Regular model checking is a technique for the verification of infinite-state systems whose configurations can be represented as finite words over a suitable alphabet. The form we are studying applies to systems whose set of initial configurations is regular, and whose transition relation is captured by a length-preserving transducer. To verify safety properties, regular model checking iteratively computes automata recognizing increasingly larger regular sets of reachable configurations, and checks if they contain unsafe configurations. Since this procedure often does not terminate, acceleration, abstraction, and widening techniques have been developed to compute a regular superset of the reachable configurations. In this paper, we develop a complementary procedure. Instead of approaching the set of reachable configurations from below, we start with the set of all configurations and approach it from above. We use that the set of reachable configurations is equal to the intersection of all inductive invariants of the system. Since this intersection is non-regular in general, we introduce b-invariants, defined as those representable by CNF-formulas with at most b clauses. We prove that, for every $b\geq0$, the intersection of all inductive b-invariants is regular, and we construct an automaton recognizing it. We show that whether this automaton accepts some unsafe configuration is in EXPSPACE for every $b\geq0$, and PSPACE-complete for b=1. Finally, we study how large must b be to prove safety properties of a number of benchmarks.

Regular transition systems (RTS) are a popular formalism for modeling infinite-state systems in general, and parameterised systems in particular. In a CONCUR 22 paper, Esparza et al. introduce a novel approach to the verification of RTS, based on inductive invariants. The approach computes the intersection of all inductive invariants of a given RTS that can be expressed as CNF formulas with a bounded number of clauses, and uses it to construct an automaton recognising an overapproximation of the reachable configurations. The paper shows that the problem of deciding if the language of this automaton intersects a given regular set of unsafe configurations is in EXPSPACE and PSPACE-hard. We introduce regular abstraction frameworks, a generalisation of the approach of Esparza et al., very similar to the regular abstractions of Hong and Lin. A framework consists of a regular language of constraints, and a transducer, called the interpretation, that assigns to each constraint the set of configurations of the RTS satisfying it. Examples of regular abstraction frameworks include the formulas of Esparza et al., octagons, bounded difference matrices, and views. We show that the generalisation of the decision problem above to regular abstraction frameworks remains in EXPSPACE, and prove a matching (non-trivial) EXPSPACE-hardness bound. EXPSPACE-hardness implies that, in the worst case, the automaton recognising the overapproximation of the reachable configurations has a double-exponential number of states. We introduce a learning algorithm that computes this automaton in a lazy manner, stopping whenever the current hypothesis is already strong enough to prove safety. We report on an implementation and show that our experimental results improve on those of Esparza et al.

Regular model checking is a technique for the verification of infinite-state systems whose configurations can be represented as finite words over a suitable alphabet. It applies to systems whose set of initial configurations is regular, and whose transition relation is captured by a length-preserving transducer. To verify safety properties, regular model checking iteratively computes automata recognizing increasingly larger regular sets of reachable configurations, and checks if they contain unsafe configurations. Since this procedure often does not terminate, acceleration, abstraction, and widening techniques have been developed to compute a regular superset of the reachable configurations. In this paper we develop a complementary procedure. Instead of approaching the set of reachable configurations from below, we start with the set of all configurations and approach it from above. We use that the set of reachable configurations is equal to the intersection of all inductive invariants of the system. Since this intersection is non-regular in general, we introduce b-bounded invariants, defined as those representable by CNF-formulas with at most b clauses. We prove that, for every b ≥ 0, the intersection of all b-bounded inductive invariants is regular, and we construct an automaton recognizing it. We show that whether this automaton accepts some unsafe configuration is in EXPSPACE for every b ≥ 0, and PSPACE-complete for b = 1. Finally, we study how large must b be to prove safety properties of a number of benchmarks.

A fundamental advantage of Petri net models is the possibility to automatically compute useful system invariants from the syntax of the net. Classical techniques used for this are place invariants, P-components, siphons or traps. Recently, Bozga et al. have presented a novel technique for the \emph{parameterized} verification of safety properties of systems with a ring or array architecture. They show that the statement \enquote{for every instance of the parameterized Petri net, all markings satisfying the linear invariants associated to all the P-components, siphons and traps of the instance are safe} can be encoded in \acs{WS1S} and checked using tools like MONA. However, while the technique certifies that this infinite set of linear invariants extracted from P-components, siphons or traps are strong enough to prove safety, it does not return an explanation of this fact understandable by humans. We present a CEGAR loop that constructs a \emph{finite} set of \emph{parameterized} P-components, siphons or traps, whose infinitely many instances are strong enough to prove safety. For this we design parameterization procedures for different architectures. Comment: Final version from editor

We consider parameterized concurrent systems consisting of a finite but unknown number of components, obtained by replicating a given set of finite state automata.