MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416473001 · doi:10.1145/3680207.3765254

Formalization, Implementation, and Verification of the Bluetooth L2CAP State Machine

2025· article· W4416473001 on OpenAlexaff
Tan Khang Le, Mohammad Omidvar Tehrani, Yuepeng Wang, Jianliang Wu, Steve Ko

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldComputer Science
TopicBluetooth and Wireless Communication Technologies
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLivenessCorrectnessState (computer science)Protocol (science)Finite-state machineFormal verificationAbstractionBluetooth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Logical Link Control and Adaptation Protocol (L2CAP) is a core Bluetooth component, and verifying its correctness is crucial for reliable and secure connectivity. However, verification can be challenging due to the complexity and ambiguities in its natural language (English) specification. In this paper, we present a formally verified implementation of the L2CAP state machine. Our approach introduces the Specification State Machine (SSM) to formalize the L2CAP state machine in the specification and the Operational State Machine (OSM) as an abstraction of the implementation. We then formally prove that (i) OSM refines SSM, and (ii) our implementation semantically conforms to OSM. By combining these two proofs, we verify that our implementation complies with our formalization of the specification. Furthermore, we define critical safety and liveness properties and formally prove that our implementation satisfies these guarantees. To ensure practicality, we implement the L2CAP state machine in Dafny and integrate it into Android's Fluoride Bluetooth stack. Our evaluation demonstrates that our formally verified implementation maintains competitive performance while ensuring formal correctness.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.937
Threshold uncertainty score0.563

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.257 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBluetooth and Wireless Communication TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207