Abstract
Branching bisimulation minimization is often used to obtain a smaller but equivalent model for a complicated one. It is particularly useful in compositional analysis to replace a subsystem’s behaviors with the minimal one so that the growth of states can be controlled in a hierarchical, divide-and-conquer manner. Nonetheless, branching bisimulation minimization is typically invoked after the whole state space is enumerated entirely. In practice, when the parallel composition engine drains too many memory resources during exploring reachable states, it causes operating systems to swap excessively (i.e., thrashing) due to the page replacement of virtual memory. When such a scenario occurs, the system degrades dramatically in performance and becomes unusable, albeit minimization is possible to abstract the whole state space into very small one. In this paper, we present a pragmatic approach to make branching bisimulation minimization on-the-fly. It minimizes the state space during composition and releases memory resources that are no longer used. Our approach allows larger systems to be verified by taking account of operating systems memory management.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Bergamini, D., Descoubes, N., Joubert, C., Mateescu, R.: BISIMULATOR: A modular tool for on-the-fly equivalence checking. In: Halbwachs, N., Zuck, L.D. (eds.) TACAS 2005. LNCS, vol. 3440, pp. 613–618. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)
Blom, S., van de Pol, J.: State space reduction by proving confluence. In: Brinksma, E., Larsen, K.G. (eds.) CAV 2002. LNCS, vol. 2404, pp. 596–609. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)
Bouajjani, A., Fernandez, J.-C., Halbwachs, N.: Minimal model generation. In: Clarke, E., Kurshan, R.P. (eds.) CAV 1990. LNCS, vol. 531, pp. 197–203. Springer, Heidelberg (1991)
Bouali, A.: Weak and branching bisimulation in fctool. Technical Report Technical Report 1575, INRIA, Sophia Antipolis, Valbonne Cedex, France (1992)
Cheng, Y.: Refactoring design models for inductive verification. In: Proceedings of International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis (ISSTA 2002), Rome, Italy, pp. 164–168 (July 2002)
Cheng, Y.-P., Young, M., Huang, C.-L., Pan, C.-Y.: Towards scalable compositional analysis by refactoring design models. In: Proceedings of the ACM SIGSOFT 2003 Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering, pp. 247–256 (2003)
Cheung, S.C., Kramer, J.: Context constraints for compositional reachability analysis. ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology 5(4), 334–377 (1996)
Dams, D., Groote, J.: Specification and implementation of components of a \(\pounds\)gCRL toolbox. Technical Report 152, Logic Group Preprint, SeriesUtrecht University (1995), http://homepages.cwi.nl/~mcrl
Fernandez, J.-C., Mounier, L.: A tool set for deciding behavioral equivalences. In: Groote, J.F., Baeten, J.C.M. (eds.) CONCUR 1991. LNCS, vol. 527. Springer, Heidelberg (1991)
Garavel, H., Lang, F., Mateescu, R.: An overview of cadp 2001. European Association for Software Science and Technology (EASST) Newsletter 4, 13–24 (2002)
Glabbeek, R.V., Weijland, W.P.: Branching time and abstraction in bisimulation semantics (extended abstract). In: Information Processing 1989, pp. 613–618. North-Holland, Amsterdam (1989)
Graf, S., Steffen, B.: Compositional minimization of finite state systems. In: Clarke, E., Kurshan, R.P. (eds.) CAV 1990. LNCS, vol. 531, pp. 186–204. Springer, Heidelberg (1991)
Groote, J., Vaandrager, F.: An efficient algorithm for branching bisimulation and stuttering equivalence. In: ICALP (1990)
Groote, J.F., van de Pol, J.: State space reduction using partial τ-confluence. In: Nielsen, M., Rovan, B. (eds.) MFCS 2000. LNCS, vol. 1893, pp. 383–393. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)
Holzmann, G.J.: Design and Validation of Computer Protocols. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, 07632 (1991)
Holzmann, G.J.: The model checker SPIN. Software Engineering 23(5), 279–295 (1997)
Kanellakis, P.C., Smolka, S.A.: CCS expressions, finite state processes, and three problems of equivalence. Information and Computation 86, 43–68 (1990)
Lee, D., Yannakakis, M.: Online minimization of transition systems. In: Proceedings of 24th ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, Victoria, pp. 264–274 (May 1992)
McMillan, K.L.: Symbolic model checking. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Massachusetts (1993)
Milner, R.: A Calculus of Communication Systems. LNCS, vol. 92. Springer, Heidelberg (1980)
Pace, G., Lang, F., Mateescu, R.: Calculating tau-confluence compositionally. In: Hunt Jr., W.A., Somenzi, F. (eds.) CAV 2003. LNCS, vol. 2725, pp. 446–459. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)
Yeh, W.J., Young, M.: Compositional reachability analysis using process algebra. In: Proceedings of the Symposium on Software Testing, Analysis, and Verification (TAV4). ACM SIGSOFT, Victoria, British Columbia, October 1991, pp. 49–59. ACM Press, New York (1991)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2006 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Cheng, YP., Wang, HY., Cheng, YR. (2006). On-the-Fly Branching Bisimulation Minimization for Compositional Analysis. In: Ibarra, O.H., Yen, HC. (eds) Implementation and Application of Automata. CIAA 2006. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 4094. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/11812128_21
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/11812128_21
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-37213-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-37214-1
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)