Specification sketching for Linear Temporal Logic

Simon Lutz, D. Neider, Rajarshi Roy
{"title":"Specification sketching for Linear Temporal Logic","authors":"Simon Lutz, D. Neider, Rajarshi Roy","doi":"10.48550/arXiv.2206.06722","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Virtually all verification and synthesis techniques assume that the formal specifications are readily available, functionally correct, and fully match the engineer's understanding of the given system. However, this assumption is often unrealistic in practice: formalizing system requirements is notoriously difficult, error-prone, and requires substantial training. To alleviate this severe hurdle, we propose a fundamentally novel approach to writing formal specifications, named specification sketching for Linear Temporal Logic (LTL). The key idea is that an engineer can provide a partial LTL formula, called an LTL sketch, where parts that are hard to formalize can be left out. Given a set of examples describing system behaviors that the specification should or should not allow, the task of a so-called sketching algorithm is then to complete a given sketch such that the resulting LTL formula is consistent with the examples. We show that deciding whether a sketch can be completed falls into the complexity class NP and present two SAT-based sketching algorithms. We also demonstrate that sketching is a practical approach to writing formal specifications using a prototype implementation.","PeriodicalId":335085,"journal":{"name":"Automated Technology for Verification and Analysis","volume":"11 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Automated Technology for Verification and Analysis","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2206.06722","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Virtually all verification and synthesis techniques assume that the formal specifications are readily available, functionally correct, and fully match the engineer's understanding of the given system. However, this assumption is often unrealistic in practice: formalizing system requirements is notoriously difficult, error-prone, and requires substantial training. To alleviate this severe hurdle, we propose a fundamentally novel approach to writing formal specifications, named specification sketching for Linear Temporal Logic (LTL). The key idea is that an engineer can provide a partial LTL formula, called an LTL sketch, where parts that are hard to formalize can be left out. Given a set of examples describing system behaviors that the specification should or should not allow, the task of a so-called sketching algorithm is then to complete a given sketch such that the resulting LTL formula is consistent with the examples. We show that deciding whether a sketch can be completed falls into the complexity class NP and present two SAT-based sketching algorithms. We also demonstrate that sketching is a practical approach to writing formal specifications using a prototype implementation.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
线性时序逻辑规范草图
实际上,所有的验证和综合技术都假定正式的规范是现成的,功能正确的,并且完全符合工程师对给定系统的理解。然而,这个假设在实践中通常是不现实的:形式化系统需求是出了名的困难,容易出错,并且需要大量的培训。为了减轻这个严重的障碍,我们提出了一种基本新颖的方法来编写正式规范,称为线性时序逻辑(LTL)的规范草图。关键思想是工程师可以提供部分LTL公式,称为LTL草图,其中难以形式化的部分可以省略。给定一组描述规范应该或不应该允许的系统行为的示例,那么所谓的草图算法的任务就是完成给定的草图,从而使生成的LTL公式与示例一致。我们证明了决定草图是否可以完成属于复杂度类NP,并提出了两种基于sat的草图算法。我们还演示了绘制草图是使用原型实现编写正式规范的实用方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Fast Equivalence Checking of Quantum Circuits of Clifford Gates An Automata-Theoretic Approach to Synthesizing Binarized Neural Networks Syntactic vs Semantic Linear Abstraction and Refinement of Neural Networks Synthesis of Distributed Protocols by Enumeration Modulo Isomorphisms Minimally Comparing Relational Abstract Domains
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1