skip to main content
10.1145/2562059.2562128acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagescpsweekConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Resilience to intermittent assumption violations in reactive synthesis

Authors Info & Claims
Published:15 April 2014Publication History

ABSTRACT

We consider the synthesis of reactive systems that are robust against intermittent violations of their environment assumptions. Such assumptions are needed to allow many systems that work in a larger context to fulfill their tasks. Yet, due to glitches in hardware or exceptional operating conditions, these assumptions do not always hold in the field. Manually constructed systems often exhibit error-resilience and can continue to work correctly in such cases. With the development cycles of reactive systems becoming shorter, and thus reactive synthesis becoming an increasingly suitable alternative to the manual design of such systems, automatically synthesized systems are also expected to feature such resilience.

The framework for achieving this goal that we present in this paper builds on generalized reactivity(1) synthesis, a synthesis approach that is well-known to be scalable enough for many practical applications. We show how, starting from a specification that is supported by this synthesis approach, we can modify it in order to use a standard generalized reactivity(1) synthesis procedure to find error-resilient systems. As an added benefit, this approach allows exploring the possible trade-offs in error resilience that a system designer has to make, and to give the designer a list of all Pareto-optimal implementations.

References

  1. S. Almagor, U. Boker, and O. Kupferman. Formalizing and reasoning about quality. In ICALP (2), pages 15--27, 2013. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. R. Bloem, H.-J. Gamauf, G. Hofferek, B. Könighofer, and R. Könighofer. Synthesizing robust systems with RATSY. In SYNT, volume 84 of EPTCS, pages 47--53, 2012.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. R. Bloem, K. Greimel, T. A. Henzinger, and B. Jobstmann. Synthesizing robust systems. In FMCAD, pages 85--92, 2009.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. R. Bloem, B. Jobstmann, N. Piterman, A. Pnueli, and Y. Sa'ar. Synthesis of reactive(1) designs. Journal of Computer and System Sciences, 78(3):911--938, 2012. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. R. Ehlers. Generalized Rabin(1) synthesis with applications to robust system synthesis. In NASA Formal Methods, pages 101--115, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. R. Ehlers, C. Finucane, and V. Raman. Slugs GR(1) synthesizer. http://github.com/ltlmop/slugs, 2013.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. R. Ehlers, R. Könighofer, and G. Hofferek. Symbolically synthesizing small circuits. In G. Cabodi and S. Singh, editors, FMCAD, pages 91--100. IEEE, 2012.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. T. Eiter, K. Makino, and G. Gottlob. Computational aspects of monotone dualization: A brief survey. Discrete Applied Mathematics, 156(11):2035--2049, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. D. Gainanov. On one criterion of the optimality of an algorithm for evaluating monotonic boolean functions. USSR Computational Mathematics and Mathematical Physics, 24(4):176--181, 1984. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. C.-H. Huang, D. Peled, S. Schewe, and F. Wang. Rapid recovery for systems with scarce faults. In M. Faella and A. Murano, editors, GandALF, volume 96 of EPTCS, pages 15--28, 2012.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. G. Jing, R. Ehlers, and H. Kress-Gazit. Shortcut through an evil door: Optimality of correct-by-construction controllers in adversarial environments. In IROS, pages 4796--4802. IEEE, 2013.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. S. C. Livingston. gr1c GR(1) synthesizer. http://github.com/slivingston/gr1c, 2013.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. A. Pnueli. The temporal logic of programs. In FOCS, pages 46--57. IEEE Computer Society, 1977. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. V. Raman, N. Piterman, and H. Kress-Gazit. Provably correct continuous control for high-level robot behaviors with actions of arbitrary execution durations. In ICRA. IEEE, 2013.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. P. Tabuada, A. Balkan, S. Y. Caliskan, Y. Shoukry, and R. Majumdar. Input-output robustness for discrete systems. In EMSOFT, pages 217--226, 2012. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. D. C. Tarraf, A. Megretski, and M. A. Dahleh. A framework for robust stability of systems over finite alphabets. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 53(5):1133--1146, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. U. Topcu, N. Ozay, J. Liu, and R. M. Murray. On synthesizing robust discrete controllers under modeling uncertainty. In Hybrid System: Computation and Control, pages 85--94, 2012. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. J. C. Willems. Dissipative dynamical systems part i: General theory. Archive for rational mechanics and analysis, 45(5):321--351, 1972.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Resilience to intermittent assumption violations in reactive synthesis

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in
      • Published in

        cover image ACM Conferences
        HSCC '14: Proceedings of the 17th international conference on Hybrid systems: computation and control
        April 2014
        328 pages
        ISBN:9781450327329
        DOI:10.1145/2562059

        Copyright © 2014 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 15 April 2014

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article

        Acceptance Rates

        HSCC '14 Paper Acceptance Rate29of69submissions,42%Overall Acceptance Rate153of373submissions,41%

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader