Results 1  10
of
10
LiftedFL: A Pragmatic Implementation of Combined Model Checking and Theorem Proving
, 1999
"... Abstract. Combining theorem proving and model checking o ers the tantalizing possibility of e ciently reasoning about large circuits at high levels of abstraction. We have constructed a system that seamlessly integrates symbolic trajectory evaluation based model checking with theorem proving in a hi ..."
Abstract

Cited by 34 (3 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
Abstract. Combining theorem proving and model checking o ers the tantalizing possibility of e ciently reasoning about large circuits at high levels of abstraction. We have constructed a system that seamlessly integrates symbolic trajectory evaluation based model checking with theorem proving in a higherorder classical logic. The approach is made possible by using the same programming language ( ) as both the meta and object language of theorem proving. This is done by \lifting &quot;,essentially deeply embedding in itself. The approach is a pragmatic solution that provides an e cient and extensible veri cation environment. Our approach is generally applicable to any dialect of the ML programming language and any modelchecking algorithm that has practical inference rules for combining results. 1
Integrating External Deduction Tools with ACL2
 Sutcliffe (Eds.), Proceedings of the 6th International Workshop on Implementation of Logics (IWIL 2006
, 2006
"... We present an interface connecting the ACL2 theorem prover with external deduction tools. The logic of ACL2 contains several constructs intended to facilitate structuring of interactive proof development, which complicates the design of such an interface. We discuss some of these complexities and de ..."
Abstract

Cited by 7 (5 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
We present an interface connecting the ACL2 theorem prover with external deduction tools. The logic of ACL2 contains several constructs intended to facilitate structuring of interactive proof development, which complicates the design of such an interface. We discuss some of these complexities and develop a precise specification of the requirements from external tools for sound connection with ACL2. We also develop constructs within ACL2 to enable the developers of external tools to satisfy our specifications. 1
Hacking and extending ACL2
 In ACL2 Workshop 2007
, 2007
"... The ACL2 theorem prover provides the user a wide range of mechanisms for customization and extension while preserving soundness. ACL2 researchers and power users, however, sometimes work outside this realm in order to add new core functionality, to attach new user interfaces, or to connect ACL2 with ..."
Abstract

Cited by 1 (1 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
The ACL2 theorem prover provides the user a wide range of mechanisms for customization and extension while preserving soundness. ACL2 researchers and power users, however, sometimes work outside this realm in order to add new core functionality, to attach new user interfaces, or to connect ACL2 with other reasoning engines. We first describe new features of ACL2 that enable users to add to the set of “trusted code ” in a trackable way. The advantage is that users can dynamically install system extensions they choose to trust in reaching their verification results, and ACL2 will track what was trusted in the process. We then describe features, idioms, and abstractions that leverage the freedoms given to trusted code and the dynamic, reflective nature of Common Lisp to modify ACL2 in deep ways at runtime. Our abstractions are designed to make it easier for system hackers to preserve sound reasoning when writing metatheoretic code. 1.
Using Theorem Proving with Algorithmic Techniques for LargeScale System Verification
"... ..."
(Show Context)
Integrating External Deduction Tools with
"... We present an interface connecting the ACL2 theorem prover with external deduction tools. The ACL2 logic contains several mechanisms for proof structuring, which are important to the construction of industrialscale proofs. The complexity induced by these mechanisms makes the design of the interface ..."
Abstract
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
We present an interface connecting the ACL2 theorem prover with external deduction tools. The ACL2 logic contains several mechanisms for proof structuring, which are important to the construction of industrialscale proofs. The complexity induced by these mechanisms makes the design of the interface challenging. We discuss some of the challenges, and develop a precise specification of the requirements on the external tools for a sound connection with ACL2. We also develop constructs within ACL2 to enable the developers of external tools to satisfy our specifications. The interface is available with the ACL2 theorem prover starting from Version 3.2, and we describe several applications of the interface. Key words: automated reasoning, decision procedures, firstorder logic, interfaces, theorem proving Preprint submitted to Elsevier 1
ACL2SIX: A Hint used to Integrate a Theorem Prover and an Automated Verification Tool
"... Abstract — We present a hardware verification environment that integrates the ACL2 theorem prover and SixthSense, the IBM internal formal verification tool. In this environment, SixthSense is called through an ACL2 function acl2six that makes use of a generalpurpose external interface added to the ..."
Abstract
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
Abstract — We present a hardware verification environment that integrates the ACL2 theorem prover and SixthSense, the IBM internal formal verification tool. In this environment, SixthSense is called through an ACL2 function acl2six that makes use of a generalpurpose external interface added to the ACL2 theorem prover. This interface allows connecting any decision procedures and modelchecker to ACL2 by simply writing ACL2 functions. Our environment exploits a unique approach to connect the logic of generalpurpose theorem prover and machine designs in VHDL, rather than a language embedding. With an example of a pipelined multiplier, we show how our environment can be used to divide a large verification problem into a number of simpler problems, which can be verified using automated verification engines. I.