. . . "In formal verification,finite state model checking needs to find a B\u00FCchi automaton (BA) equivalent to a given linear temporal logic (LTL) formula, i.e., such that the LTL formula and the BA recognize the same \u03C9-language. There are algorithms that translate an LTL formula to a BA. This transformation is normally done in two steps. The first step produces a generalized B\u00FCchi automaton (GBA) from a LTL formula. The second step translates this GBA into a BA, which involves a relatively easy construction. Since LTL is strictly less expressive than BA, the reverse construction is not always possible. The algorithms for transforming LTL to GBA differ in their construction strategies but they all have a common underlying principle, i.e., each state in the constructed automaton represents a set of LTL formulas that are expected to be satisfied by the remaining input word after occurrence of the state during a run."@en . "Linear temporal logic to B\u00FCchi automaton"@en . . . . . . . . . . . "20712"^^ . . . "Proof of correctness of the above construction"@en . . . . . "1101824819"^^ . . "background:lightblue;"@en . "31670156"^^ . . . "lightgrey"@en . . . . . . "In formal verification,finite state model checking needs to find a B\u00FCchi automaton (BA) equivalent to a given linear temporal logic (LTL) formula, i.e., such that the LTL formula and the BA recognize the same \u03C9-language. There are algorithms that translate an LTL formula to a BA. This transformation is normally done in two steps. The first step produces a generalized B\u00FCchi automaton (GBA) from a LTL formula. The second step translates this GBA into a BA, which involves a relatively easy construction. Since LTL is strictly less expressive than BA, the reverse construction is not always possible."@en . .