{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01932367149758454, 'fraction_numerical': 0.007729468599033816, 'mean_word_length': 5.771241830065359, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Counterexample-guided abstraction refinement for symbolic model checking

The state explosion problem remains a major hurdle in applying symbolic model checking to large hardware designs. State space abstraction, having been essential for verifying designs of industrial complexity, is typically a manual process, requiring considerable creativity and insight.In this article, we present an automatic iterative abstraction-refinement methodology that extends symbolic model checking. In our method, the initial abstract model is generated by an automatic analysis of the control structures in the program to be verified. Abstract models may admit erroneous (or "spurious") counterexamples. We devise new symbolic techniques that analyze such counterexamples and refine the abstract model correspondingly. We describe aSMV, a prototype implementation of our methodology in NuSMV. Practical experiments including a large Fujitsu IP core design with about 500 latches and 10000 lines of SMV code confirm the effectiveness of our approach.