Nondeterministic Relational Semantics of a while Program

A relational semantics is a mapping of programs to relations. We consider that the input-output semantics of a program is given by a relation on its set of states; in a nondeterministic context, this relation is calculated by considering the worst behavior of the program (demonic relational semantics). In this paper, we concentrate on while loops. Calculating the relational abstraction (semantics) of a loop is difficult, but showing the correctness of any candidate abstraction is much easier. For functional programs, Mills has described a checking method known as the while statement verification rule. A programming theorem for iterative constructs is proposed, proved, demonstrated and applied for an example. This theorem can be considered as a generalization of the while statement verification to nondeterministic loops.&nbsp

Isabelle/UTP: Mechanised Theory Engineering for the UTP

Isabelle/UTP is a mechanised theory engineering toolkit based on Hoare and He’s Unifying Theories of Programming (UTP). UTP enables the creation of denotational, algebraic, and operational semantics for different programming languages using an alphabetised relational calculus. We provide a semantic embedding of the alphabetised relational calculus in Isabelle/HOL, including new type definitions, relational constructors, automated proof tactics, and accompanying algebraic laws. Isabelle/UTP can be used to both capture laws of programming for different languages, and put these fundamental theorems to work in the creation of associated verification tools, using calculi like Hoare logics. This document describes the relational core of the UTP in Isabelle/HOL

Functional Big-step Semantics

When doing an interactive proof about a piece of software, it is important that the underlying programming language’s semantics does not make the proof unnecessarily difficult or unwieldy. Both smallstep and big-step semantics are commonly used, and the latter is typically given by an inductively defined relation. In this paper, we consider an alternative: using a recursive function akin to an interpreter for the language. The advantages include a better induction theorem, less duplication, accessibility to ordinary functional programmers, and the ease of doing symbolic simulation in proofs via rewriting. We believe that this style of semantics is well suited for compiler verification, including proofs of divergence preservation. We do not claim the invention of this style of semantics: our contribution here is to clarify its value, and to explain how it supports several language features that might appear to require a relational or small-step approach. We illustrate the technique on a simple imperative language with C-like for-loops and a break statement, and compare it to a variety of other approaches. We also provide ML and lambda-calculus based examples to illustrate its generality