because automatic approaches are lacking, a software developer/tester must manually specify verification properties. A generative adversarial network (GAN) learns features from input training data and outputs new data with similar or coincident features. GANs have been successfully used in the image processing and text processing fields and achieved interesting and automatic results. Inspired by the power of GANs, in this article, we propose a GAN-based automatic property generation (GAPG) approach to generate verification properties supporting model checking. First, the verification properties in the form of computational tree logic (CTL) are encoded and used as input to the GAN. Second, we introduce regular expressions as grammar rules to check the correctness of the generated properties. These rules work to detect and filter meaningless properties that occur because the GAN learning process is uncontrollable and may generate unsuitable properties in real applications. Third, the learning network is further trained by using labeled information associated with the input properties. These are intended to guide the training process to generate additional new properties, particularly those that map to corresponding formal models. Finally, a series of comprehensive experiments demonstrate that the proposed GAPG method can obtain new verification properties from two aspects: (1) using only CTL formulas and (2) using CTL formulas combined with Kripke structures.

Skip Supplemental Material Section

Supplemental Material

REFERENCES

  1. [1] Bird Christian, Ranganath Venkatesh-Prasad, Zimmermann Thomas, Nagappan Nachiappan, and Zeller Andreas. 2014. Extrinsic influence factors in software reliability: A study of 200,000 windows machines. In Proceedings of the 36th International Conference on Software Engineering. 205214.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. [2] Reid S.. 2013. Software and Systems Engineering Software Testing Part 1: Concepts and Definitions. Technical Report. ISO/IEC/IEEE 29119-1.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. [3] Nanda Smruti Priyambada and Grant Emanuel S.. 2019. A survey of formal specification application to safety critical systems. In Proceedings of the IEEE 2nd International Conference on Information and Computer Technologies (ICICT). IEEE, 296302.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. [4] Sakib Kazi, Tari Zahir, and Bertók Péter. 2013. Verification of Communication Protocols in Web Services: Model-checking Service Compositions. John Wiley & Sons.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. [5] He Shiying, Huang Liansheng, Gao Ge, Wang Guanghong, Wang Zejing, and Chen Xiaojiao. 2019. Design of real-time control in poloidal field power supply based on finite-state machine. IEEE Trans. Plasma Sci. 47, 4 (2019), 18781883.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. [6] Society IEEE Computer. 2019. IEEE standard for the functional verification language e. IEEE Std 1647-2019 (Revision of IEEE Std 1647-2016) (2019), 1622. DOI:Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. [7] Akram Adeel, Wang Nannan, Gao Xinbo, and Li Jie. 2018. Integrating GAN with CNN for face sketch synthesis. In Proceedings of the IEEE 4th International Conference on Computer and Communications (ICCC). IEEE, 14831487.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. [8] Gao Xiang, Tian Yingjie, and Qi Zhiquan. 2020. RPD-GAN: Learning to draw realistic paintings with generative adversarial network. IEEE Trans. Image Process. 29 (2020), 87068720.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. [9] Yang Yang, Dan Xiaodong, Qiu Xuesong, and Gao Zhipeng. 2020. FGGAN: Feature-guiding generative adversarial networks for text generation. IEEE Access 8 (2020), 105217105225.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. [10] Gao Honghao, Chu Danqi, Duan Yucong, and Yin Yuyu. 2017. Probabilistic model checking-based service selection method for business process modeling. Int. J. Softw. Eng. Knowl. Eng. 27, 06 (2017), 897923.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. [11] Nardone Vittoria, Santone Antonella, Tipaldi Massimo, Liuzza Davide, and Glielmo Luigi. 2018. Model checking techniques applied to satellite operational mode management. IEEE Syst. J. 13, 1 (2018), 10181029.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. [12] Gao Honghao, Miao Huaikou, Liu Lilan, Kai Jinyu, and Zhao Kun. 2018. Automated quantitative verification for service-based system design: A visualization transform tool perspective. Int. J. Softw. Eng. Knowl. Eng. 28, 10 (2018), 13691397.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. [13] Mili Saoussen, Nguyen Nga, and Chelouah Rachid. 2019. Transformation-based approach to security verification for cyber-physical systems. IEEE Syst. J. 13, 4 (2019), 39894000.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. [14] Gao Honghao, Miao Huaikou, and Zeng Hongwei. 2013. Predictive web service monitoring using probabilistic model checking. Appl. Math. Inf. Sci. 7, 1L (2013), 139148.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. [15] Cui Jin, Duan Zhenhua, Tian Cong, and Du Hongwei. 2018. A novel approach to modeling and verifying real-time systems for high reliability. IEEE Trans. Reliab. 67, 2 (2018), 481493.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. [16] Li Li, Sun Jun, Liu Yang, Sun Meng, and Dong Jin-Song. 2017. A formal specification and verification framework for timed security protocols. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 44, 8 (2017), 725746.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. [17] Lv Zhao, Chen Shuming, Zhang Tingrong, and Wang Yaohua. 2019. A specification-based semi-formal functional verification method by a stage transition graph model. IEEE Access 7 (2019), 1494714958.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. [18] Sultana Sidra and Arif Fahim. 2017. Computational conversion via translation rules for transforming C++ code into UPPAAL’s automata. IEEE Access 5 (2017), 1445514467.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. [19] Rössig Ansgar and Petkovic Milena. 2021. Advances in verification of ReLU neural networks. J. Global Optim. 81, 1 (2021), 109152.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. [20] Naseer Mahum, Minhas Mishal Fatima, Khalid Faiq, Hanif Muhammad Abdullah, Hasan Osman, and Shafique Muhammad. 2020. FANNet: Formal analysis of noise tolerance, training bias and input sensitivity in neural networks. In Proceedings of the Design, Automation & Test in Europe Conference & Exhibition (DATE). IEEE, 666669.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. [21] Yin Shanghui, Xing Renzhi, Liu Xiangqi, Yi Yinhui, Zheng Kai, and Huang Xin. 2018. Model checking an artificial neural networks system in medical diagnosis. In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Information Technology in Medicine and Education (ITME). IEEE, 852856.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. [22] Venzke Andreas and Chatzivasileiadis Spyros. 2020. Verification of neural network behaviour: Formal guarantees for power system applications. IEEE Trans. Smart Grid 12, 1 (2020), 383397.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. [23] Abate Alessandro, Ahmed Daniele, Giacobbe Mirco, and Peruffo Andrea. 2020. Formal synthesis of Lyapunov neural networks. IEEE Contr. Syst. Lett. 5, 3 (2020), 773778.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. [24] Phan Quoc-Sang and Malacaria Pasquale. 2015. All-solution satisfiability modulo theories: Applications, algorithms and benchmarks. In Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Availability, Reliability and Security. IEEE, 100109.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. [25] Goodfellow Ian, Pouget-Abadie Jean, Mirza Mehdi, Xu Bing, Warde-Farley David, Ozair Sherjil, Courville Aaron, and Bengio Yoshua. 2014. Generative adversarial nets. Adv. Neural Inf. Process. Syst. 27 (2014).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. [26] Mirza Mehdi and Osindero Simon. 2014. Conditional generative adversarial nets. arXiv preprint arXiv:1411.1784. (2014).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. [27] Li Tao, Liu Xudong, and Su Shihan. 2018. Semi-supervised text regression with conditional generative adversarial networks. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Big Data (Big Data). IEEE, 53755377.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  28. [28] Zhang Mengshi, Zhang Yuqun, Zhang Lingming, Liu Cong, and Khurshid Sarfraz. 2018. DeepRoad: GAN-based metamorphic testing and input validation framework for autonomous driving systems. In Proceedings of the 33rd IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASE). IEEE, 132142.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. [29] Segura Sergio, Fraser Gordon, Sanchez Ana B., and Ruiz-Cortés Antonio. 2016. A survey on metamorphic testing. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 42, 9 (2016), 805824.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  30. [30] Huszár Ferenc. 2015. How (not) to train your generative model: Scheduled sampling, likelihood, adversary?arXiv preprint arXiv:1511.05101 (2015).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. [31] Yu Lantao, Zhang Weinan, Wang Jun, and Yu Yong. 2017. SeqGAN: Sequence generative adversarial nets with policy gradient. In Proceedings of the 31st AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence. 28522858.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  32. [32] Tuan Yi-Lin and Lee Hung-Yi. 2019. Improving conditional sequence generative adversarial networks by stepwise evaluation. IEEE/ACM Trans. Audio, Speech Lang. Process. 27, 4 (2019), 788798.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. [33] Rivieccio Umberto, Jung Achim, and Jansana Ramon. 2017. Four-valued modal logic: Kripke semantics and duality. J. Logic Computat. 27, 1 (2017), 155199.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  34. [34] Baier Christel and Katoen Joost-Pieter. 2008. Principles of Model Checking. The MIT Press.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. [35] Qian Yichen, Wu Jun, Wang Rui, Zhu Fusheng, and Zhang Wei. 2019. Survey on reinforcement learning applications in communication networks. J. Commun. Inf. Netw. 4, 2 (2019), 3039.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  36. [36] Cazenave Tristan. 2012. Monte Carlo beam search. IEEE Trans. Computat. Intell. AI Games 4, 1 (2012), 6872.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  37. [37] Silver David, Huang Aja, Maddison Chris J., Guez Arthur, Sifre Laurent, Driessche George Van Den, Schrittwieser Julian, Antonoglou Ioannis, Panneershelvam Veda, Lanctot Marc, et al. 2016. Mastering the game of Go with deep neural networks and tree search. Nature 529, 7587 (2016), 484489.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  38. [38] Power IEEE and Society Energy. 2018. IEEE standard for fall protection for electric utility transmission and distribution on poles and structures. IEEE Std 1307-2018 (Revision of IEEE Std 1307-2004) (2018), 146. DOI:Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  39. [39] Khalil Kasem, Eldash Omar, Kumar Ashok, and Bayoumi Magdy. 2019. Economic LSTM approach for recurrent neural networks. IEEE Trans. Circ. Syst. II: Express Briefs 66, 11 (2019), 18851889.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  40. [40] Goodfellow Ian, Bengio Yoshua, and Courville Aaron. 2016. Deep Learning. The MIT Press.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  41. [41] Peng Yingqiong, Liao Muxin, Song Yuxia, Liu Zhichao, He Huojiao, Deng Hong, and Wang Yinglong. 2019. FB-CNN: Feature fusion-based bilinear CNN for classification of fruit fly image. IEEE Access 8 (2019), 39873995.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  42. [42] Lei Xinyu, Pan Hongguang, and Huang Xiangdong. 2019. A dilated CNN model for image classification. IEEE Access 7 (2019), 124087124095.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. A Novel GAPG Approach to Automatic Property Generation for Formal Verification: The GAN Perspective

    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

    • Published in

      cover image ACM Transactions on Multimedia Computing, Communications, and Applications
      ACM Transactions on Multimedia Computing, Communications, and Applications  Volume 19, Issue 1
      January 2023
      505 pages
      ISSN:1551-6857
      EISSN:1551-6865
      DOI:10.1145/3572858
      • Editor:
      • Abdulmotaleb El Saddik
      Issue’s Table of Contents

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 5 January 2023
      • Online AM: 18 February 2022
      • Accepted: 6 February 2022
      • Revised: 17 January 2022
      • Received: 12 October 2021
      Published in tomm Volume 19, Issue 1

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article
      • Refereed

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    Full Text

    View this article in Full Text.

    View Full Text

    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!