Formal verification of higher-order probabilistic programs

Probabilistic programming provides a convenient lingua franca for writing succinct and rigorous descriptions of probabilistic models and inference tasks. Several probabilistic programming languages, including Anglican, Church or Hakaru, derive their expressiveness from a powerful combination of continuous distributions, conditioning, and higher-order functions. Although very important for practical applications, these combined features raise fundamental challenges for program semantics and verification. Several recent works offer promising answers to these challenges, but their primary focus is on semantical issues. In this paper, we take a step further and we develop a set of program logics, named PPV, for proving properties of programs written in an expressive probabilistic higher-order language with continuous distributions and operators for conditioning distributions by real-valued functions. Pleasingly, our program logics retain the comfortable reasoning style of informal proofs thanks to carefully selected axiomatizations of key results from probability theory. The versatility of our logics is illustrated through the formal verification of several intricate examples from statistics, probabilistic inference, and machine learning. We further show the expressiveness of our logics by giving sound embeddings of existing logics. In particular, we do this in a parametric way by showing how the semantics idea of (unary and relational) TT-lifting can be internalized in our logics. The soundness of PPV follows by interpreting programs and assertions in quasi-Borel spaces (QBS), a recently proposed variant of Borel spaces with a good structure for interpreting higher order probabilistic programs

Fifty years of Hoare's Logic

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

Advanced Probabilistic Couplings for Differential Privacy

Differential privacy is a promising formal approach to data privacy, which provides a quantitative bound on the privacy cost of an algorithm that operates on sensitive information. Several tools have been developed for the formal verification of differentially private algorithms, including program logics and type systems. However, these tools do not capture fundamental techniques that have emerged in recent years, and cannot be used for reasoning about cutting-edge differentially private algorithms. Existing techniques fail to handle three broad classes of algorithms: 1) algorithms where privacy depends accuracy guarantees, 2) algorithms that are analyzed with the advanced composition theorem, which shows slower growth in the privacy cost, 3) algorithms that interactively accept adaptive inputs. We address these limitations with a new formalism extending apRHL, a relational program logic that has been used for proving differential privacy of non-interactive algorithms, and incorporating aHL, a (non-relational) program logic for accuracy properties. We illustrate our approach through a single running example, which exemplifies the three classes of algorithms and explores new variants of the Sparse Vector technique, a well-studied algorithm from the privacy literature. We implement our logic in EasyCrypt, and formally verify privacy. We also introduce a novel coupling technique called \emph{optimal subset coupling} that may be of independent interest

Proving uniformity and independence by self-composition and coupling

Proof by coupling is a classical proof technique for establishing probabilistic properties of two probabilistic processes, like stochastic dominance and rapid mixing of Markov chains. More recently, couplings have been investigated as a useful abstraction for formal reasoning about relational properties of probabilistic programs, in particular for modeling reduction-based cryptographic proofs and for verifying differential privacy. In this paper, we demonstrate that probabilistic couplings can be used for verifying non-relational probabilistic properties. Specifically, we show that the program logic pRHL---whose proofs are formal versions of proofs by coupling---can be used for formalizing uniformity and probabilistic independence. We formally verify our main examples using the EasyCrypt proof assistant

Stochastic Invariants for Probabilistic Termination

Termination is one of the basic liveness properties, and we study the termination problem for probabilistic programs with real-valued variables. Previous works focused on the qualitative problem that asks whether an input program terminates with probability~1 (almost-sure termination). A powerful approach for this qualitative problem is the notion of ranking supermartingales with respect to a given set of invariants. The quantitative problem (probabilistic termination) asks for bounds on the termination probability. A fundamental and conceptual drawback of the existing approaches to address probabilistic termination is that even though the supermartingales consider the probabilistic behavior of the programs, the invariants are obtained completely ignoring the probabilistic aspect. In this work we address the probabilistic termination problem for linear-arithmetic probabilistic programs with nondeterminism. We define the notion of {\em stochastic invariants}, which are constraints along with a probability bound that the constraints hold. We introduce a concept of {\em repulsing supermartingales}. First, we show that repulsing supermartingales can be used to obtain bounds on the probability of the stochastic invariants. Second, we show the effectiveness of repulsing supermartingales in the following three ways: (1)~With a combination of ranking and repulsing supermartingales we can compute lower bounds on the probability of termination; (2)~repulsing supermartingales provide witnesses for refutation of almost-sure termination; and (3)~with a combination of ranking and repulsing supermartingales we can establish persistence properties of probabilistic programs. We also present results on related computational problems and an experimental evaluation of our approach on academic examples.Comment: Full version of a paper published at POPL 2017. 20 page

A Relational Logic for Higher-Order Programs

Relational program verification is a variant of program verification where one can reason about two programs and as a special case about two executions of a single program on different inputs. Relational program verification can be used for reasoning about a broad range of properties, including equivalence and refinement, and specialized notions such as continuity, information flow security or relative cost. In a higher-order setting, relational program verification can be achieved using relational refinement type systems, a form of refinement types where assertions have a relational interpretation. Relational refinement type systems excel at relating structurally equivalent terms but provide limited support for relating terms with very different structures. We present a logic, called Relational Higher Order Logic (RHOL), for proving relational properties of a simply typed $\lambda$-calculus with inductive types and recursive definitions. RHOL retains the type-directed flavour of relational refinement type systems but achieves greater expressivity through rules which simultaneously reason about the two terms as well as rules which only contemplate one of the two terms. We show that RHOL has strong foundations, by proving an equivalence with higher-order logic (HOL), and leverage this equivalence to derive key meta-theoretical properties: subject reduction, admissibility of a transitivity rule and set-theoretical soundness. Moreover, we define sound embeddings for several existing relational type systems such as relational refinement types and type systems for dependency analysis and relative cost, and we verify examples that were out of reach of prior work.Comment: Submitted to ICFP 201