1 | |
---|
2 | iterative_model_check - Perform CTL model checking on an abstracted system |
---|
3 | with automatic refinement algorithm. |
---|
4 | _________________________________________________________________ |
---|
5 | |
---|
6 | iterative_model_check [-h] [-x] [-t <seconds>] [-v <number>]\ [-D |
---|
7 | <number>] [-r <number>] [-i <number>] \ [-p <number>] [-g <number>] |
---|
8 | <ctlfile> |
---|
9 | |
---|
10 | Command options: |
---|
11 | |
---|
12 | -h |
---|
13 | Print the command usage. |
---|
14 | |
---|
15 | -x |
---|
16 | Perform the verification exactly. No approximation is done. |
---|
17 | |
---|
18 | -t <secs> |
---|
19 | Time in seconds allowed for verification. The default is no |
---|
20 | limit. |
---|
21 | |
---|
22 | -v <number> |
---|
23 | Specify verbosity level. Use 0 for no feedback (default), 1 for |
---|
24 | more, and 2 for maximum feedback. |
---|
25 | |
---|
26 | -D <number> |
---|
27 | Specify extent to which don't cares are used to simplify the |
---|
28 | MDDs. |
---|
29 | |
---|
30 | + 0: No don't cares used. This is the default. |
---|
31 | + 1: Use reachability information to compute the don't-care |
---|
32 | set. |
---|
33 | + 2: Use reachability information, and minimize the transition |
---|
34 | relation with respect to the `frontier set' (aggresive |
---|
35 | minimization). |
---|
36 | + 3: Use approximate reachability information. |
---|
37 | |
---|
38 | -r <number> |
---|
39 | Specify refinement method. |
---|
40 | |
---|
41 | + 0: Static scheduling by name sorting. Fast, easy, but less |
---|
42 | accurate. |
---|
43 | + 1: Static scheduling by latch affinity. Slow, but more |
---|
44 | accurate. This is the default. |
---|
45 | |
---|
46 | -i <number> |
---|
47 | The number of state variables to be added for exact computation |
---|
48 | at each iteration. The default is 4. |
---|
49 | |
---|
50 | -l <number> |
---|
51 | Type of lower-bound approximation method. |
---|
52 | |
---|
53 | + 0: Take a subset of each transition sub-relation by BDD |
---|
54 | subsetting. |
---|
55 | + 1: Take a subset by universal quantification. This is the |
---|
56 | default. |
---|
57 | |
---|
58 | -p <number> |
---|
59 | Type of partition method. If 'build_partition_mdds' is already |
---|
60 | invoked, this option is ignored. Notice that some next state |
---|
61 | functions might not be available after iterative_model_checking |
---|
62 | command is performed because of this option. |
---|
63 | |
---|
64 | + 0: Build all next state functions. Same as |
---|
65 | 'build_partition_mdds'. This is the default. |
---|
66 | + 1: Build the next state functions related to the formulas. |
---|
67 | Build all next state functions that are necessary to prove |
---|
68 | all formulas. |
---|
69 | + 2: Build the next state functions incrementally. None of next |
---|
70 | state functions are removed. |
---|
71 | |
---|
72 | -g <number> |
---|
73 | Type of operational graph. |
---|
74 | |
---|
75 | + 0: Negative Operational Graph. Good to prove a formula true. |
---|
76 | + 1: Positive Operational Graph. Good to prove a formula false. |
---|
77 | + 2: Mixed Operational Graph. Good to prove any formula, but it |
---|
78 | may be slower. This is the default. |
---|
79 | |
---|
80 | <ctlfile> |
---|
81 | File containing the CTL formulas to be verified. |
---|
82 | |
---|
83 | Related "set" options: |
---|
84 | |
---|
85 | ctl_change_bracket <yes/no> |
---|
86 | Vl2mv automatically converts "[]" to "<>" in node names, |
---|
87 | therefore CTL parser does the same thing. However, in some |
---|
88 | cases a user does not want to change node names in CTL parsing. |
---|
89 | Then, use this set option by giving "no". Default is "yes". |
---|
90 | |
---|
91 | See also commands : model_check, incremental_ctl_verification |
---|
92 | |
---|
93 | 1. Jae-Young Jang, In-Ho Moon, and Gary D. Hachtel. Iterative |
---|
94 | Abstraction-based CTL Model Checking. Design, Automation and Test in |
---|
95 | Europe (DATE), 2000 |
---|
96 | |
---|
97 | 2. Jae-Young Jang. Iterative Abstraction-based CTL Model Checking. Ph. |
---|
98 | D. Thesis. University of Colorado, 1999. |
---|
99 | _________________________________________________________________ |
---|
100 | |
---|
101 | Last updated on 20050519 10h16 |
---|