Enhancing Predicate Pairing with Abstraction for Relational Verification

Relational verification is a technique that aims at proving properties that relate two different program fragments, or two different program runs. It has been shown that constrained Horn clauses (CHCs) can effectively be used for relational verification by applying a CHC transformation, called predicate pairing, which allows the CHC solver to infer relations among arguments of different predicates. In this paper we study how the effects of the predicate pairing transformation can be enhanced by using various abstract domains based on linear arithmetic (i.e., the domain of convex polyhedra and some of its subdomains) during the transformation. After presenting an algorithm for predicate pairing with abstraction, we report on the experiments we have performed on over a hundred relational verification problems by using various abstract domains. The experiments have been performed by using the VeriMAP transformation and verification system, together with the Parma Polyhedra Library (PPL) and the Z3 solver for CHCs.Comment: Pre-proceedings paper presented at the 27th International Symposium on Logic-Based Program Synthesis and Transformation (LOPSTR 2017), Namur, Belgium, 10-12 October 2017 (arXiv:1708.07854

Combining Forward and Backward Abstract Interpretation of Horn Clauses

Alternation of forward and backward analyses is a standard technique in abstract interpretation of programs, which is in particular useful when we wish to prove unreachability of some undesired program states. The current state-of-the-art technique for combining forward (bottom-up, in logic programming terms) and backward (top-down) abstract interpretation of Horn clauses is query-answer transformation. It transforms a system of Horn clauses, such that standard forward analysis can propagate constraints both forward, and backward from a goal. Query-answer transformation is effective, but has issues that we wish to address. For that, we introduce a new backward collecting semantics, which is suitable for alternating forward and backward abstract interpretation of Horn clauses. We show how the alternation can be used to prove unreachability of the goal and how every subsequent run of an analysis yields a refined model of the system. Experimentally, we observe that combining forward and backward analyses is important for analysing systems that encode questions about reachability in C programs. In particular, the combination that follows our new semantics improves the precision of our own abstract interpreter, including when compared to a forward analysis of a query-answer-transformed system.Comment: Francesco Ranzato. 24th International Static Analysis Symposium (SAS), Aug 2017, New York City, United States. Springer, Static Analysi

Decomposition by tree dimension in Horn clause verification

This volume contains the papers selected among those which were presented at the 3rd International Workshop on Verification and Program Transformation (VPT 2015) held in London, UK, on April 11th, 2015. Previous editions of the Workshop were held at Saint-Petersburg (Russia) in 2013, and Vienna (Austria) in 2014. Those papers show that methods and tools developed in the field of program transformation such as partial evaluation and fold/unfold transformations, and supercompilation, can be applied in the verification of software systems. They also show how some program verification methods, such as model checking techniques, abstract interpretation, SAT and SMT solving, and automated theorem proving, can be used to enhance program transformation techniques, thereby making these techniques more powerful and useful in practice

Precondition Inference via Partitioning of Initial States

Precondition inference is a non-trivial task with several applications in program analysis and verification. We present a novel iterative method for automatically deriving sufficient preconditions for safety and unsafety of programs which introduces a new dimension of modularity. Each iteration maintains over-approximations of the set of \emph{safe} and \emph{unsafe} \emph{initial} states. Then we repeatedly use the current abstractions to partition the program's \emph{initial} states into those known to be safe, known to be unsafe and unknown, and construct a revised program focusing on those initial states that are not yet known to be safe or unsafe. An experimental evaluation of the method on a set of software verification benchmarks shows that it can solve problems which are not solvable using previous methods.Comment: 19 pages, 8 figure

Inductive Program Synthesis via Iterative Forward-Backward Abstract Interpretation

A key challenge in example-based program synthesis is the gigantic search space of programs. To address this challenge, various work proposed to use abstract interpretation to prune the search space. However, most of existing approaches have focused only on forward abstract interpretation, and thus cannot fully exploit the power of abstract interpretation. In this paper, we propose a novel approach to inductive program synthesis via iterative forward-backward abstract interpretation. The forward abstract interpretation computes possible outputs of a program given inputs, while the backward abstract interpretation computes possible inputs of a program given outputs. By iteratively performing the two abstract interpretations in an alternating fashion, we can effectively determine if any completion of each partial program as a candidate can satisfy the input-output examples. We apply our approach to a standard formulation, syntax-guided synthesis (SyGuS), thereby supporting a wide range of inductive synthesis tasks. We have implemented our approach and evaluated it on a set of benchmarks from the prior work. The experimental results show that our approach significantly outperforms the state-of-the-art approaches thanks to the sophisticated abstract interpretation techniques