On automatic verification of self-stabilizing
population protocols
On automatic verification of self-stabilizing
population protocols
PANG Jun1, LUO Zhengqin2, DENG Yuxin2
1.Department of Computer Science and Communications, Université du Luxembourg；State Key Laboratory of Novel Software Technology, Nanjing University; 2.Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Shanghai Jiao Tong University; 3.2008-12-11 13:56:58
Abstract：The population protocol model has emerged as an elegant computation paradigm for describing mobile ad hoc networks, consisting of a number of mobile nodes that interact with each other to carry out a computation. The interactions of nodes are subject to a fairness constraint. One essential property of population protocols is that all nodes must eventually converge to the correct output value (or configuration). In this paper, we aim to automatically verify self-stabilizing population protocols for leader election and token circulation in the Spin model checker. We report our verification results and discuss the issue of modeling strong fairness constraints in Spin.
出版日期: 2008-12-05
引用本文:
. On automatic verification of self-stabilizing
population protocols[J]. Frontiers of Computer Science in China, 0, (): 357-367.
PANG Jun, LUO Zhengqin, DENG Yuxin. On automatic verification of self-stabilizing
population protocols. Front. Comput. Sci., 0, (): 357-367.
Fuzzati R . Merro M, Nestmann U . Distributed consensus, revisited. Acta Informatica, 2007, 44(6): 377–425. doi:10.1007/s00236-007-0052-1
2
Chandra T D . Toueg S . Unreliable failure detectorfor reliable distributed systems. Journalof the ACM, 1996, 43(2): 225–267. doi:10.1145/226643.226647
3
Holzmann G J . The model checker Spin. IEEE Transactionson Software Engineering, 1997, 23(5): 279–295. doi:10.1109/32.588521
4
Aspnes J . Ruppert E . An introduction to populationprotocols. Bulletin of the European Associationfor Theoretical Computer Science, Distributed Computing Column, 2007, 93: 98–117
5
Attie P C . Francez N, Grumberg O . Fairness and hyperfairness in multi-party interactions. Distributed Computing, 1993, 6: 245–254. doi:10.1007/BF02242712
Völzer H . Varacca D, Kindler E . Defining fairness. In: Proceedingsof the 14th Conference on Concurrency Theory. Berlin: Springer, 2005, 3653: 458–472
8
Völzer H . Onconspiracies and hyperfairness in distributed computing. In: Proceedings of the 19th Conference on DistributedComputing. Berlin: Springer, 2005, 3724 : 33–47
9
Corradini F . Di Berardini M, Vogler W . Checking a mutex algorithm in a process algebra withfairness. In: Proceedings of the 15th Conferenceon Concurrency Theory. Berlin: Springer, 2006, 4137: 142–157
10
Fischer M J . Jiang H . Self-stabilizing leader electionin networks of finite-state anonymous agents. In: Proceedings of the 10th Conference on Principles of Distributed Systems. Berlin: Springer, 2006, 4305: 395–409
11
Angluin D . Aspnes J, Fischer M J, Jiang H . Selfstabilizingpopulation protocols. In: Proceedings ofthe 9th Conference on Principles of Distributed Systems. Berlin: Springer, 2005, 3974: 103–117
12
Holzmann G J . On-the-fly, LTL model checking with spin. http://spinroot.com
13
Holzmann G J . The spin model checker: Primer and reference manual. Addison-Wesley, 2003
14
Dijkstra E W . Self-stabilizing systems in spite of distributed control. Communications of the ACM, 1974, 17(11): 643–644. doi:10.1145/361179.361202
15
Luo Z Q . Pang J, Deng Y X . Promela source codes of self-stabilizing population protocols. http://basics.sjtu.edu.cn/∼zhengqin/population
16
Jiang H . Distributedsystems of simple interacting agents. YaleUniversity, 2007
17
Hammer M . Knapp A, Merz S . Truly on-the-fly LTL model checking. In: Proceedings of the 11th Conference on Tools and Algorithms for theConstruction and Analysis of Systems. Berlin: Springer, 2005, 3440: 191–205
18
Fokkink W J . Hoepman J H, Pang J . A note on K-stateself-stabilization in a ring with K = N. Nordic Journal of Computing, 2005, 12(1): 18–26
