$ and a labeling function is constructed for each subformula of $f$. As seen from the algorithm $CheckCTL$ (at the end of Section \[Ideas\]), the algorithm either gives a definite “yes” or “no” answer to the CTL model-checking problem, i.e., $\langle M,X\rangle, s_0\models f$, or it reduces the problem to checking whether the ID expression $\psi$ labeled to $s_0$ can be evaluated true at the state. The evaluation procedure is carried out by the following recursive procedure $TestWG$, after an input sequence $\pi$ has been accepted by the unspecified component $X$.

[**Procedure**]{} $TestWG(X,\pi,s_0,\psi)$

$\psi=\psi_1\vee \psi_2$:

$TestWG(X,\pi,s_0,\psi_1)$ [**Then**]{}

$true$;

$TestWG(X,\pi,s_0,\psi_2)$

$\psi=\neg \psi_1$:

$\neg TestWG(X,\pi,s_0, \psi_1)$

$\psi=1$:

$true$;

$\psi=i$ with $2\le i\le k+1$:

${\cal I}^{-1}(i)$ is an $EX$ graph

$TestEX(X,\pi,s_0,{\cal I}^{-1}(i))$;

${\cal I}^{-1}(i)$ is an $EU$ graph

$TestEU(X,\pi,s_0,{\cal I}^{-1}(i), level=0)$;

${\cal I}^{-1}(i)$ is an $EG$ graph

$TestEG(X,\pi,s_0,{\cal I}^{-1}(i)).$

In $TestWG$, the first three cases are straightforward, which are consistent with the intended meaning of ID expressions. The cases $TestEX, TestEU, TestEG$ for evaluating $EX, EU$, $EG$ graphs are discussed in the following three subsections.

### $TestEX$

The case for checking whether an $EX$ graph $G=\langle N,E, L_g\rangle$ can be evaluated true at a state $s_0$ is simple. We just test whether the system $
$ and a labeling function is constructed for each subformula of $ f$. As seen from the algorithm $ CheckCTL$ (at the end of incision \[Ideas\ ]), the algorithm either render a definite “ yes ” or “ no ” answer to the CTL model - checking trouble, i.e., $ \langle M, X\rangle, s_0\models f$, or it reduces the problem to checking whether the ID saying $ \psi$ labeled to $ s_0 $ can be evaluated truthful at the state. The evaluation procedure is post out by the following recursive procedure $ TestWG$, after an remark succession $ \pi$ has been accepted by the unspecified component $ X$. 

 [ * * operation * * ] { } $ TestWG(X,\pi, s_0,\psi)$ 

 $ \psi=\psi_1\vee \psi_2 $: 

 $ TestWG(X,\pi, s_0,\psi_1)$ [ * * Then * * ] { } 

 $ true$; 

 $ TestWG(X,\pi, s_0,\psi_2)$ 

 $ \psi=\neg \psi_1 $: 

 $ \neg TestWG(X,\pi, s_0, \psi_1)$ 

 $ \psi=1 $: 

 $ true$; 

 $ \psi = i$ with $ 2\le i\le k+1 $: 

 $ { \cal I}^{-1}(i)$ is an $ EX$ graph 

 $ TestEX(X,\pi, s_0,{\cal I}^{-1}(i))$; 

 $ { \cal I}^{-1}(i)$ is an $ EU$ graph 

 $ TestEU(X,\pi, s_0,{\cal I}^{-1}(i), level=0)$; 

 $ { \cal I}^{-1}(i)$ is an $ EG$ graph 

 $ TestEG(X,\pi, s_0,{\cal I}^{-1}(i)).$ 

 In $ TestWG$, the first three cases are square, which are consistent with the intended meaning of ID expressions. The case $ TestEX, TestEU, TestEG$ for evaluating $ EX, EU$, $ EG$ graphs are discussed in the following three subsection. 

 # # # $ TestEX$ 

 The case for control whether an $ EX$ graph $ G=\langle N, E, L_g\rangle$ can be evaluated true at a state $ s_0 $ is childlike. We just test whether the system $
$ anf a labeling function is constructed fot wach snbformuma of $f$. Xs seen from the algorithm $CieckXTL$ (au the end of Sectiov \[Ideas\]), tje algoruthm wither givxa a defluite “gcs” or “io” answer to thg CTL model-cvecking problek, k.e., $\langle M,X\rangle, s_0\models f$, or it requces tne problem to chgckinb whefher the ID expression $\psi$ labeled to $s_0$ cen be evaluated true at the state. The evapuatlon procedure is cwrried out vy trw following fecursive krmcedure $TeatWG$, after an input sequence $\pi$ has yeen acceptgb by jhe unspecifmed coiponent $X$.

[**Progvdure**]{} $TastWG(X,\po,s_0,\psi)$

$\psi=\psi_1\vee \psm_2$:

$TesrWG(X,\pi,s_0,\psi_1)$ [**Then**]{}

$true$;

$TevtWG(X,\pi,s_0,\psi_2)$

$\psi=\neg \ksi_1$:

$\neg TesdWY(X,\pi,s_0, \psi_1)$

$\psi=1$:

$true$;

$\psi=i$ qirh $2\le i\le k+1$:

${\cau I}^{-1}(i)$ is ai $ES$ grapj

$TeatEX(X,\pi,s_0,{\cam I}^{-1}(i))$;

${\cal I}^{-1}(i)$ us an $EU$ graph

$TestEI(X,\[p,x_0,{\cal I}^{-1}(i), levem=0)$;

${\cal I}^{-1}(y)$ ys an $EG$ graph

$TestEG(X,\pi,s_0,{\cal I}^{-1}(i)).$

In $TestWG$, ths first three cases are straightforward, whicj are confistent with the intended meaning of ID expressiots. Thx zasts $TestDZ, HestEU, TestEG$ for evaluating $EX, EU$, $EG$ graphs wde dpscussed in the fjllowing thtef xobsections.

### $TesjEX$

The ezss for checking whehher an $EX$ geaph $G=\landle M,E, L_g\rangle$ can be evaluatee true at a frate $s_0$ is simple. Wz just test chethet the xystem $
$ and a labeling function is constructed subformula $f$. As from the algorithm Section the algorithm either a definite “yes” “no” answer to the CTL model-checking i.e., $\langle M,X\rangle, s_0\models f$, or it reduces the problem to checking whether ID expression $\psi$ labeled to $s_0$ can be evaluated true at the state. evaluation is out the following recursive procedure $TestWG$, after an input sequence $\pi$ has been accepted by the unspecified $X$. [**Procedure**]{} $TestWG(X,\pi,s_0,\psi)$ $\psi=\psi_1\vee \psi_2$: $TestWG(X,\pi,s_0,\psi_1)$ [**Then**]{} $true$; $\psi=\neg \psi_1$: $\neg TestWG(X,\pi,s_0, $\psi=1$: $true$; $\psi=i$ with $2\le k+1$: I}^{-1}(i)$ is $EX$ $TestEX(X,\pi,s_0,{\cal ${\cal I}^{-1}(i)$ is $EU$ graph $TestEU(X,\pi,s_0,{\cal I}^{-1}(i), level=0)$; ${\cal I}^{-1}(i)$ is an $EG$ graph $TestEG(X,\pi,s_0,{\cal I}^{-1}(i)).$ In $TestWG$, the first cases are are consistent the meaning ID expressions. The TestEU, TestEG$ for evaluating $EX, EU$, discussed in the following three subsections. ### $TestEX$ case for whether an $EX$ graph $G=\langle N,E, can be evaluated true at a state $s_0$ simple. We just test whether the system $
$ and a labeling function is conStructed foR each SubForMuLa of $F$. As sEen from the algoRIthm $checkCTL$ (at the end of SectIon \[IdEaS\]), The aLGoRithm Either gIVeS A DefInItE “yeS” oR “No” AnsweR to The CTL mOdel-checkiNg pRoBlem, i.e., $\langle m,x\rAngle, s_0\modeLs f$, Or it reduces tHe pRoblem To CheCKing wHetHer thE ID expREssion $\Psi$ labeleD tO $S_0$ can be EValuateD TRuE at tHe state. The evaluatIOn PRocedure is carrIed out By THe FOLloWinG recursive PrOceduRE $TestWG$, AFtER AN inPUt sequence $\pi$ hAs been accepTEd bY the unSpEciFIed comPonenT $X$.

[**pRocEdure**]{} $TestWG(x,\pi,s_0,\Psi)$

$\psi=\psi_1\Vee \psi_2$:

$tEstWG(X,\pI,S_0,\psi_1)$ [**TheN**]{}

$true$;

$TEstwG(X,\Pi,s_0,\pSI_2)$

$\pSi=\Neg \PsI_1$:

$\Neg tEsTWG(x,\Pi,s_0, \Psi_1)$

$\psi=1$:

$trUe$;

$\PsI=i$ witH $2\le i\LE K+1$:

${\CAl I}^{-1}(i)$ Is aN $EX$ gRaph

$TEstEX(X,\pi,s_0,{\cal I}^{-1}(I))$;

${\caL I}^{-1}(i)$ iS An $Eu$ grapH

$TesteU(X,\pI,s_0,{\Cal I}^{-1}(i), Level=0)$;

${\cAl I}^{-1}(i)$ iS aN $EG$ graph

$TestEG(X,\Pi,s_0,{\cAl I}^{-1}(i)).$

In $TesTWG$, ThE fiRsT threE Cases aRe sTraIghtforWard, whiCH arE cONSIsTent with the intendeD mEANiNg of ID exPressiONs. thE Cases $TesTEx, TeStEU, tEStEG$ fOr evALuAting $EX, Eu$, $EG$ graPHs ArE discusSeD in the FoLloWinG threE SubsEctionS.

### $TestEX$

THe casE For checking wheTHer an $EX$ graph $G=\LAnGLE N,e, l_g\raNglE$ can be evaluAted TRue aT a stATe $S_0$ is SImple. we jusT tESt WHether the system $
$ and a labeling functionis constru ctedfor  ea ch  sub form ula of $f$. As seen  from the algorithm $C heckC TL $  (at th e end  of Sec t io n \[I de as \]) ,t he  algo rit hm eith er gives a  de fi nite “yes” o r  “ no” answer  to  the CTL mod el- checki ng  pr o blem,  i. e., $ \langl e  M,X\r angle, s_ 0\ m odelsf $, or i t re duce s the problem toc he c king whether t he IDex p re s s ion  $\ psi$ label ed  to $ s _0$ can be e v alu a ted true at t he state. T h e e valuat io n p r ocedur e isca r rie d out by th e fo llowing r ecursi v e proce d ure $Te stWG$,  af ter  ani np ut  se qu e nce $\ pi$ has  been ac ce pt ed by  the u n s peci fie d co mpone nt $X$.

[**P roc edur e **] {} $T estWG (X,\ pi ,s_0, \psi)$ 

$\p si =\psi_1\vee \ps i_2$ :

$TestW G(X ,\ pi, s_ 0,\ps i _1)$ [ **T hen **]{}
$true$; 
$T es t W G (X ,\pi,s_0,\psi_2)$
$ \ p si =\neg \p si_1$: 
$ \n e g TestWG (X ,\p i,s_ 0 ,  \psi _1)$ 
$ \psi=1$: 

$tru e $; 
$\psi=i $with $ 2\ lei\l e k+1 $ :

$ {\calI}^{-1}( i)$ i s  an $EX$ graph 
$TestEX(X,\p i ,s _ 0 ,{ \ calI}^ {-1}(i))$;
${\ c al I }^{- 1 }( i)$ is an  $EU$  g r ap h 

$TestEU(X,\pi,s_0 ,{ \cal I }^{-1 }(i), level=0 )$;

${\ca l I }^{-1}(i )$ i s  a n  $EG$ graph

$ TestE G(X,\pi,s_ 0 ,{\cal I }^{-1 }(i)).$
In $Test W G $, the f irs t t hre e c a s es  are straight f o rwar d,  whichare  consis ten t w ith  th eintendedmeaningof  I Dex pre ssion s . The ca se s $ Te stE X, Te s tEU, T estEG $ fo rev a lua ting $E X ,E U $, $ EG $grap hsar e dis cuss e d i n the f ollowingthr e e su bs ec tions.
### $TestEX$ 
The case f or  ch ecking w hether a n $EX$ graph $G=\langle N,E, L_ g\r angle $ ca n be eval uat ed tru e a t  a sta te $s_ 0$ is  s imp l e . Wej u st  te st  whether t h e  sy stem$
$ and_a labeling_function is constructed for_each subformula_of_$f$. As_seen_from the algorithm_$CheckCTL$ (at the_end of Section \[Ideas\]),_the algorithm either_gives_a definite “yes” or “no” answer to the CTL model-checking problem, i.e., $\langle M,X\rangle,_s_0\models_f$, or_it_reduces_the problem to checking whether_the ID expression $\psi$ labeled_to $s_0$_can be evaluated true at the state. The_evaluation_procedure is carried_out by the following recursive procedure $TestWG$, after an_input sequence $\pi$ has been accepted_by the unspecified_component_$X$.

[**Procedure**]{}_$TestWG(X,\pi,s_0,\psi)$

$\psi=\psi_1\vee \psi_2$:

$TestWG(X,\pi,s_0,\psi_1)$ [**Then**]{}

$true$;

$TestWG(X,\pi,s_0,\psi_2)$

$\psi=\neg \psi_1$:

$\neg_TestWG(X,\pi,s_0, \psi_1)$

$\psi=1$:

$true$;

$\psi=i$ with $2\le i\le k+1$:

${\cal_I}^{-1}(i)$ is an $EX$ graph

$TestEX(X,\pi,s_0,{\cal I}^{-1}(i))$;

${\cal_I}^{-1}(i)$ is an $EU$ graph

$TestEU(X,\pi,s_0,{\cal I}^{-1}(i), level=0)$;

${\cal_I}^{-1}(i)$ is an $EG$ graph

$TestEG(X,\pi,s_0,{\cal I}^{-1}(i)).$

In_$TestWG$, the first three cases_are straightforward,_which are consistent with the_intended meaning of_ID expressions._The cases $TestEX,_TestEU, TestEG$ for evaluating $EX, EU$,_$EG$ graphs are_discussed in the following three subsections.

###_$TestEX$

The_case for checking_whether_an_$EX$ graph_$G=\langle N,E, L_g\rangle$_can_be evaluated_true_at a state $s_0$ is simple._We_just test whether the system $