Results 1  10
of
52
Lazy Satisfiability Modulo Theories
 Journal on Satisfiability, Boolean Modeling and Computation
, 2007
"... Satisfiability Modulo Theories (SMT) is the problem of deciding the satisfiability of a firstorder formula with respect to some decidable firstorder theory T (SMT (T)). These problems are typically not handled adequately by standard automated theorem provers. SMT is being recognized as increasingl ..."
Abstract

Cited by 74 (32 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Satisfiability Modulo Theories (SMT) is the problem of deciding the satisfiability of a firstorder formula with respect to some decidable firstorder theory T (SMT (T)). These problems are typically not handled adequately by standard automated theorem provers. SMT is being recognized as increasingly important due to its applications in many domains in different communities, in particular in formal verification. An amount of papers with novel and very efficient techniques for SMT has been published in the last years, and some very efficient SMT tools are now available. Typical SMT (T) problems require testing the satisfiability of formulas which are Boolean combinations of atomic propositions and atomic expressions in T, so that heavy Boolean reasoning must be efficiently combined with expressive theoryspecific reasoning. The dominating approach to SMT (T), called lazy approach, is based on the integration of a SAT solver and of a decision procedure able to handle sets of atomic constraints in T (Tsolver), handling respectively the Boolean and the theoryspecific components of reasoning. Unfortunately, neither the problem of building an efficient SMT solver, nor even that of acquiring a comprehensive background knowledge in lazy SMT, is of simple solution. In this paper we present an extensive survey of SMT, with particular focus on the lazy approach. We survey, classify and analyze from a theoryindependent perspective the most effective techniques and optimizations which are of interest for lazy SMT and which have been proposed in various communities; we discuss their relative benefits and drawbacks; we provide some guidelines about their choice and usage; we also analyze the features for SAT solvers and Tsolvers which make them more suitable for an integration. The ultimate goals of this paper are to become a source of a common background knowledge and terminology for students and researchers in different areas, to provide a reference guide for developers of SMT tools, and to stimulate the crossfertilization of techniques and ideas among different communities.
A practical and complete approach to predicate refinement
 In Tools and Algorithms for the Construction and Analysis of Systems, LNCS 3920
, 2006
"... Abstract. Predicate abstraction is a method of synthesizing the strongest inductive invariant of a system expressible as a Boolean combination of a given set of atomic predicates. A predicate selection method can be said to be complete for a given theory if it is guaranteed to eventually find atomic ..."
Abstract

Cited by 55 (6 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Abstract. Predicate abstraction is a method of synthesizing the strongest inductive invariant of a system expressible as a Boolean combination of a given set of atomic predicates. A predicate selection method can be said to be complete for a given theory if it is guaranteed to eventually find atomic predicates sufficient to prove a given property, when such exist. Current heuristics are incomplete, and often diverge on simple examples. We present a practical method of predicate selection that is complete in the above sense. The method is based on interpolation and uses a “split prover”, somewhat in the style of structurebased provers used in artificial intelligence. We show that it allows the verification of a variety of simple programs that cannot be verified by existing software model checkers. 1
Bounded model checking and induction: From refutation to verification (extended abstract, category A
 Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Computer Aided Verification, CAV 2003, volume 2725 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science
"... Abstract. We explore the combination of bounded model checking and induction for proving safety properties of infinitestate systems. In particular, we define a general kinduction scheme and prove completeness thereof. A main characteristic of our methodology is that strengthened invariants are gen ..."
Abstract

Cited by 51 (8 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Abstract. We explore the combination of bounded model checking and induction for proving safety properties of infinitestate systems. In particular, we define a general kinduction scheme and prove completeness thereof. A main characteristic of our methodology is that strengthened invariants are generated from failed kinduction proofs. This strengthening step requires quantifierelimination, and we propose a lazy quantifierelimination procedure, which delays expensive computations of disjunctive normal forms when possible. The effectiveness of induction based on bounded model checking and invariant strengthening is demonstrated using infinitestate systems ranging from communication protocols to timed automata and (linear) hybrid automata. 1 Introduction Bounded model checking (BMC) [5, 4, 7] is often used for refutation, where one systematically searches for counterexamples whose length is bounded by some integer k. The bound k is increased until a bug is found, or some precomputed completeness threshold is reached. Unfortunately, the computation of completeness thresholds is usually prohibitively expensive and these thresholds may be too large to effectively explore the associated bounded search space. In addition, such completeness thresholds do not exist for many infinitestate systems.
The UCLID Decision Procedure
 In CAV’04
, 2004
"... UCLID is a tool for termlevel modeling and verification of infinitestate systems expressible in the logic of counter arithmetic with lambda expressions and uninterpreted functions (CLU). In this paper, we describe a key component of the tool, the decision procedure for CLU. ..."
Abstract

Cited by 39 (1 self)
 Add to MetaCart
UCLID is a tool for termlevel modeling and verification of infinitestate systems expressible in the logic of counter arithmetic with lambda expressions and uninterpreted functions (CLU). In this paper, we describe a key component of the tool, the decision procedure for CLU.
Deciding QuantifierFree Presburger Formulas Using Finite Instantiation Based on Parameterized Solution Bounds
 In Proc. 19 th LICS. IEEE
, 2003
"... Given a formula # in quantifierfree Presburger arithmetic, it is well known that, if there is a satisfying solution to #, there is one whose size, measured in bits, is polynomially bounded in the size of #. In this paper, we consider a special class of quantifierfree Presburger formulas in which m ..."
Abstract

Cited by 34 (7 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Given a formula # in quantifierfree Presburger arithmetic, it is well known that, if there is a satisfying solution to #, there is one whose size, measured in bits, is polynomially bounded in the size of #. In this paper, we consider a special class of quantifierfree Presburger formulas in which most linear constraints are separation (di#erencebound) constraints, and the nonseparation constraints are sparse. This class has been observed to commonly occur in software verification problems. We derive a new solution bound in terms of parameters characterizing the sparseness of linear constraints and the number of nonseparation constraints, in addition to traditional measures of formula size. In particular, the number of bits needed per integer variable is linear in the number of nonseparation constraints and logarithmic in the number and size of nonzero coe#cients in them, but is otherwise independent of the total number of linear constraints in the formula. The derived bound can be used in a decision procedure based on instantiating integer variables over a finite domain and translating the input quantifierfree Presburger formula to an equisatisfiable Boolean formula, which is then checked using a Boolean satisfiability solver. We present empirical evidence indicating that this method can greatly outperform other decision procedures.
The ICS Decision Procedures for Embedded Deduction
, 2004
"... Automated theorem proving... linear arithmetic, and lists. The ground (i.e., quantifierfree) fragment of many combinations is decidable when the fully quantified combination is not, and practical experience indicates that automation of the ground case is adequate for most applications. Practical ex ..."
Abstract

Cited by 32 (6 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Automated theorem proving... linear arithmetic, and lists. The ground (i.e., quantifierfree) fragment of many combinations is decidable when the fully quantified combination is not, and practical experience indicates that automation of the ground case is adequate for most applications. Practical experience also suggests several other desiderata for an effective deductive service. Some applications (e.g., construction of abstractions) invoke their deductive service a huge number of times in the course of a single calculation, so that performance of the service must be very good. Other applications such as proof search explore many variations on a formula (i.e., alternately asserting and denying various combinations of its premises), so the deductive service should not examine individual formulas in isolation, but should provide a rich application programming interface that supports incremental assertion, retraction, and querying of formulas. Other applications such as test case generation...
Completeness and Complexity of Bounded Model Checking
, 2004
"... For every finite model M and an LTL property #, there exists a number (the Completeness Threshold) such that if there is no counterexample to # in M of length or less, then M #. Finding this number, if it is su#ciently small, o#ers a practical method for making Bounded Model Checking co ..."
Abstract

Cited by 24 (4 self)
 Add to MetaCart
For every finite model M and an LTL property #, there exists a number (the Completeness Threshold) such that if there is no counterexample to # in M of length or less, then M #. Finding this number, if it is su#ciently small, o#ers a practical method for making Bounded Model Checking complete. We describe how to compute an overapproximation to for a general LTL property using Buchi automata, following the VardiWolper LTL model checking framework.
Abstractionbased satisfiability solving of Presburger arithmetic
 In: Proc. CAV. Volume 3114 of LNCS. (2004) 308–320
, 2004
"... Abstract. We present a new abstractionbased framework for deciding satisfiability of quantifierfree Presburger arithmetic formulas. Given a Presburger formula φ, our algorithm invokes a SAT solver to produce proofs of unsatisfiability of approximations of φ. These proofs are in turn used to genera ..."
Abstract

Cited by 22 (8 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Abstract. We present a new abstractionbased framework for deciding satisfiability of quantifierfree Presburger arithmetic formulas. Given a Presburger formula φ, our algorithm invokes a SAT solver to produce proofs of unsatisfiability of approximations of φ. These proofs are in turn used to generate abstractions of φ as inputs to a theorem prover. The SATencodings of the approximations of φ are obtained by instantiating the variables of the formula over finite domains. The satisfying integer assignments provided by the theorem prover are then used to selectively increase domain sizes and generate fresh SATencodings of φ. The efficiency of this approach derives from the ability of SAT solvers to extract small unsatisfiable cores, leading to small abstracted formulas. We present experimental results which suggest that our algorithm is considerably more efficient than directly invoking the theorem prover on the original formula. 1
Verification of timed automata via satisfiability checking
 In Proc. Formal Techniques in RealTime and FaultTolerant Systems FTRTFT'02, volume 2469 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science
, 2002
"... Abstract. In this paper we show how to translate boundedlength verification problems for timed automata into formulae in difference logic, a propositional logic enriched with timing constraints. We describe the principles of a satisfiability checker specialized for this logic that we have implement ..."
Abstract

Cited by 20 (3 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Abstract. In this paper we show how to translate boundedlength verification problems for timed automata into formulae in difference logic, a propositional logic enriched with timing constraints. We describe the principles of a satisfiability checker specialized for this logic that we have implemented and report some preliminary experimental results. 1