Results 1  10
of
49
HOL Light: A tutorial introduction
 Proceedings of the First International Conference on Formal Methods in ComputerAided Design (FMCAD’96), volume 1166 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science
, 1996
"... HOL Light is a new version of the HOL theorem prover. While retaining the reliability and programmability of earlier versions, it is more elegant, lightweight, powerful and automatic; it will be the basis for the Cambridge component of the HOL2000 initiative to develop the next generation of HOL th ..."
Abstract

Cited by 70 (9 self)
 Add to MetaCart
HOL Light is a new version of the HOL theorem prover. While retaining the reliability and programmability of earlier versions, it is more elegant, lightweight, powerful and automatic; it will be the basis for the Cambridge component of the HOL2000 initiative to develop the next generation of HOL theorem provers. HOL Light is written in CAML Light, and so will run well even on small machines, e.g. PCs and Macintoshes with a few megabytes of RAM. This is in stark contrast to the resourcehungry systems which are the norm in this field, other versions of HOL included. Among the new features of this version are a powerful simplifier, effective first order automation, simple higherorder matching and very general support for inductive and recursive definitions.
Proving Pointer Programs in HigherOrder Logic
 Information and Computation
, 2003
"... This paper develops sound modelling and reasoning methods for imperative programs with pointers: heaps are modelled as mappings from addresses to values, and pointer structures are mapped to higherlevel data types for verification. The programming language is embedded in higherorder logic, its ..."
Abstract

Cited by 66 (1 self)
 Add to MetaCart
This paper develops sound modelling and reasoning methods for imperative programs with pointers: heaps are modelled as mappings from addresses to values, and pointer structures are mapped to higherlevel data types for verification. The programming language is embedded in higherorder logic, its Hoare logic is derived. The whole development is purely definitional and thus sound. The viability of this approach is demonstrated with a nontrivial case study. We show the correctness of the SchorrWaite graph marking algorithm and present part of the readable proof in Isabelle/HOL.
Java Program Verification via a Hoare Logic with Abrupt Termination
 Fundamental Approaches to Software Engineering (FASE 2000), number 1783 in LNCS
, 2000
"... This paper formalises a semantics for statements and expressions (in sequential imperative languages) which includes nontermination, normal termination and abrupt termination (e.g. because of an exception, break, return or continue). This extends the traditional semantics underlying e.g. Hoare logi ..."
Abstract

Cited by 63 (6 self)
 Add to MetaCart
This paper formalises a semantics for statements and expressions (in sequential imperative languages) which includes nontermination, normal termination and abrupt termination (e.g. because of an exception, break, return or continue). This extends the traditional semantics underlying e.g. Hoare logic, which only distinguishes termination and nontermination. An extension of Hoare logic is elaborated that includes means for reasoning about abrupt termination (and sideeffects). It prominently involves rules for reasoning about while loops, which may contain exceptions, breaks, continues and returns. This extension applies in particular to Java. As an example, a standard pattern search algorithm in Java (involving a while loop with returns) is proven correct using the prooftool PVS.
A Programming Logic for Sequential Java
 Programming Languages and Systems (ESOP ’99), volume 1576 of LNCS
, 1999
"... . A Hoarestyle programming logic for the sequential kernel of Java is presented. It handles recursive methods, class and interface types, subtyping, inheritance, dynamic and static binding, aliasing via object references, and encapsulation. The logic is proved sound w.r.t. an SOS semantics by e ..."
Abstract

Cited by 58 (8 self)
 Add to MetaCart
. A Hoarestyle programming logic for the sequential kernel of Java is presented. It handles recursive methods, class and interface types, subtyping, inheritance, dynamic and static binding, aliasing via object references, and encapsulation. The logic is proved sound w.r.t. an SOS semantics by embedding both into higherorder logic. 1 Introduction Java is a practically important objectoriented programming language. This paper presents a logic to verify sequential Java programs. The motivations for investigating the logical foundations of Java are as follows: 1. Java plays an important role in the quickly developing software component industry and the smart card technology. Verification techniques can be used for static program analysis, e.g., to prove the absence of nullpointer exceptions. The Java subset used in this paper is similar to JavaCard, the Java dialect for implementing smart cards. 2. As pointed out in [MPH97], logical foundations of programming languages form a b...
A benchmark for comparing different approaches for specifying and verifying realtime systems
 IN PROC. 10 TH IEEE WORKSHOP ON REALTIME OPERATING SYSTEMS AND SOFTWARE
, 1993
"... ..."
Experience with embedding hardware description languages in HOL
 Theorem Provers in Circuit Design
, 1992
"... Abstract The semantics of hardware description languages can be represented in higher order logic. This provides a formal definition that is suitable for machine processing. Experiments are in progress at Cambridge to see whether this method can be the basis of practical tools based on the HOL theor ..."
Abstract

Cited by 39 (4 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Abstract The semantics of hardware description languages can be represented in higher order logic. This provides a formal definition that is suitable for machine processing. Experiments are in progress at Cambridge to see whether this method can be the basis of practical tools based on the HOL theoremproving assistant. Three languages are being investigated: ELLA, Silage and VHDL. The approaches taken for these languages are compared and current progress on building semanticallybased theoremproving tools is discussed.
Hoare Logic and VDM: MachineChecked Soundness and Completeness Proofs
, 1998
"... Investigating soundness and completeness of verification calculi for imperative programming languages is a challenging task. Many incorrect results have been published in the past. We take advantage of the computeraided proof tool LEGO to interactively establish soundness and completeness of both H ..."
Abstract

Cited by 31 (1 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Investigating soundness and completeness of verification calculi for imperative programming languages is a challenging task. Many incorrect results have been published in the past. We take advantage of the computeraided proof tool LEGO to interactively establish soundness and completeness of both Hoare Logic and the operation decomposition rules of the Vienna Development Method (VDM) with respect to operational semantics. We deal with parameterless recursive procedures and local variables in the context of total correctness. As a case study, we use LEGO to verify the correctness of Quicksort in Hoare Logic. As our main contribution, we illuminate the rle of auxiliary variables in Hoare Logic. They are required to relate the value of program variables in the final state with the value of program variables in the initial state. In our formalisation, we reflect their purpose by interpreting assertions as relations on states and a domain of auxiliary variables. Furthermore, we propose a new structural rule for adjusting auxiliary variables when strengthening preconditions and weakening postconditions. This rule is stronger than all previously suggested structural rules, including rules of adaptation. With the new treatment, we are able to show that, contrary to common belief, Hoare Logic subsumes VDM in that every derivation in VDM can be naturally embedded in Hoare Logic. Moreover, we establish completeness results uniformly as corollaries of Most General Formula theorems which remove the need to reason about arbitrary assertions.
Floating point verification in HOL Light: the exponential function
 UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE COMPUTER LABORATORY
, 1997
"... Since they often embody compact but mathematically sophisticated algorithms, operations for computing the common transcendental functions in floating point arithmetic seem good targets for formal verification using a mechanical theorem prover. We discuss some of the general issues that arise in veri ..."
Abstract

Cited by 31 (6 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Since they often embody compact but mathematically sophisticated algorithms, operations for computing the common transcendental functions in floating point arithmetic seem good targets for formal verification using a mechanical theorem prover. We discuss some of the general issues that arise in verifications of this class, and then present a machinechecked verification of an algorithm for computing the exponential function in IEEE754 standard binary floating point arithmetic. We confirm (indeed strengthen) the main result of a previously published error analysis, though we uncover a minor error in the hand proof and are forced to confront several subtle issues that might easily be overlooked informally. The development described here includes, apart from the proof itself, a formalization of IEEE arithmetic, a mathematical semantics for the programming language in which the algorithm is expressed, and the body of pure mathematics needed. All this is developed logically from first prin...
Scalable automated verification via expertsystem guided transformations
 in FMCAD
, 2004
"... Abstract. Transformationbased verification has been proposed to synergistically leverage various transformations to successively simplify and decompose large problems to ones which may be formally discharged. While powerful, such systems require a fair amount of user sophistication and experimentat ..."
Abstract

Cited by 28 (13 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Abstract. Transformationbased verification has been proposed to synergistically leverage various transformations to successively simplify and decompose large problems to ones which may be formally discharged. While powerful, such systems require a fair amount of user sophistication and experimentation to yield greatest benefits – every verification problem is different, hence the most efficient transformation flow differs widely from problem to problem. Finding an efficient proof strategy not only enables exponential reductions in computational resources, it often makes the difference between obtaining a conclusive result or not. In this paper, we propose the use of an expert system to automate this proof strategy development process. We discuss the types of rules used by the expert system, and the type of feedback necessary between the algorithms and expert system, all oriented towards yielding a conclusive result with minimal resources. Experimental results are provided to demonstrate that such a system is able to automatically discover efficient proof strategies, even on large and complex problems with more than 100,000 state elements in their respective cones of influence. These results also demonstrate numerous types of algorithmic synergies that are critical to the automation of such complex proofs. 1