alarsyo/spot
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull requests Projects Releases Wiki Activity

Improve ltlfilt.org

Browse source 
* doc/org/ltlfilt.org: Mention that the --stutter-invariant check
use automata.  Fix a typo.
This commit is contained in:
Alexandre Duret-Lutz 2013-06-09 18:55:57 +02:00
parent 644b5f0152
commit 372a086cb7
1 changed files with 3 additions and 3 deletions
Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

6
doc/org/ltlfilt.org
View file

@ -221,7 +221,7 @@ two formulas are equivalent. It would print nothing and set the exit
status to 1, were the two formulas not equivalent. status to 1, were the two formulas not equivalent.
If the formula =F(a & X(!a & Gb))= stutter-invariant? Is the formula =F(a & X(!a & Gb))= stutter-invariant?
#+BEGIN_SRC sh :results verbatim :exports both #+BEGIN_SRC sh :results verbatim :exports both
ltlfilt -f 'F(a & X(!a & Gb))' --stutter-invariant ltlfilt -f 'F(a & X(!a & Gb))' --stutter-invariant
@ -250,8 +250,8 @@ ltlfilt -f 'F(a & X(!a & Gb))' --remove-x | ltlfilt --equivalent-to 'F(a & X(!a
It is therefore equivalent, but that is not a surprise since the It is therefore equivalent, but that is not a surprise since the
=--stutter-invariant= filter is actually implemented using exactly =--stutter-invariant= filter is actually implemented using exactly
[[http://homepages.inf.ed.ac.uk/kousha/note_on_stut_tl_lpi.ps][this procedure]] (calling the =remove_x()= function, and checking the [[http://homepages.inf.ed.ac.uk/kousha/note_on_stut_tl_lpi.ps][this procedure]] (calling the =remove_x()= function, and building automata
equivalence of the resulting formula with the original one). to check the equivalence of the resulting formula with the original one).
# LocalWords: ltlfilt num toc LTL PSL syntaxes LBT's SRC GFp scheck # LocalWords: ltlfilt num toc LTL PSL syntaxes LBT's SRC GFp scheck