首页> 外文会议> >A comparative study between linear programming verification (LPV) and other verification methods
【24h】

A comparative study between linear programming verification (LPV) and other verification methods

机译:线性规划验证(LPV)与其他验证方法的比较研究

获取原文

摘要

Compares our linear programming technology for software verification (LPV) with other verification systems: explicit exploration using partial order reduction (Spin) and implicit exploration using BDDs (Xeve/Esterel). The case study is a safety property of an easily-scalable problem (a bus arbiter). The results show that exploration-based methods (Spin and Xeve/Esterel) have an overall exponential complexity, restricting their use on small instances. The LPV technique, which does not rely on exploration, is the only one fast enough (quadratic complexity) to handle systems that are 50 times larger than the other techniques presented in this paper can do. Moreover, in opposition to exploration-based methods, LPV produces real proven facts that mean this technique shares some common points with theorem proving. We believe that the scale-change robustness of LPV shows that linear programming can be applied successfully to the verification of industrial systems.
机译:将我们用于软件验证(LPV)的线性编程技术与其他验证系统进行了比较:使用部分顺序约简(Spin)的显式探索和使用BDD(Xeve / Esterel)的隐式探索。案例研究是一个易于扩展的问题(总线仲裁器)的安全属性。结果表明,基于探索的方法(Spin和Xeve / Esterel)具有整体指数复杂性,从而限制了它们在小型实例上的使用。 LPV技术不依赖探索,它是唯一一种足够快(二次复杂度)的系统,其处理能力比本文中介绍的其他技术大50倍。此外,与基于探索的方法相反,LPV产生了已被证明的真实事实,这意味着该技术与定理证明有一些共同点。我们相信LPV的尺度变化鲁棒性表明线性规划可以成功地应用于工业系统的验证。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号