The Java Modeling Language (JML) can be used to specify the detailed design of Java classes and interfaces by adding annotations to Java source files. The aim of JML is to provide a specification language that is easy to use for Java programmers and that is supported by a wide range of tools for specification type-checking, runtime debugging, static analysis, and verification. This paper

Daikon is an implementation of dynamic detection of likely invariants; that is, the Daikon invariant detector reports likely program invariants. An invariant is a property that holds at a certain point or points in a program; these are often used in assert statements, documentation, and formal specifications. Examples include being constant (x = a), non-zero (x ̸ = 0), being in a

While a typical software component has a clearly specified (static) interface in terms of the methods and the input/output types they support, information about the correct sequencing of method calls the client must invoke is usually undocumented. In this paper, we propose a novel solution for automatically extracting such temporal specifications for Java classes. Given a Java class, and a safety property such as “the exception E should not be raised”, the corresponding (dynamic) interface is the most general way of invoking the methods in the class so that the safety property is not violated. Our synthesis method first constructs a symbolic representation of the finite state-transition system obtained from the class using predicate abstraction. Constructing the interface then corresponds to solving a partial-information two-player game on this symbolic graph. We present a sound approach to solve this computationally-hard problem approximately using algorithms for learning finite automata and symbolic model checking for branching-time logics. We describe an implementation of the proposed techniques in the tool JIST — Java Interface Synthesis Tool—and demonstrate that the tool can construct interfaces accurately and efficiently for sample Java2SDK library classes.

Programs usually follow many implicit programming rules, most of which are too tedious to be documented by programmers. When these rules are violated by programmers who are unaware of or forget about them, defects can be easily introduced. Therefore, it is highly desirable to have tools to automatically extract such rules and also to automatically detect violations. Previous work in this direction focuses on simple function-pair based programming rules and additionally requires programmers to provide rule templates. This paper proposes a general method called PR-Miner that uses a data mining technique called frequent itemset mining to efficiently extract implicit programming rules from large software code written in an industrial programming language such as C, requiring little effort from programmers and no prior knowledge of the software. Benefiting from frequent itemset mining, PR-Miner can extract programming

This paper presents the operational difference technique for generating, augmenting, and minimizing test suites. The technique is analogous to structural code coverage techniques, but it operates in the semantic domain of program properties rather than the syntactic domain of program text. The operational difference technique automatically selects test cases; it assumes only the existence of a source of test cases. The technique dynamically generates operational abstractions (which describe observed behavior and are syntactically identical to formal specifications) from test suite executions. Test suites can be generated by adding cases until the operational abstraction stops changing. The resulting test suites are as small, and detect as many faults, as suites with 100% branch coverage, and are better at detecting certain common faults.

Abstract. This contribution proposes a set of criteria that distinguish a grand challenge in science or engineering from the many other kinds of short-term or long-term research problems that engage the interest of scientists and engineers. As an example drawn from Computer Science, it revives an old challenge: the construction and application of a verifying compiler that guarantees correctness of a program before running it. Introduction. The primary purpose of the formulation and promulgation of a grand challenge is the advancement of science or engineering. A grand challenge represents a commitment by a significant section of the research community to work together towards a common goal, agreed to be valuable and achievable by a team effort within a predicted timescale. The challenge is formulated by the

We present and evaluate an automatic tool for extracting algebraic specifications from Java classes. Our tool maps a Java class to an algebraic signature and then uses the signature to generate a large number of terms. The tool evaluates these terms and based on the results of the evaluation, it proposes equations. Finally, the tool generalizes equations to axioms and eliminates many redundant axioms. Since our tool uses dynamic information, it is not guaranteed to be sound or complete. However, we manually inspected the axioms generated in our experiments and found them all to be correct.

Static checking can verify the absence of errors in a program, but often requires written annotations or speci cations. As a result, static checking can be dicult to use eectively: it can be dicult to determine a speci cation and tedious to annotate programs. Automated tools that aid the annotation process can decrease the cost of static checking and enable it to be more widely used.

This paper presents two sets of observations relating static and dynamic analysis. The first concerns synergies between static and dynamic analysis. Wherever one is utilized, the other may also be applied, often in a complementary way, and existing analyses should inspire different approaches to the same problem. Furthermore, existing static and dynamic analyses often have very similar structure and technical approaches. The second observation is that some static and dynamic approaches are similar in that each considers, and generalizes from, a subset of all possible executions. Researchers need to develop new analyses that complement existing ones. More importantly, researchers need to erase the boundaries between static and dynamic analysis and create unified analyses that can operate in either mode, or in a mode that blends the strengths of both approaches.

DSD-Crasher is a bug finding tool that follows a three-step approach to program analysis: D. Capture the program’s intended execution behavior with dynamic invariant detection. The derived invariants exclude many unwanted values from the program’s input domain. S. Statically analyze the program within the restricted input domain to explore many paths. D. Automatically generate test cases that focus on reproducing the predictions of the static analysis. Thereby confirmed results are feasible. This three-step approach yields benefits compared to past two-step combinations in the literature. In our evaluation with third-party applications, we demonstrate higher precision over tools that lack a dynamic step and higher efficiency over tools that lack a static step.