@article{3115,
abstract = {We consider the offset-deconstruction problem: Given a polygonal shape Q with n vertices, can it be expressed, up to a tolerance ε in Hausdorff distance, as the Minkowski sum of another polygonal shape P with a disk of fixed radius? If it does, we also seek a preferably simple-looking solution P; then, P's offset constitutes an accurate, vertex-reduced, and smoothened approximation of Q. We give an O(nlogn)-time exact decision algorithm that handles any polygonal shape, assuming the real-RAM model of computation. A variant of the algorithm, which we have implemented using the cgal library, is based on rational arithmetic and answers the same deconstruction problem up to an uncertainty parameter δ its running time additionally depends on δ. If the input shape is found to be approximable, this algorithm also computes an approximate solution for the problem. It also allows us to solve parameter-optimization problems induced by the offset-deconstruction problem. For convex shapes, the complexity of the exact decision algorithm drops to O(n), which is also the time required to compute a solution P with at most one more vertex than a vertex-minimal one.},
author = {Berberich, Eric and Halperin, Dan and Kerber, Michael and Pogalnikova, Roza},
journal = {Discrete & Computational Geometry},
number = {4},
pages = {964 -- 989},
publisher = {Springer},
title = {{Deconstructing approximate offsets}},
doi = {10.1007/s00454-012-9441-5},
volume = {48},
year = {2012},
}
@article{3836,
abstract = {Hierarchical Timing Language (HTL) is a coordination language for distributed, hard real-time applications. HTL is a hierarchical extension of Giotto and, like its predecessor, based on the logical execution time (LET) paradigm of real-time programming. Giotto is compiled into code for a virtual machine, called the EmbeddedMachine (or E machine). If HTL is targeted to the E machine, then the hierarchicalprogram structure needs to be flattened; the flattening makes separatecompilation difficult, and may result in E machinecode of exponential size. In this paper, we propose a generalization of the E machine, which supports a hierarchicalprogram structure at runtime through real-time trigger mechanisms that are arranged in a tree. We present the generalized E machine, and a modular compiler for HTL that generates code of linear size. The compiler may generate code for any part of a given HTL program separately in any order.},
author = {Ghosal, Arkadeb and Iercan, Daniel and Kirsch, Christoph and Henzinger, Thomas A and Sangiovanni Vincentelli, Alberto},
journal = {Science of Computer Programming},
number = {2},
pages = {96 -- 112},
publisher = {Elsevier},
title = {{Separate compilation of hierarchical real-time programs into linear-bounded embedded machine code}},
doi = {10.1016/j.scico.2010.06.004},
volume = {77},
year = {2012},
}
@article{494,
abstract = {We solve the longstanding open problems of the blow-up involved in the translations, when possible, of a nondeterministic Büchi word automaton (NBW) to a nondeterministic co-Büchi word automaton (NCW) and to a deterministic co-Büchi word automaton (DCW). For the NBW to NCW translation, the currently known upper bound is 2o(nlog n) and the lower bound is 1.5n. We improve the upper bound to n2n and describe a matching lower bound of 2ω(n). For the NBW to DCW translation, the currently known upper bound is 2o(nlog n). We improve it to 2 o(n), which is asymptotically tight. Both of our upper-bound constructions are based on a simple subset construction, do not involve intermediate automata with richer acceptance conditions, and can be implemented symbolically. We continue and solve the open problems of translating nondeterministic Streett, Rabin, Muller, and parity word automata to NCW and to DCW. Going via an intermediate NBW is not optimal and we describe direct, simple, and asymptotically tight constructions, involving a 2o(n) blow-up. The constructions are variants of the subset construction, providing a unified approach for translating all common classes of automata to NCW and DCW. Beyond the theoretical importance of the results, we point to numerous applications of the new constructions. In particular, they imply a simple subset-construction based translation, when possible, of LTL to deterministic Büchi word automata.},
author = {Boker, Udi and Kupferman, Orna},
journal = {ACM Transactions on Computational Logic (TOCL)},
number = {4},
publisher = {ACM},
title = {{Translating to Co-Büchi made tight, unified, and useful}},
doi = {10.1145/2362355.2362357},
volume = {13},
year = {2012},
}
@inproceedings{2888,
abstract = {Formal verification aims to improve the quality of hardware and software by detecting errors before they do harm. At the basis of formal verification lies the logical notion of correctness, which purports to capture whether or not a circuit or program behaves as desired. We suggest that the boolean partition into correct and incorrect systems falls short of the practical need to assess the behavior of hardware and software in a more nuanced fashion against multiple criteria.},
author = {Henzinger, Thomas A},
booktitle = {Conference proceedings MODELS 2012},
location = {Innsbruck, Austria},
pages = {1 -- 2},
publisher = {Springer},
title = {{Quantitative reactive models}},
doi = {10.1007/978-3-642-33666-9_1},
volume = {7590},
year = {2012},
}
@inproceedings{2890,
abstract = {Systems are often specified using multiple requirements on their behavior. In practice, these requirements can be contradictory. The classical approach to specification, verification, and synthesis demands more detailed specifications that resolve any contradictions in the requirements. These detailed specifications are usually large, cumbersome, and hard to maintain or modify. In contrast, quantitative frameworks allow the formalization of the intuitive idea that what is desired is an implementation that comes "closest" to satisfying the mutually incompatible requirements, according to a measure of fit that can be defined by the requirements engineer. One flexible framework for quantifying how "well" an implementation satisfies a specification is offered by simulation distances that are parameterized by an error model. We introduce this framework, study its properties, and provide an algorithmic solution for the following quantitative synthesis question: given two (or more) behavioral requirements specified by possibly incompatible finite-state machines, and an error model, find the finite-state implementation that minimizes the maximal simulation distance to the given requirements. Furthermore, we generalize the framework to handle infinite alphabets (for example, realvalued domains). We also demonstrate how quantitative specifications based on simulation distances might lead to smaller and easier to modify specifications. Finally, we illustrate our approach using case studies on error correcting codes and scheduler synthesis.},
author = {Cerny, Pavol and Gopi, Sivakanth and Henzinger, Thomas A and Radhakrishna, Arjun and Totla, Nishant},
booktitle = {Proceedings of the tenth ACM international conference on Embedded software},
location = {Tampere, Finland},
pages = {53 -- 62},
publisher = {ACM},
title = {{Synthesis from incompatible specifications}},
doi = {10.1145/2380356.2380371},
year = {2012},
}