1 | |
---|
2 | ltl_model_check - perform LTL model checking on a flattened network |
---|
3 | _________________________________________________________________ |
---|
4 | |
---|
5 | ltl_model_check [-a <ltl2aut_algorithm>] [-b] [-d <dbg_level>] [-f |
---|
6 | <dbg_file>] [-h] [-i] [-m] [-s] [-t <time_out_period>][-v <verbosity_level>] |
---|
7 | [-A <le_method>] [-D <dc_level>] [-L <lockstep_mode>] [-S <schedule>] [-F] |
---|
8 | [-X] [-Y] [-M] <ltl_file> |
---|
9 | |
---|
10 | Performs LTL model checking on a flattened network. Before calling this |
---|
11 | command, the user should have initialized the design by calling the command |
---|
12 | [1]init_verify. Regardless of the options, no 'false positives' or 'false |
---|
13 | negatives' will occur: the result is correct for the given circuit. |
---|
14 | |
---|
15 | Properties to be verified should be provided as LTL formulae in the file |
---|
16 | ltl_file. Note that the support of any wire referred to in a formula should |
---|
17 | consist only of latches. For the precise syntax of LTL formulas, see the |
---|
18 | [2]VIS CTL and LTL syntax manual. |
---|
19 | |
---|
20 | A formula passes iff it is true for all initial states of the system. |
---|
21 | Therefore, in the presence of multiple initial states, if a formula fails, |
---|
22 | the negation of the formula may also fail. |
---|
23 | |
---|
24 | If a formula does not pass, a (potentially partial) proof of failure |
---|
25 | (referred to as a debug trace) is demonstrated. Fair paths are represented |
---|
26 | by a finite sequence of states (the stem) leading to a fair cycle, i.e. a |
---|
27 | cycle on which there is a state from each fairness condition. Whether |
---|
28 | demostrate the proof or not can be specified (see option -d). |
---|
29 | |
---|
30 | Command options: |
---|
31 | |
---|
32 | -a <ltl2aut_algorithm> |
---|
33 | Specify the algorithm used in LTL formula -> Buechi automaton |
---|
34 | translation. |
---|
35 | |
---|
36 | ltl2aut_algorithm must be one of the following: |
---|
37 | |
---|
38 | 0: GPVW. |
---|
39 | |
---|
40 | 1: GPVW+. |
---|
41 | |
---|
42 | 2: LTL2AUT. |
---|
43 | |
---|
44 | 3: WRING (default). |
---|
45 | |
---|
46 | -b |
---|
47 | Use boolean minimization during the LTL to Automaton translation. |
---|
48 | |
---|
49 | -d <dbg_level> |
---|
50 | Specify whether to demonstrate a counter-example when the system |
---|
51 | fails a formula being checked. |
---|
52 | |
---|
53 | dbg_level must be one of the following: |
---|
54 | |
---|
55 | 0: No debugging performed. dbg_level=0 is the default. |
---|
56 | |
---|
57 | 1: Generate a counter-example (a path to a fair cycle). |
---|
58 | |
---|
59 | -f <dbg_file> |
---|
60 | Write the debugger output to dbg_file. |
---|
61 | |
---|
62 | -h |
---|
63 | Print the command usage. |
---|
64 | |
---|
65 | -i |
---|
66 | Print input values causing transitions between states during |
---|
67 | debugging. Both primary and pseudo inputs are printed. |
---|
68 | |
---|
69 | -m |
---|
70 | Pipe debugger output through the UNIX utility more. |
---|
71 | |
---|
72 | -t <timeOutPeriod> |
---|
73 | Specify the time out period (in seconds) after which the command |
---|
74 | aborts. By default this option is set to infinity. |
---|
75 | |
---|
76 | -s |
---|
77 | Print debug output in the format accepted by the [3]simulate command. |
---|
78 | |
---|
79 | -v <verbosity_level> |
---|
80 | Specify verbosity level. This sets the amount of feedback on CPU |
---|
81 | usage and code status. |
---|
82 | verbosity_level must be one of the following: |
---|
83 | |
---|
84 | 0: No feedback provided. This is the default. |
---|
85 | |
---|
86 | 1: Feedback on code location. |
---|
87 | |
---|
88 | 2: Feedback on code location and CPU usage. |
---|
89 | |
---|
90 | -A <le_method> |
---|
91 | Specify whether the compositional SCC analysis algorithm, Divide and |
---|
92 | Compose (DnC), is enabled for language emptiness checking. The DnC |
---|
93 | algorithm first enumerates fair SCCs in an over-approximated abstract |
---|
94 | model, and then successively refines them in the more concrete |
---|
95 | models. Since non-fair SCCs can be ignored in the more concrete |
---|
96 | models, a potentially large part of the state space are pruned away |
---|
97 | early on when the computations are cheap. |
---|
98 | |
---|
99 | le_method must be one of the following: |
---|
100 | |
---|
101 | 0 : no use of Divide and Compose (Default). |
---|
102 | |
---|
103 | 1 : use Divide and Compose. |
---|
104 | |
---|
105 | -D <dc_level> |
---|
106 | Specify extent to which don't cares are used to simplify MDDs in |
---|
107 | model checking. Don't cares are minterms on which the value taken by |
---|
108 | functions does not affect the computation; potentially, these |
---|
109 | minterms can be used to simplify MDDs and reduce the time taken to |
---|
110 | perform model checking. |
---|
111 | dc_level must be one of the following: |
---|
112 | |
---|
113 | 0 : No don't cares are used. |
---|
114 | |
---|
115 | 1 : Use unreachable states as don't cares. This is the default. |
---|
116 | |
---|
117 | 2 : Use unreachable states as don't cares and in the EU computation, |
---|
118 | use 'frontiers' for image computation. |
---|
119 | |
---|
120 | 3 : First compute an overapproximation of the reachable states |
---|
121 | (ARDC), and use that as the cares set. Use `frontiers' for image |
---|
122 | computation. For help on controlling options for ARDC, look up help |
---|
123 | on the command: [4]print_ardc_options. Refer to Moon, Jang, Somenzi, |
---|
124 | Pixley, Yuan, "Approximate Reachability Don't Cares for {CTL} Model |
---|
125 | Checking", ICCAD98, and to two papers by Cho et al, IEEE TCAD |
---|
126 | December 1996: one is for State Space Decomposition and the other is |
---|
127 | for Approximate FSM Traversal. |
---|
128 | |
---|
129 | -S <schedule> |
---|
130 | Specify schedule for GSH algorithm, which generalizes the Emerson-Lei |
---|
131 | algorithm and is used to compute greatest fixpoints. The choice of |
---|
132 | schedule affects the sequence in which EX and EU operators are |
---|
133 | applied. It makes a difference only when fairness constraints are |
---|
134 | specified. |
---|
135 | <schedule> must be one of the following: |
---|
136 | |
---|
137 | EL : EU and EX operators strictly alternate. This is the default. |
---|
138 | |
---|
139 | EL1 : EX is applied once for every application of all EUs. |
---|
140 | |
---|
141 | EL2 : EX is applied repeatedly after each application of all EUs. |
---|
142 | |
---|
143 | budget : a hybrid of EL and EL2 |
---|
144 | |
---|
145 | random : enabled operators are applied in (pseudo-)random order. |
---|
146 | |
---|
147 | off : GSH is disabled, and the old algorithm is used instead. The old |
---|
148 | algorithm uses the EL , but the termination checks are less |
---|
149 | sophisticated than in GSH. |
---|
150 | |
---|
151 | -F |
---|
152 | Use forward analysis in the computation of the greatest fixpoint. |
---|
153 | This option is incompatible with -d 1 or higher and can only be used |
---|
154 | with -D 1. |
---|
155 | |
---|
156 | -L <lockstep_mode> |
---|
157 | Use the lockstep algorithm, which is based on fair SCC enumeration. |
---|
158 | <lockstep_mode> must be one of the following: |
---|
159 | |
---|
160 | off : Lockstep is disabled. This is the default. Language emptiness |
---|
161 | is checked by computing a hull of the fair SCCs. |
---|
162 | |
---|
163 | on : Lockstep is enabled. |
---|
164 | |
---|
165 | all : Lockstep is enabled; all fair SCCs are enumerated instead of |
---|
166 | terminating as soon as one is found. This can be used to study the |
---|
167 | SCCs of a graph, but it is slower than the default option. |
---|
168 | |
---|
169 | n : (n is a positive integer). Lockstep is enabled and up to n fair |
---|
170 | SCCs are enumerated. This is less expensive than all , but still less |
---|
171 | efficient than on , even when n = 1 . |
---|
172 | |
---|
173 | -X |
---|
174 | Disable strength reduction (use different decision procedures for |
---|
175 | strong, weak, and terminal automaton). Strength reduction is the |
---|
176 | default. Refer to Bloem, Ravi, Somenzi, "Efficient Decision |
---|
177 | Procedures for LTL Model Checking," CAV99. |
---|
178 | |
---|
179 | -Y |
---|
180 | Disable incremental construction of the partition for (MxA). Instead, |
---|
181 | build a new partition from the scratch. Incremental construction of |
---|
182 | the partition is the default. |
---|
183 | |
---|
184 | -Z |
---|
185 | Add arcs into the Buechi automaton by direct simulation relation, to |
---|
186 | heuristically reduce the length of shortest counter-example in model |
---|
187 | checking. Refer to Awedh and Somenze, "Proving More Properties with |
---|
188 | Bounded Model Checking," CAV04. |
---|
189 | |
---|
190 | -M |
---|
191 | Maximize (adding arcs to) Buechi automaton using Direct Simulation. |
---|
192 | |
---|
193 | <ltl_file> |
---|
194 | File containing LTL formulas to be model checked. |
---|
195 | |
---|
196 | Related "set" options: |
---|
197 | |
---|
198 | ltl_change_bracket <yes/no> |
---|
199 | Vl2mv automatically converts "[]" to "<>" in node names, therefore |
---|
200 | CTL* parser does the same thing. However, in some cases a user does |
---|
201 | not want to change node names in CTL* parsing. Then, use this set |
---|
202 | option by giving "no". Default is "yes". |
---|
203 | |
---|
204 | See also commands : model_check, approximate_model_check, |
---|
205 | incremental_ctl_verification |
---|
206 | __________________________________________________________ |
---|
207 | |
---|
208 | Last updated on 20100410 00h02 |
---|
209 | |
---|
210 | References |
---|
211 | |
---|
212 | 1. file://localhost/projects/development/hsv/vis/common/doc/html/init_verifyCmd.html |
---|
213 | 2. file://localhost/projects/development/hsv/vis/common/doc/ctl/ctl/ctl.html |
---|
214 | 3. file://localhost/projects/development/hsv/vis/common/doc/html/simulateCmd.html |
---|
215 | 4. file://localhost/projects/development/hsv/vis/common/doc/html/print_ardc_optionsCmd.html |
---|