// Copyright (C) 2003, 2004 Laboratoire d'Informatique de Paris 6 (LIP6), // département Systèmes Répartis Coopératifs (SRC), Université Pierre // et Marie Curie. // // This file is part of Spot, a model checking library. // // Spot is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it // under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by // the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or // (at your option) any later version. // // Spot is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, but WITHOUT // ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of MERCHANTABILITY // or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the GNU General Public // License for more details. // // You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License // along with Spot; see the file COPYING. If not, write to the Free // Software Foundation, Inc., 59 Temple Place - Suite 330, Boston, MA // 02111-1307, USA. #ifndef SPOT_TGBAALGOS_GTEC_GTEC_HH # define SPOT_TGBAALGOS_GTEC_GTEC_HH #include "status.hh" #include "tgbaalgos/emptiness.hh" #include "tgbaalgos/emptiness_stats.hh" namespace spot { /// \addtogroup emptiness_check_algorithms /// @{ /// \brief Check whether the language of an automate is empty. /// /// This is based on the following paper. /// \verbatim /// @InProceedings{couvreur.99.fm, /// author = {Jean-Michel Couvreur}, /// title = {On-the-fly Verification of Temporal Logic}, /// pages = {253--271}, /// editor = {Jeannette M. Wing and Jim Woodcock and Jim Davies}, /// booktitle = {Proceedings of the World Congress on Formal Methods in /// the Development of Computing Systems (FM'99)}, /// publisher = {Springer-Verlag}, /// series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science}, /// volume = {1708}, /// year = {1999}, /// address = {Toulouse, France}, /// month = {September}, /// isbn = {3-540-66587-0} /// } /// \endverbatim /// /// check() returns true if the automaton's language is empty. When /// it return false, a stack of SCC has been built is available /// using result() (spot::counter_example needs it). /// /// There are two variants of this algorithm: spot::couvreur99_check and /// spot::couvreur99_check_shy. They differ in their memory usage, the /// number for successors computed before they are used and the way /// the depth first search is directed. /// /// spot::couvreur99_check performs a straightforward depth first search. /// The DFS stacks store tgba_succ_iterators, so that only the /// iterators which really are explored are computed. /// /// spot::couvreur99_check_shy tries to explore successors which are /// visited states first. this helps to merge SCCs and generally /// helps to produce shorter counter-examples. However this /// algorithm cannot stores unprocessed successors as /// tgba_succ_iterators: it must compute all successors of a state /// at once in order to decide which to explore first, and must keep /// a list of all unexplored successors in its DFS stack. class couvreur99_check: public emptiness_check, public ec_statistics { public: couvreur99_check(const tgba* a, const numbered_state_heap_factory* nshf = numbered_state_heap_hash_map_factory::instance()); virtual ~couvreur99_check(); /// Check whether the automaton's language is empty. virtual emptiness_check_result* check(); virtual std::ostream& print_stats(std::ostream& os) const; /// \brief Return the status of the emptiness-check. /// /// When check() succeed, the status should be passed along /// to spot::counter_example. /// /// This status should not be deleted, it is a pointer /// to a member of this class that will be deleted when /// the couvreur99 object is deleted. const couvreur99_check_status* result() const; protected: couvreur99_check_status* ecs_; /// \brief Remove a strongly component from the hash. /// /// This function remove all accessible state from a given /// state. In other words, it removes the strongly connected /// component that contains this state. void remove_component(const state* start_delete); }; /// \brief A version of spot::couvreur99_check that tries to visit /// known states first. /// /// If \a group is true (the default), the successors of all the /// states that belong to the same SCC will be considered when /// choosing a successor. Otherwise, only the successor of the /// topmost state on the DFS stack are considered. /// /// See the documentation for spot::couvreur99_check class couvreur99_check_shy : public couvreur99_check { public: couvreur99_check_shy(const tgba* a, bool group = true, const numbered_state_heap_factory* nshf = numbered_state_heap_hash_map_factory::instance()); virtual ~couvreur99_check_shy(); virtual emptiness_check_result* check(); protected: struct successor { bdd acc; const spot::state* s; successor(bdd acc, const spot::state* s): acc(acc), s(s) {} }; // We use five main data in this algorithm: // * couvreur99_check::root, a stack of strongly connected components (SCC), // * couvreur99_check::h, a hash of all visited nodes, with their order, // (it is called "Hash" in Couvreur's paper) // * arc, a stack of acceptance conditions between each of these SCC, std::stack arc; // * num, the number of visited nodes. Used to set the order of each // visited node, int num; // * todo, the depth-first search stack. This holds pairs of the // form (STATE, SUCCESSORS) where SUCCESSORS is a list of // (ACCEPTANCE_CONDITIONS, STATE) pairs. typedef std::list succ_queue; typedef std::pair pair_state_successors; typedef std::list todo_list; todo_list todo; // Whether successors should be grouped for states in the same // SCC. bool group_; /// \brief find the SCC number of a unprocessed state. /// /// Sometimes we want to modify some of the above structures when /// looking up a new state. This happens for instance when find() /// must perform inclusion checking and add new states to process /// to TODO during this step. (Because TODO must be known, /// sub-classing spot::numbered_state_heap is not enough.) Then /// overriding this method is the way to go. virtual int* find_state(const state* s); }; /// @} } #endif // SPOT_TGBAALGOS_GTEC_GTEC_HH