Hardware Reference
In-Depth Information
Example 22.8. weak (a[ * 2]) is satisfied on any trace of the form aa:::. Indeed, the
sequence a[ * 2] is tightly satisfied on the traces a > and aa where the match of the
sequence a[ * 2] can be witnessed.
However, weak (a[ * 2]) is not satisfied on the trace a : a:::, as the sequence
a[ * 2] is not tightly satisfied on the trace a : a.
t
Consider an infinite trace and suppose that there is some time T such that any
prefix matching the sequence is of length at most T . Then there is no difference
between the weak and the strong satisfaction of the sequence on the trace. This is
the case of bounded sequences described in Sect. 6.2 .
For instance, the sequence a[ * 2] from Example 22.8 satisfies these conditions,
provided it is controlled by the global clock since only traces of length 2 may
match it. Therefore, there is no difference between the properties weak (a[ * 2]) and
strong (a[ * 2]) when they are controlled by the global clock.
Example 22.9. The property weak (##[ * ]a) holds on any trace without any
special letter > or ? . Indeed, since a, w 0;i
>j ##[ * ]a for any w 2 ˙ !
and for any i (recall that ˙ ! is an infinite sequence of the letters from the alphabet
of the language defined by the FV model, see Sect. 21.2.2 ). However, property
strong (##[ * ]a) is equivalent to s_eventually a .
The property weak (##[ * ] a ##1 0) also holds on any infinite trace without any
special letter > or ? . Since a and false . D 0 /, w 0;i
>>j ##[ * ] a ##1 0
for any w 2 ˙ and any i . On the contrary, the property strong (##[ * ] a ##1 0)
is a contradiction, as false does not match any letter from the original unextended
alphabet.
t
22.3.4
Property Negation
In Sect. 22.1.1.2 , we gave the following definition of property negation:
w ˆ not p iff w p.
This definition is only correct if w does not contain special letters > or ? . According
to that definition, if w D>
! then, for any a, w ˆ a, and thus w not a.Thisis
counterintuitive since we expect not a to behave the same way as ! a when the
property is controlled by the global clock. ! a is satisfied on w since > satisfies
every Boolean expression.
We need to modify the formal semantics of nega ti on to eliminate this counterin-
tuitive behavior. Given a word w we build the word w by interchanging the letters >
and ? in w and leaving all other letters unmodified. Then we can define the formal
semantics of property negation as follows:
w ˆ not p iff w p.
 
Search WWH ::




Custom Search