Model Checking¶
Clarke, E. M., Grumberg, O., & Peled, D. A. (1999). Model Checking. MIT Press.
Cited by¶
7 citations across 7 artifacts.
Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.
Primes¶
- Conjunctive Path Activation
- The remedy is the prime's: not to tighten every signal (defending an OR-failure), but to break the AND at the most robust edge — add a single gate or latch that makes one of the three conditions un-satisfiable in the hazard window — or deploy combination-aware verification (model-checking the state space) rather than per-signal checks.
This sourceFormal verification by exhaustive exploration of a system's state space, catching hazards that single-signal checks miss; addresses the state-explosion problem inherent to inspecting combinations of states.
- The remedy is the prime's: not to tighten every signal (defending an OR-failure), but to break the AND at the most robust edge — add a single gate or latch that makes one of the three conditions un-satisfiable in the hazard window — or deploy combination-aware verification (model-checking the state space) rather than per-signal checks.
- Coverage / Reachability
- Formal verification: every reachable state is enumerated, and unreachability of a bad state is the dual proof obligation.
This sourceStandard text on reachable-state enumeration and reachability analysis in formal verification, including the dual obligation of proving bad states unreachable.
- Formal verification: every reachable state is enumerated, and unreachability of a bad state is the dual proof obligation.
- Decidability Computability
- Engineering verification. Model checking decides safety properties on finite-state models, while theorem proving over richer logics is undecidable, so the same engineered system can be decidable in one specification and undecidable in another.
This sourceEstablishes that safety properties of finite-state models are algorithmically decidable, while verification over richer logics is undecidable.
- Engineering verification. Model checking decides safety properties on finite-state models, while theorem proving over richer logics is undecidable, so the same engineered system can be decidable in one specification and undecidable in another.
- Modal Reasoning
- Model-checking tools mechanize exactly this: they explore the reachable-state space and report whether the invariant holds universally or whether a counterexample trace exists.
This sourceCanonical reference on model checking: mechanizes safety verification as necessity over a reachable-state space, reporting whether an invariant holds universally or returning a counterexample trace witnessing reachability (possibility) of a violating state.
- Model-checking tools mechanize exactly this: they explore the reachable-state space and report whether the invariant holds universally or whether a counterexample trace exists.
- State and State Transition
Domain-specific¶
Mechanisms¶
- State / Action Map
- … characteristic failure is state-space explosion: because states multiply combinatorially with every distinction you add, a map drawn at too fine a grain becomes larger than the problem and stops being usable — the classic misuse is enumerating every micro-configuration until the graph is a hairball no one reads.
This sourceIdentifies state-space explosion as the central model-checking challenge and explains that interacting components and data values can make the number of global states enormous.
- … characteristic failure is state-space explosion: because states multiply combinatorially with every distinction you add, a map drawn at too fine a grain becomes larger than the problem and stops being usable — the classic misuse is enumerating every micro-configuration until the graph is a hairball no one reads.
Verification¶
This reference passed the adversarial substantiation pipeline: it was checked to exist and to support the claim it is attached to. See how references were verified.
Registry ID ref:c74ea579e0c8 · see in the full table