Bisimulation is crucial for verifying process equivalence in probabilistic systems. This paper presents a novel logical framework for analyzing bisimulation in probabilistic parameterized systems, namely, infinite families of finite-state probabilistic systems. Our framework is built upon the first-order theory of regular structures, which provides a decidable logic for reasoning about these systems. We show that essential properties like anonymity and uniformity can be encoded and verified within this framework in a manner aligning with the principles of deductive software verification, where systems, properties, and proofs are expressed in a unified decidable logic. By integrating language inference techniques, we achieve full automation in synthesizing candidate bisimulation proofs for anonymity and uniformity. We demonstrate the efficacy of our approach by addressing several challenging examples, including cryptographic protocols and randomized algorithms that were previously beyond the reach of fully automated methods.

Verifying safety and liveness over array systems is a highly challenging problem. Array systems naturally capture parameterized systems such as distributed protocols with an unbounded number of processes. Such distributed protocols often exploit process IDs during their computation, resulting in array systems whose element values range over an infinite domain. In this paper, we develop a novel framework for proving safety and liveness over array systems. The crux of the framework is to overapproximate an array system as a string rewriting system (i.e. over a finite alphabet) by means of a new predicate abstraction that exploits the so-called indexed predicates. This allows us to tap into powerful verification methods for string rewriting systems that have been heavily developed in the last two decades or so (e.g. regular model checking). We demonstrate how our method yields simple, automatically verifiable proofs of safety and liveness properties for challenging examples, including Dijkstra’s self-stabilizing protocol and the Chang-Roberts leader election protocol.

Probabilistic bisimulation is a fundamental notion of process equivalence for probabilistic systems. It has important applications, including the formalisation of the anonymity property of several communication protocols. While there is a large body of work on verifying probabilistic bisimulation for finite systems, the problem is in general undecidable for parameterized systems, i.e., for infinite families of finite systems with an arbitrary number n of processes. In this paper we provide a general framework for reasoning about probabilistic bisimulation for parameterized systems. Our approach is in the spirit of software verification, wherein we encode proof rules for probabilistic bisimulation and use a decidable first-order theory to specify systems and candidate bisimulation relations, which can then be checked automatically against the proof rules. We work in the framework of regular model checking, and specify an infinite-state system as a regular relation described by a first-order formula over a universal automatic structure, i.e., a logical theory over the string domain. For probabilistic systems, we show how probability values (as well as the required operations) can be encoded naturally in the logic. Our main result is that one can specify the verification condition of whether a given regular binary relation is a probabilistic bisimulation as a regular relation. Since the first-order theory of the universal automatic structure is decidable, we obtain an effective method for verifying probabilistic bisimulation for infinite-state systems, given a regular relation as a candidate proof. As a case study, we show that our framework is sufficiently expressive for proving the anonymity property of the parameterized dining cryptographers protocol and the parameterized grades protocol. Both of these protocols hitherto could not be verified by existing automatic methods. Moreover, with the help of standard automata learning algorithms, we show that the candidate relations can be synthesized fully automatically, making the verification fully automated.

Monadic decomposibility - the ability to determine whether a formula in a given logical theory can be decomposed into a boolean combination of monadic formulas - is a powerful tool for devising a decision procedure for a given logical theory. In this paper, we revisit a classical decision problem in automata theory: given a regular (a.k.a. synchronized rational) relation, determine whether it is recognizable, i.e., it has a monadic decomposition (that is, a representation as a boolean combination of cartesian products of regular languages). Regular relations are expressive formalisms which, using an appropriate string encoding, can capture relations definable in Presburger Arithmetic. In fact, their expressive power coincide with relations definable in a universal automatic structure; equivalently, those definable by finite set interpretations in WS1S (Weak Second Order Theory of One Successor). Determining whether a regular relation admits a recognizable relation was known to be decidable (and in exponential time for binary relations), but its precise complexity still hitherto remains open. Our main contribution is to fully settle the complexity of this decision problem by developing new techniques employing infinite Ramsey theory. The complexity for DFA (resp. NFA) representations of regular relations is shown to be NLOGSPACE-complete (resp. PSPACE-complete).

Minification is a widely accepted technique that aims at reducing the size of the code transmitted over the web. This article concerns the problem of semantic-preserving minification of Cascading Style Sheets (CSS)—the de facto language for styling web documents—based on merging similar rules. The cascading nature of CSS makes the semantics of CSS files sensitive to the ordering of rules in the file. To automatically identify rule-merging opportunities that best minimise file size, we reduce the rule-merging problem to a problem concerning “CSS-graphs,” i.e., node-weighted bipartite graphs with a dependency ordering on the edges, where weights capture the number of characters. Constraint solving plays a key role in our approach. Transforming a CSS file into a CSS-graph problem requires us to extract the dependency ordering on the edges (an NP-hard problem), which requires us to solve the selector intersection problem. To this end, we provide the first full formalisation of CSS3 selectors (the most stable version of CSS) and reduce their selector intersection problem to satisfiability of quantifier-free integer linear arithmetic, for which highly optimised SMT-solvers are available. To solve the above NP-hard graph optimisation problem, we show how Max-SAT solvers can be effectively employed. We have implemented our rule-merging algorithm and tested it against approximately 70 real-world examples (including examples from each of the top 20 most popular websites). We also used our benchmarks to compare our tool against six well-known minifiers (which implement other optimisations). Our experiments suggest that our tool produced larger savings. A substantially better minification rate was shown when our tool is used together with these minifiers.

We revisit the classic problem of proving safety over parameterised concurrent systems, i.e., an infinite family of finite-state concurrent systems that are represented by some finite (symbolic) means. An example of such an infinite family is a dining philosopher protocol with any number n of processes (n being the parameter that defines the infinite family). Regular model checking is a well-known generic framework for modelling parameterised concurrent systems, where an infinite set of configurations (resp. transitions) is represented by a regular set (resp. regular transducer). Although verifying safety properties in the regular model checking framework is undecidable in general, many sophisticated semi-algorithms have been developed in the past fifteen years that can successfully prove safety in many practical instances. In this paper, we propose a simple solution to synthesise regular inductive invariants that makes use of Angluin's classic L* algorithm (and its variants). We provide a termination guarantee when the set of configurations reachable from a given set of initial configurations is regular. We have tested L* algorithm on standard (as well as new) examples in regular model checking including the dining philosopher protocol, the dining cryptographer protocol, and several mutual exclusion protocols (e.g. Bakery, Burns, Szymanski, and German). Our experiments show that, despite the simplicity of our solution, it can perform at least as well as existing semi-algorithms.