Explaining Hyperproperty Violations

Hyperproperties relate multiple computation traces to each other. Model checkers for hyperproperties thus return, in case a system model violates the specification, a set of traces as a counterexample. Fixing the erroneous relations between traces in the system that led to the counterexample is a di...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:arXiv.org 2022-06
Hauptverfasser: Coenen, Norine, Dachselt, Raimund, Finkbeiner, Bernd, Frenkel, Hadar, Hahn, Christopher, Horak, Tom, Metzger, Niklas, Siber, Julian
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Hyperproperties relate multiple computation traces to each other. Model checkers for hyperproperties thus return, in case a system model violates the specification, a set of traces as a counterexample. Fixing the erroneous relations between traces in the system that led to the counterexample is a difficult manual effort that highly benefits from additional explanations. In this paper, we present an explanation method for counterexamples to hyperproperties described in the specification logic HyperLTL. We extend Halpern and Pearl's definition of actual causality to sets of traces witnessing the violation of a HyperLTL formula, which allows us to identify the events that caused the violation. We report on the implementation of our method and show that it significantly improves on previous approaches for analyzing counterexamples returned by HyperLTL model checkers.
ISSN:2331-8422