ACM Home Page
Please provide us with feedback. Feedback
Digital Library logoTake a look at the new version of this page: [ beta version ]. Tell us what you think.
Improving efficiency of symbolic model checking for state-based system requirements
Full text PdfPdf (1.17 MB)
Source International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis archive
Proceedings of the 1998 ACM SIGSOFT international symposium on Software testing and analysis table of contents
Clearwater Beach, Florida, United States
Pages: 102 - 112  
Year of Publication: 1998
ISBN:0-89791-971-8
Also published in ...
Authors
William Chan  Department of Computer Science and Engineering, University of Washington, Box 352350, Seattle, WA
Richard J. Anderson  Department of Computer Science and Engineering, University of Washington, Box 352350, Seattle, WA
Paul Beame  Department of Computer Science and Engineering, University of Washington, Box 352350, Seattle, WA
David Notkin  Department of Computer Science and Engineering, University of Washington, Box 352350, Seattle, WA
Sponsor
SIGSOFT: ACM Special Interest Group on Software Engineering
Publisher
ACM  New York, NY, USA
Bibliometrics
Downloads (6 Weeks): 2,   Downloads (12 Months): 15,   Citation Count: 13
Additional Information:

abstract   references   cited by   index terms   collaborative colleagues  

Tools and Actions: Request Permissions Request Permissions    Review this Article  
DOI Bookmark: Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/271771.271798
What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

We present various techniques for improving the time and space efficiency of symbolic model checking for system requirements specified as synchronous finite state machines. We used these techniques in our analysis of the system requirements specification of TCAS II, a complex aircraft collision avoidance system. They together reduce the time and space complexities by orders of magnitude, making feasible some analysis that was previously intractable. The TCAS II requirements were written in RSML, a dialect of state-charts.


REFERENCES

Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.

1
 
2
J. J. Britt. Case study: Applying formal methods to the Traffic Alert and Collision Avoidance System (TCAS) II. In COMPASS'94, Proceedings of the 9th Annual Conference on Computer Assurance, pages 39-51, Gaithersburg, MD, USA, June/July 1994. IEEE.
 
3
 
4
 
5
 
6
J. R. Burch, E. M. Clarke, D. E. Long, K. L. McMillan, and D. L. Dill. Symbolic model checking for sequential circuit verification. IEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design oflntegrated Circuits, 13(4):401-424, April 1994.
7
 
8
 
9
10
 
11
 
12
J. Crow and B. L. Di Vito. Formalizing space shuffle software requirements. In Proceedings of the ACM $IG$OFT Workshop on Formal Methods in Software Practice, pages 40-48, JaNuary 1996.
13
 
14
Proceedings of the Joint 6th European Software Engineering Conference and 5th ACM $IG$OFT Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering, Zurich, Switzerland, September 1997.
 
15
 
16
17
 
18
19
20
 
21
 
22
 
23
 
24
 
25
 
26
R. K. Ranjan, A. Aziz, R. K. Brayton, B. Plessier, and C. Pixley. Efficient B DD algorithms for FSM synthesis and verification. In Proceedings of lEEF_./A CM International Workshop on Logic Synthesis, Lake Tahoe, USA, May 1995.
 
27
T. Sreemani and J. M. Atlee. Feasibility of model checking software requirements: A case study. In COMPASS'96, Proceedings of the l lth Annual Conference on ComputerAssurance, pages 77-88, Gaithersburg, MD, USA, June 1996. IEEE. '
 
28

CITED BY  13

Collaborative Colleagues:
William Chan: colleagues
Richard J. Anderson: colleagues
Paul Beame: colleagues
David Notkin: colleagues