Commit 372a086c authored by Alexandre Duret-Lutz's avatar Alexandre Duret-Lutz
Browse files

Improve ltlfilt.org

* doc/org/ltlfilt.org: Mention that the --stutter-invariant check
use automata.  Fix a typo.
parent 644b5f01
......@@ -221,7 +221,7 @@ two formulas are equivalent. It would print nothing and set the exit
status to 1, were the two formulas not equivalent.
If the formula =F(a & X(!a & Gb))= stutter-invariant?
Is the formula =F(a & X(!a & Gb))= stutter-invariant?
#+BEGIN_SRC sh :results verbatim :exports both
ltlfilt -f 'F(a & X(!a & Gb))' --stutter-invariant
......@@ -250,8 +250,8 @@ ltlfilt -f 'F(a & X(!a & Gb))' --remove-x | ltlfilt --equivalent-to 'F(a & X(!a
It is therefore equivalent, but that is not a surprise since the
=--stutter-invariant= filter is actually implemented using exactly
[[http://homepages.inf.ed.ac.uk/kousha/note_on_stut_tl_lpi.ps][this procedure]] (calling the =remove_x()= function, and checking the
equivalence of the resulting formula with the original one).
[[http://homepages.inf.ed.ac.uk/kousha/note_on_stut_tl_lpi.ps][this procedure]] (calling the =remove_x()= function, and building automata
to check the equivalence of the resulting formula with the original one).
# LocalWords: ltlfilt num toc LTL PSL syntaxes LBT's SRC GFp scheck
......
Markdown is supported
0% or .
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment