10,866 research outputs found
Third Conference on Artificial Intelligence for Space Applications, part 2
Topics relative to the application of artificial intelligence to space operations are discussed. New technologies for space station automation, design data capture, computer vision, neural nets, automatic programming, and real time applications are discussed
An overview of very high level software design methods
Very High Level design methods emphasize automatic transfer of requirements to formal design specifications, and/or may concentrate on automatic transformation of formal design specifications that include some semantic information of the system into machine executable form. Very high level design methods range from general domain independent methods to approaches implementable for specific applications or domains. Applying AI techniques, abstract programming methods, domain heuristics, software engineering tools, library-based programming and other methods different approaches for higher level software design are being developed. Though one finds that a given approach does not always fall exactly in any specific class, this paper provides a classification for very high level design methods including examples for each class. These methods are analyzed and compared based on their basic approaches, strengths and feasibility for future expansion toward automatic development of software systems
Logic programming in the context of multiparadigm programming: the Oz experience
Oz is a multiparadigm language that supports logic programming as one of its
major paradigms. A multiparadigm language is designed to support different
programming paradigms (logic, functional, constraint, object-oriented,
sequential, concurrent, etc.) with equal ease. This article has two goals: to
give a tutorial of logic programming in Oz and to show how logic programming
fits naturally into the wider context of multiparadigm programming. Our
experience shows that there are two classes of problems, which we call
algorithmic and search problems, for which logic programming can help formulate
practical solutions. Algorithmic problems have known efficient algorithms.
Search problems do not have known efficient algorithms but can be solved with
search. The Oz support for logic programming targets these two problem classes
specifically, using the concepts needed for each. This is in contrast to the
Prolog approach, which targets both classes with one set of concepts, which
results in less than optimal support for each class. To explain the essential
difference between algorithmic and search programs, we define the Oz execution
model. This model subsumes both concurrent logic programming
(committed-choice-style) and search-based logic programming (Prolog-style).
Instead of Horn clause syntax, Oz has a simple, fully compositional,
higher-order syntax that accommodates the abilities of the language. We
conclude with lessons learned from this work, a brief history of Oz, and many
entry points into the Oz literature.Comment: 48 pages, to appear in the journal "Theory and Practice of Logic
Programming
The AutoProof Verifier: Usability by Non-Experts and on Standard Code
Formal verification tools are often developed by experts for experts; as a
result, their usability by programmers with little formal methods experience
may be severely limited. In this paper, we discuss this general phenomenon with
reference to AutoProof: a tool that can verify the full functional correctness
of object-oriented software. In particular, we present our experiences of using
AutoProof in two contrasting contexts representative of non-expert usage.
First, we discuss its usability by students in a graduate course on software
verification, who were tasked with verifying implementations of various sorting
algorithms. Second, we evaluate its usability in verifying code developed for
programming assignments of an undergraduate course. The first scenario
represents usability by serious non-experts; the second represents usability on
"standard code", developed without full functional verification in mind. We
report our experiences and lessons learnt, from which we derive some general
suggestions for furthering the development of verification tools with respect
to improving their usability.Comment: In Proceedings F-IDE 2015, arXiv:1508.0338
Procedure-modular specification and verification of temporal safety properties
This paper describes ProMoVer, a tool for fully automated procedure-modular verification of Java programs equipped with method-local and global assertions that specify safety properties of sequences of method invocations. Modularity at the procedure-level is a natural instantiation of the modular verification paradigm, where correctness of global properties is relativized on the local properties of the methods rather than on their implementations. Here, it is based on the construction of maximal models for a program model that abstracts away from program data. This approach allows global properties to be verified in the presence of code evolution, multiple method implementations (as arising from software product lines), or even unknown method implementations (as in mobile code for open platforms). ProMoVer automates a typical verification scenario for a previously developed tool set for compositional verification of control flow safety properties, and provides appropriate pre- and post-processing. Both linear-time temporal logic and finite automata are supported as formalisms for expressing local and global safety properties, allowing the user to choose a suitable format for the property at hand. Modularity is exploited by a mechanism for proof reuse that detects and minimizes the verification tasks resulting from changes in the code and the specifications. The verification task is relatively light-weight due to support for abstraction from private methods and automatic extraction of candidate specifications from method implementations. We evaluate the tool on a number of applications from the domains of Java Card and web-based application
- ā¦