arXivDaily arXiv每日学术速递 周一至周五更新
arXiv周末暂无论文更新,休息一下吧,周末愉快~~
arXiv 2007.02282cs.FLcs.CL
收藏

Proving Non-Inclusion of Büchi Automata based on Monte Carlo Sampling

Institute of Software, Chinese Academy of Sciences(中国科学院软件研究所);Institute of Intelligent Software, Guangzhou(广州智能软件研究院);University of Chinese Academy of Sciences(中国科学院大学)

Yong Li, Andrea Turrini, Xuechao Sun, Lijun Zhang

英文摘要:

The search for a proof of correctness and the search for counterexamples (bugs) are complementary aspects of verification. In order to maximize the practical use of verification tools it is better to pursue them at the same time. While this is well-understood in the termination analysis of programs, this is not the case for the language inclusion analysis of Büchi automata, where research mainly focused on improving algorithms for proving language inclusion, with the search for counterexamples left to the expensive complementation operation. In this paper, we present $\mathsf{IMC}^2$, a specific algorithm for proving Büchi automata non-inclusion $\mathcal{L}(\mathcal{A}) \not\subseteq \mathcal{L}(\mathcal{B})$, based on Grosu and Smolka's algorithm $\mathsf{MC}^2$ developed for Monte Carlo model checking against LTL formulas. The algorithm we propose takes $M = \lceil \ln δ/ \ln (1-ε) \rceil$ random lasso-shaped samples from $\mathcal{A}$ to decide whether to reject the hypothesis $\mathcal{L}(\mathcal{A}) \not\subseteq \mathcal{L}(\mathcal{B})$, for given error probability $ε$ and confidence level $1 - δ$. With such a number of samples, $\mathsf{IMC}^2$ ensures that the probability of witnessing $\mathcal{L}(\mathcal{A}) \not\subseteq \mathcal{L}(\mathcal{B})$ via further sampling is less than $δ$, under the assumption that the probability of finding a lasso counterexample is larger than $ε$. Extensive experimental evaluation shows that $\mathsf{IMC}^2$ is a fast and reliable way to find counterexamples to Büchi automata inclusion.

机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来,可能存在错误,请以论文正文为准。

↑