Results 1 
8 of
8
Structuring and Automating Hardware Proofs in a HigherOrder TheoremProving Environment
 Formal Methods in System Design
, 1993
"... . In this article we present a structured approach to formal hardware verification by modelling circuits at the registertransfer level using a restricted form of higherorder logic. This restricted form of higherorder logic is sufficient for obtaining succinct descriptions of hierarchically design ..."
Abstract

Cited by 20 (7 self)
 Add to MetaCart
. In this article we present a structured approach to formal hardware verification by modelling circuits at the registertransfer level using a restricted form of higherorder logic. This restricted form of higherorder logic is sufficient for obtaining succinct descriptions of hierarchically designed registertransfer circuits. By exploiting the structure of the underlying hardware proofs and limiting the form of descriptions used, we have attained nearly complete automation in proving the equivalences of the specifications and implementations. A hardwarespecific tool called MEPHISTO converts the original goal into a set of simpler subgoals, which are then automatically solved by a generalpurpose, firstorder prover called FAUST. Furthermore, the complete verification framework is being integrated within a commercial VLSI CAD framework. Keywords: hardware verification, higherorder logic 1 Introduction The past decade has witnessed the spiralling of interest within the academic com...
Experiments in Automating Hardware Verification using Inductive Proof Planning
, 1996
"... We present a new approach to automating the verification of hardware designs based on planning techniques. A database of methods is developed that combines tactics, which construct proofs, using specifications of their behaviour. Given a verification problem, a planner uses the method database to ..."
Abstract

Cited by 13 (6 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We present a new approach to automating the verification of hardware designs based on planning techniques. A database of methods is developed that combines tactics, which construct proofs, using specifications of their behaviour. Given a verification problem, a planner uses the method database to build automatically a specialised tactic to solve the given problem. User interaction is limited to specifying circuits and their properties and, in some cases, suggesting lemmas. We have implemented our work in an extension of the Clam proof planning system. We report on this and its application to verifying a variety of combinational and synchronous sequential circuits including a parameterised multiplier design and a simple computer microprocessor.
Formal Verification of a Basic Circuits Library
 In Proc. of IASTED Int. Conf. on Applied Informatics, Innsbruck (AI 2001
, 2001
"... We describe the results and status of a project aiming to provide a provably correct library of basic circuits. We use the theorem proving system PVS in order to prove circuits such as incrementers, adders, arithmetic units, multipliers, leading zero counters, shifters, and decoders. All specificati ..."
Abstract

Cited by 7 (4 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We describe the results and status of a project aiming to provide a provably correct library of basic circuits. We use the theorem proving system PVS in order to prove circuits such as incrementers, adders, arithmetic units, multipliers, leading zero counters, shifters, and decoders. All specifications and proofs are available on the web.
A Method for Approximate Equivalence Checking
 in Proceedings of the 30th IEEE International Symposium on MultipleValued Logic, Portland OR
, 2000
"... An approximate equivalence checking method is developed based on the use of partial Haar spectral diagrams (HSDs). Partial HSDs are defined and used to represent a subset of the Haar spectral coefficients for two functions. Due to the uniqueness properties of the Haar transform, a necessary conditio ..."
Abstract

Cited by 3 (1 self)
 Add to MetaCart
An approximate equivalence checking method is developed based on the use of partial Haar spectral diagrams (HSDs). Partial HSDs are defined and used to represent a subset of the Haar spectral coefficients for two functions. Due to the uniqueness properties of the Haar transform, a necessary condition for equivalence is that the individual coefficients must have the same value. The probability that two functions are equivalent is then computed based on the number of observed, samevalued, Haar coefficients. The method described here can be useful for the case where two candidate functions require extreme amounts of computational resources for exact equivalence checking. For simplicity, the technique is explained for the binary case first and extensions to Multiple Valued Logic (MVL) are shown afterwards. Experimental results are provided to validate the effectiveness of this approach. 1. Introduction The equivalence checking problem for two logic functions of n variables, f(X) and g(Y...
Dynamic Functional Testing for VLSI Circuits
 IEEE Design and Test of Computers
, 1990
"... Dynamic testing is the process of creating testvectors during simulation and using the output of the simulator to guide the vector generation process. The two main problems of dynamic testing are the design of a highlevel vectorgeneration language, and the design of the interface between the vect ..."
Abstract

Cited by 1 (0 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Dynamic testing is the process of creating testvectors during simulation and using the output of the simulator to guide the vector generation process. The two main problems of dynamic testing are the design of a highlevel vectorgeneration language, and the design of the interface between the vectorgenerator and the simulator. Solutions to these two problems are presented. The paper discusses guidelines for designing a highlevel vector generation language, and presents several examples written in the FHDL driver language which was designed according to these guidelines. The examples illustrate how dynamic testing can be used to simplify the verification of circuits at the functional level. The paper presents a solution to the interface problem which is designed around a special interface data structure. This data structure supports several different styles of vector generators and also supports the interactive debugging of circuits. The interface data structure also supports the independent simulation of subcircuit instances and the dynamic creation and
Probabilistic Equivalence Checking Using Partial Haar Spectral Diagrams
 Proc. 4th Int. Workshop Applications of the Reed–Muller Expansion in Circuit Design
, 1999
"... A probabilistic equivalence checking method is developed based on the use of partial Haar spectral diagrams (HSDs). Partial HSDs are defined and used to represent a subset of Haar spectral coefficients for two Boolean functions. The resulting coefficients are then used to compute and to iteratively ..."
Abstract

Cited by 1 (0 self)
 Add to MetaCart
A probabilistic equivalence checking method is developed based on the use of partial Haar spectral diagrams (HSDs). Partial HSDs are defined and used to represent a subset of Haar spectral coefficients for two Boolean functions. The resulting coefficients are then used to compute and to iteratively refine the probability that two functions are equivalent. This problem has applications in both logic synthesis and verification. The method described here can be useful for the case where two candidate functions require extreme amounts of memory for a complete BDD representation. Experimental results are provided to validate the effectiveness of this approach. 1 Introduction The equivalence checking problem for two Boolean functions of n variables, f(X) and g(Y ), is addressed in this work. Here, we assume that the correspondence between the vectors of variables, X and Y is known. Although this problem is easily solved when f and g can be completely represented in BDD form, problems can ar...
The CATHEDRAL I1 Silicon Compiler [l] synthe
"... Different types of problems in the hardware verification field have inspired different methodologies to tackle them. When different approaches can verify the same class of circuits, at a given level of abstraction, it is often the case that each one has advantages and drawbacks with respect to the ..."
Abstract
 Add to MetaCart
Different types of problems in the hardware verification field have inspired different methodologies to tackle them. When different approaches can verify the same class of circuits, at a given level of abstraction, it is often the case that each one has advantages and drawbacks with respect to the others. Comparing different methodologies is important, not only to identify the right tool for the right task, but also to evaluate the compromises of different approaches. This paper summarises a comparison between the theorem proving environments HOL and BoyerMoore, based on a practical experience with both systems for the verification of a parameterised module from the CATHE DRAL Silicon Compiler library.