Scribd
Upload
118 views4 pages

Principles of Model Checking Solutions To Exercise Class 2: Problem 1

1) The document discusses solutions to exercises on model checking regular linear time properties. 2) It presents solutions to three problems involving constructing automata to recognize certain languages and proving language equivalences. 3) The third problem constructs a product automaton to recognize the intersection of the languages of two given automata, by tracking three phases that must be repeated infinitely often in accepting runs.

Uploaded by

Przeczytajwiadomość Prywatną Odemniechcemycipomóc
Copyright
© Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
118 views4 pages

Principles of Model Checking Solutions To Exercise Class 2: Problem 1

1) The document discusses solutions to exercises on model checking regular linear time properties. 2) It presents solutions to three problems involving constructing automata to recognize certain languages and proving language equivalences. 3) The third problem constructs a product automaton to recognize the intersection of the languages of two given automata, by tracking three phases that must be repeated infinitely often in accepting runs.

Uploaded by

Przeczytajwiadomość Prywatną Odemniechcemycipomóc
Copyright
© Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 4

Principles of Model Checking

Solutions to exercise class 2


Verication of regular linear time properties
Prof. Dr. Joost-Pieter Katoen, Dr. Taolue Chen, and Ir. Mark Timmer
September, 21, 2012
Problem 1
1. An NFA that accepts the set of minimal bad prexes:
q
0
q
1
q
2
q
3
(a b) c
(a b c) (a c)
a
b c
(b c)
a
c a
2. First we apply the TS / construction, which yields:
s
0
, q
1

s
3
, q
2

s
1
, q
2

s
4
, q
2

s
5
, q
3

1
A counterexample to TS [= P
safe
is given by the following initial path
fragment in TS /:

= s
0
, q
1
s
3
, q
2
s
1
, q
2
s
4
, q
2
s
5
, q
3

By projection on the state component, we get a path in the underlying


transition system TS:
= s
0
s
3
s
1
s
4
s
5
with trace () = a, ba, ca, b, ca, ca, b
Since

reaches q
3
(a nal state of /), trace () BadPref(P
safe
).
Hence, Traces
n
(TS) BadPref(P
safe
) ,= . By Lemma 3.25, this is
equivalent to TS ,[= P
safe
.
Problem 2
1. L
1
= A, B

[ contains ABA innitely often, but AA only nitely often


q
0
q
1
q
2
q
3
q
4
A, B
A B
A
B
A, B
B
B
2. L
2
= /((AB + C)

((AA + B)C)

+ (A

C)

)
q
0
q
4
q
1
q
2
q
3
A C A
B
B
A
A B
C
q
5
q
6
A C
C
A
Note: We allow more than one initial state! Formally, the automaton
outlined above is given by
/
2
= (q
0
, . . . , q
6
, A, B, C, , q
0
, q
5
, q
3
, q
6
)
where is dened as shown in the picture.
2
Problem 3
Proof sketch: Use a product construction and distinguish three phases which
have to be repeated in an innite successful run innitely often:
1. Wait for the rst component to visit a nal state;
2. Wait for the second component to a visit nal state;
3. Signal that phase 1 and phase 2 have been completed.
Let /
i
= (Q
i
, ,
i
, Q
0,i
, F
i
) for i = 1, 2. Then, we dene / = (Q, , , Q
0
, F),
where
Q = Q
1
Q
2
1, 2, 3
: Q 2
Q
such that
((q
1
, q
2
, 1), A) =

(
1
(q
1
, A) F
1
)
2
(q
2
, A) 1

(
1
(q
1
, A) F
1
)
2
(q
2
, A) 2

((q
1
, q
2
, 2), A) =

1
(q
1
, A) (
2
(q
2
, A) F
2
) 2

1
(q
1
, A) (
2
(q
2
, A) F
2
) 3

((q
1
, q
2
, 3), A) =
1
(q
1
, A)
2
(q
2
, A) 1
Q
0
= Q
0,1
Q
0,2
3
F = Q
1
Q
2
3
We have to prove that /

(/) = /

(/
1
) /

(/
2
):
Let = A
1
A
2
A
3
. . . /

(/). Then, there exists an accepting run


of / of the form
(p
0
, q
0
, i
0
)
A
1
(p
1
, q
1
, i
1
)
A
2

such that i
k
= 3 for innitely many k 0. But then, p
i
F
1
and
q
j
F
2
for innitely many i, j by construction. Hence, the runs p
0
A
1

p
1
A
2
p
2
. . . and q
0
A
1
q
1
A
2
q
2
. . . are accepting runs for in /
1
and /
2
, respectively. Therefore /

(/
1
) /

(/
2
).
3
Let = A
1
A
2
A
3
. . . /

(/
1
) /

(/
2
). Then, there exist accepting
runs p
0
A
1
p
1
A
2
p
2
. . . and q
0
A
1
q
1
A
2
q
2
. . . of in /
1
and /
2
,
such that p
i
F
1
and q
j
F
2
for innitely many i, j. We obtain the
induced run of / on as follows:
(p
0
, q
0
, i
0
)
A
1
(p
1
, q
1
, i
1
)
A
2
(p
2
, q
2
, i
2
)
We need to prove that i
k
= 3 for innitely many k 0.
Therefore, let i
k
= 3 for some k 0 (this happens at least once, as
it happens in every initial state). We prove that there exists a k

> k
such that i
k
= 3:
As p
n
F
1
innitely often, there exists a fragment p
k
, p
k+1
, . . . , p
k+l
such that p
k+l
F
1
, l > 0 and p
j
/ F
1
for j = k+1, . . . , k+l1. By
construction, i
k+l
= 2.
Analogously, q
n
F
2
for innitely many n. Thus there exists a
fragment q
k+l
, q
k+l+1
, q
k+l+2
, . . . , q
k+l+o
with o > 0 such that q
j
/ F
2
for j = k+l+1, . . . , k+l+o1 and q
k+l+o
F
2
. Then, by construction,
i
k+l+o
= 3. To conclude the proof, set k

= k+l+o.
4

You might also like