Learning to Prove Safety over Parameterised Concurrent Systems (Full Version)

We revisit the classic problem of proving safety over parameterised concurrent systems, i.e., an infinite family of finite-state concurrent systems that are represented by some finite (symbolic) means. An example of such an infinite family is a dining philosopher protocol with any number n of processes (n being the parameter that defines the infinite family). Regular model checking is a well-known generic framework for modelling parameterised concurrent systems, where an infinite set of configurations (resp. transitions) is represented by a regular set (resp. regular transducer). Although verifying safety properties in the regular model checking framework is undecidable in general, many sophisticated semi-algorithms have been developed in the past fifteen years that can successfully prove safety in many practical instances. In this paper, we propose a simple solution to synthesise regular inductive invariants that makes use of Angluin's classic L* algorithm (and its variants). We provide a termination guarantee when the set of configurations reachable from a given set of initial configurations is regular. We have tested L* algorithm on standard (as well as new) examples in regular model checking including the dining philosopher protocol, the dining cryptographer protocol, and several mutual exclusion protocols (e.g. Bakery, Burns, Szymanski, and German). Our experiments show that, despite the simplicity of our solution, it can perform at least as well as existing semi-algorithms.Comment: Full version of FMCAD'17 pape

Towards Generic Monitors for Object-Oriented Real-Time Maude Specifications

Non-Functional Properties (NFPs) are crucial in the design of software. Specification of systems is used in the very first phases of the software development process for the stakeholders to make decisions on which architecture or platform to use. These specifications may be an- alyzed using different formalisms and techniques, simulation being one of them. During a simulation, the relevant data involved in the anal- ysis of the NFPs of interest can be measured using monitors. In this work, we show how monitors can be parametrically specified so that the instrumentation of specifications to be monitored can be automatically performed. We prove that the original specification and the automati- cally obtained specification with monitors are bisimilar by construction. This means that the changes made on the original system by adding monitors do not affect its behavior. This approach allows us to have a library of possible monitors that can be safely added to analyze different properties, possibly on different objects of our systems, at will.Universidad de Málaga, Campus de Excelencia Internacional Andalucía Tech. Spanish MINECO/FEDER project TIN2014-52034-R, NSF Grant CNS 13-19109

An Assertional Proof System for Multithreaded Java - Theory and Tool Support

Besides the features of a class-based object-oriented language, Java integrates concurrency via its thread classes, allowing for a multithreaded flow of control. The concurrency model includes shared-variable concurrency via instance variables, coordination via reentrant synchronization monitors, synchronous message passing, and dynamic thread creation. To reason about safety properties of multithreaded Java programs, we introduce a tool-supported assertional proof method for JavaMT ("Multi-Threaded Java"), a small sublanguage of Java, covering the mentioned concurrency issues as well as the object-based core of Java. The verification method is formulated in terms of proof-outlines, where the assertions are layered into local ones specifying the behavior of a single instance, and global ones taking care of the connections between objects. We establish the soundness and the completeness of the proof system. From an annotated program, a number of verification conditions are generated and handed over to the interactive theorem prover PVS.IST project Omega (IST-2001-33522) NWO/DFG project Mobi-J (RO 1122/9-1, RO 1122/9-2)UBL - phd migration 201

TLA+ Proofs

TLA+ is a specification language based on standard set theory and temporal logic that has constructs for hierarchical proofs. We describe how to write TLA+ proofs and check them with TLAPS, the TLA+ Proof System. We use Peterson's mutual exclusion algorithm as a simple example to describe the features of TLAPS and show how it and the Toolbox (an IDE for TLA+) help users to manage large, complex proofs.Comment: A shorter version of this article appeared in the proceedings of the conference Formal Methods 2012 (FM 2012, Paris, France, Springer LNCS 7436, pp. 147-154

Open architectures for formal reasoning and deductive technologies for software development

The objective of this project is to develop an open architecture for formal reasoning systems. One goal is to provide a framework with a clear semantic basis for specification and instantiation of generic components; construction of complex systems by interconnecting components; and for making incremental improvements and tailoring to specific applications. Another goal is to develop methods for specifying component interfaces and interactions to facilitate use of existing and newly built systems as 'off the shelf' components, thus helping bridge the gap between producers and consumers of reasoning systems. In this report we summarize results in several areas: our data base of reasoning systems; a theory of binding structures; a theory of components of open systems; a framework for specifying components of open reasoning system; and an analysis of the integration of rewriting and linear arithmetic modules in Boyer-Moore using the above framework

Verifying Safety Properties With the TLA+ Proof System

TLAPS, the TLA+ proof system, is a platform for the development and mechanical verification of TLA+ proofs written in a declarative style requiring little background beyond elementary mathematics. The language supports hierarchical and non-linear proof construction and verification, and it is independent of any verification tool or strategy. A Proof Manager uses backend verifiers such as theorem provers, proof assistants, SMT solvers, and decision procedures to check TLA+ proofs. This paper documents the first public release of TLAPS, distributed with a BSD-like license. It handles almost all the non-temporal part of TLA+ as well as the temporal reasoning needed to prove standard safety properties, in particular invariance and step simulation, but not liveness properties

Fifty years of Hoare's Logic

We present a history of Hoare's logic.Comment: 79 pages. To appear in Formal Aspects of Computin