An Entailment Checker for Separation Logic with Inductive Definitions An Entailment Checker for Separation Logic with Inductive Definitions

International audienceIn this paper, we present Inductor, a checker for entailments between mutually recursive predicates, whose inductive definitions contain ground constraints belonging to the quantifier-free fragment of Separation Logic. Our tool implements a proof-search method for a cyclic proof system that we have shown to be sound and complete, under certain semantic restrictions involving the set of constraints in a given inductive system. Dedicated decision procedures from the DPLL(T)-based SMT solver CVC4 are used to establish the satisfiability of Separation Logic formu-lae. Given inductive predicate definitions, an entailment query, and a proof-search strategy, Inductor uses a compact tree structure to explore all derivations enabled by the strategy. A successful result is accompanied by a proof, while an unsuccessful one is supported by a counterexample

A Complete Cyclic Proof System for Inductive Entailments in First Order Logic

International audienceIn this paper we develop a cyclic proof system for the problem of inclusion between the least sets of models of mutually recursive predicates, when the ground constraints in the inductive definitions are quantifier-free formulae of first order logic. The proof system consists of a small set of inference rules, inspired by a top-down language inclusion algorithm for tree automata [9]. We show the proof system to be sound, in general, and complete, under certain semantic restrictions involving the set of constraints in the inductive system. Moreover, we investigate the computational complexity of checking these restrictions, when the function symbols in the logic are given the canonical Herbrand interpretation

Structural Invariants for Parametric Verification of Systems with Almost Linear Architectures

We consider concurrent systems consisting of a finite but unknown number of components , that are replicated instances of a given set of finite state automata. The components communicate by executing interactions which are simultaneous atomic state changes of a set of components. We specify both the type of interactions (e.g. rendezvous , broadcast) and the topology (i.e. architecture) of the system (e.g. pipeline, ring) via a decidable interaction logic, which is embedded in the classical weak sequential calculus of one successor (WS1S). Proving correctness of such system for safety properties , such as deadlock freedom or mutual exclusion, requires the inference of an induc-tive invariant that subsumes the set of reachable states and avoids the unsafe states. Our method synthesizes such invariants directly from the formula describing the interactions , without costly fixed point iterations. We applied our technique to the verification of several textbook examples, such as dining philosophers, mutual exclusion protocols and concurrent systems with preemption and priorities