Results 1 - 10
of
13
Mathematizing C++ Concurrency
"... Shared-memory concurrency in C and C++ is pervasive in systems programming, but has long been poorly defined. This motivated an ongoing shared effort by the standards committees to specify concurrent behaviour in the next versions of both languages. They aim to provide strong guarantees for race-fre ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 10 (6 self)
- Add to MetaCart
Shared-memory concurrency in C and C++ is pervasive in systems programming, but has long been poorly defined. This motivated an ongoing shared effort by the standards committees to specify concurrent behaviour in the next versions of both languages. They aim to provide strong guarantees for race-free programs, together with new (but subtle) relaxed-memory atomic primitives for highperformance concurrent code. However, the current draft standards, while the result of careful deliberation, are not yet clear and rigorous definitions, and harbour substantial problems in their details. In this paper we establish a mathematical (yet readable) semantics for C++ concurrency. We aim to capture the intent of the current (‘Final Committee’) Draft as closely as possible, but discuss changes that fix many of its problems. We prove that a proposed x86 implementation of the concurrency primitives is correct with respect to the x86-TSO model, and describe our CPPMEM tool for exploring the semantics of examples, using code generated from our Isabelle/HOL definitions. Having already motivated changes to the draft standard, this work will aid discussion of any further changes, provide a correctness condition for compilers, and give a much-needed basis for analysis and verification of concurrent C and C++ programs.
Monotonicity Inference for Higher-Order Formulas
, 2010
"... Formulas are often monotonic in the sense that if the formula is satisfiable for given domains of discourse, it is also satisfiable for all larger domains. Monotonicity is undecidable in general, but we devised two calculi that infer it in many cases for higher-order logic. The stronger calculus has ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 5 (5 self)
- Add to MetaCart
Formulas are often monotonic in the sense that if the formula is satisfiable for given domains of discourse, it is also satisfiable for all larger domains. Monotonicity is undecidable in general, but we devised two calculi that infer it in many cases for higher-order logic. The stronger calculus has been implemented in Isabelle’s model finder Nitpick, where it is used to prune the search space, leading to dramatic speed improvements for formulas involving many atomic types.
Satisfiability modulo recursive programs
- In Static Analysis Symposium (SAS
, 2011
"... Abstract. We present a semi-decision procedure for checking satisfiability of expressive correctness properties of recursive first-order functional programs. In our approach, both properties and programs are expressed in the same language, a subset of Scala. We implemented our procedure and integrat ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 2 (1 self)
- Add to MetaCart
Abstract. We present a semi-decision procedure for checking satisfiability of expressive correctness properties of recursive first-order functional programs. In our approach, both properties and programs are expressed in the same language, a subset of Scala. We implemented our procedure and integrated it with the Z3 SMT solver and the Scala compiler. Our procedure is sound for counterexamples and for proofs of terminating functions. It is terminating and thus complete for many important classes of specifications, including all satisfiable formulas and all formulas where recursive functions satisfy certain syntactic restrictions. Using our system, Leon, we verified detailed correctness properties for functional data structure implementations, as well as syntax tree manipulations. We have found our system to be fast for both finding counterexamples and finding correctness proofs, and to scale to larger programs than alternative techniques. 1
Smart testing of functional programs in Isabelle
"... Abstract. We present a novel counterexample generator for the interactive theorem prover Isabelle based on a compiler that synthesizes test data generators for functional programming languages (e.g. ML, Haskell) from specifications in Isabelle. In contrast to naive type-based test data generators, t ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 1 (1 self)
- Add to MetaCart
Abstract. We present a novel counterexample generator for the interactive theorem prover Isabelle based on a compiler that synthesizes test data generators for functional programming languages (e.g. ML, Haskell) from specifications in Isabelle. In contrast to naive type-based test data generators, the smart generators take the preconditions into account and only generate tests that fulfill the preconditions. The smart generators are constructed by a compiler that reformulates the preconditions as logic programs and analyzes them with an enriched mode inference. From this inference, the compiler can construct the desired generators in the functional programming language. Applying these test data generators reduces the number of tests significantly and enables us to find errors in specifications where naive random and exhaustive testing fail. 1
Generating Counterexamples for Structural Inductions by Exploiting Nonstandard Models
"... Abstract. Induction proofs often fail because the stated theorem is noninductive, in which case the user must strengthen the theorem or prove auxiliary properties before performing the induction step. (Counter)model finders are useful for detecting non-theorems, but they will not find any counterexa ..."
Abstract
- Add to MetaCart
Abstract. Induction proofs often fail because the stated theorem is noninductive, in which case the user must strengthen the theorem or prove auxiliary properties before performing the induction step. (Counter)model finders are useful for detecting non-theorems, but they will not find any counterexamples for noninductive theorems. We explain how to apply a well-known concept from first-order logic, nonstandard models, to the detection of noninductive invariants. Our work was done in the context of the proof assistant Isabelle/HOL and the counterexample generator Nitpick. 1
Relational Analysis of (Co)inductive Predicates, (Co)algebraic Datatypes, and (Co)recursive Functions ⋆
"... Abstract. This paper presents techniques for applying a finite relational model finder to logical specifications that involve (co)inductive predicates, (co)algebraic datatypes, and (co)recursive functions. In contrast to previous work, which focused on algebraic datatypes and restricted occurrences ..."
Abstract
- Add to MetaCart
Abstract. This paper presents techniques for applying a finite relational model finder to logical specifications that involve (co)inductive predicates, (co)algebraic datatypes, and (co)recursive functions. In contrast to previous work, which focused on algebraic datatypes and restricted occurrences of unbounded quantifiers in formulas, we can handle arbitrary formulas by means of a three-valued Kleene logic. The techniques form the basis of the counterexample generator Nitpick for Isabelle/HOL. As a case study, we consider a coalgebraic lazy list type. 1
Nitpick: A Counterexample Generator for Isabelle/HOL Based on the Relational Model Finder Kodkod (System Description)
, 2010
"... ..."
Automatic Proof and Disproof in Isabelle/HOL
"... Abstract. Isabelle/HOL is a popular interactive theorem prover based on higherorder logic. It owes its success to its ease of use and powerful automation. Much of the automation is performed by external tools: The metaprover Sledgehammer relies on resolution provers and SMT solvers for its proof sea ..."
Abstract
- Add to MetaCart
Abstract. Isabelle/HOL is a popular interactive theorem prover based on higherorder logic. It owes its success to its ease of use and powerful automation. Much of the automation is performed by external tools: The metaprover Sledgehammer relies on resolution provers and SMT solvers for its proof search, the counterexample generator Quickcheck uses the ML compiler as a fast evaluator for ground formulas, and its rival Nitpick is based on the model finder Kodkod, which performs a reduction to SAT. Together with the Isar structured proof format and a new asynchronous user interface, these tools have radically transformed the Isabelle user experience. This paper provides an overview of the main automatic proof and disproof tools. 1
Smart test data generators via logic programming ∗
"... We present a novel counterexample generator for the interactive theorem prover Isabelle based on a compiler that synthesizes test data generators for functional programming languages (e.g. Standard ML, OCaml) from specifications in Isabelle. In contrast to naive type-based test data generators, the ..."
Abstract
- Add to MetaCart
We present a novel counterexample generator for the interactive theorem prover Isabelle based on a compiler that synthesizes test data generators for functional programming languages (e.g. Standard ML, OCaml) from specifications in Isabelle. In contrast to naive type-based test data generators, the smart generators take the preconditions into account and only generate tests that fulfill the preconditions. The smart generators are constructed by a compiler that reformulates the preconditions as logic programs and analyzes them by an enriched mode inference. From this inference, the compiler can construct the desired generators in the functional programming language. These test data generators are applied to find errors in specifications, as we show in a case study of a hotel key card system.

