Towards Erlang Verification by Term Rewriting

The final publication is available at Springer via http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-14125-1_7This paper presents a transformational approach to the verification of Erlang programs. We define a stepwise transformation from (first-order) Erlang programs to (non-deterministic) term rewrite systems that compute an overapproximation of the original Erlang program. In this way, existing techniques for term rewriting become available. Furthermore, one can use narrowing as a symbolic execution extension of rewriting in order to design a verification technique. We illustrate our approach with some examples, including a deadlock analysis of a simple Erlang program.Vidal Oriola, GF. (2013). Towards Erlang Verification by Term Rewriting. En Logic-Based Program Synthesis and Transformation. Springer. 109-126. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-14125-1_7S109126Albert, E., Arenas, P., Gómez-Zamalloa, M.: Symbolic Execution of Concurrent Objects in CLP. In: Russo, C., Zhou, N.-F. (eds.) PADL 2012. LNCS, vol. 7149, pp. 123–137. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)Albert, E., Vidal, G.: The narrowing-driven approach to functional logic program specialization. New Generation Computing 20(1), 3–26 (2002)Joe, A., Robert, V., Williams, M.: Concurrent programming in ERLANG. Prentice Hall (1993)Arts, T., Earle, C.B., Derrick, J.: Development of a verified Erlang program for resource locking. STTT 5(2–3), 205–220 (2004)Baader, F., Nipkow, T.: Term Rewriting and All That. Cambridge University Press (1998)Caballero, R., Martin-Martin, E., Riesco, A., Tamarit, S.: A Declarative Debugger for Sequential Erlang Programs. In: Veanes, M., Viganò, L. (eds.) TAP 2013. LNCS, vol. 7942, pp. 96–114. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)Claessen, K., Svensson, H.: A semantics for distributed Erlang. In: Sagonas, K.F., Armstrong, J. (eds.). In: Proc. of the 2005 ACM SIGPLAN Workshop on Erlang, pp. 78–87. ACM (2005)Earle, C.B.: Symbolic program execution using the Erlang verification tool. In: Alpuente, M. (eds.) Proc. of the 9th International Workshop on Functional and Logic Programming (WFLP 2000), pp. 42–55 (2000)Felleisen, M., Friedman, D.P., Kohlbecker, E.E., Duba, B.F.: A syntactic theory of sequential control. Theor. Comput. Sci. 52, 205–237 (1987)Fredlund, L.-A., Svensson, H.: McErlang: a model checker for a distributed functional programming language. In: Hinze, R., Ramsey, N. (eds). In: Proc. of ICFP 2007, pp. 125–136. ACM (2007)Giesl, J., Arts, T.: Verification of Erlang Processes by Dependency Pairs. Appl. Algebra Eng. Commun. Comput. 12(1/2), 39–72 (2001)Hanus, M. (ed.): Curry: An integrated functional logic language (vers. 0.8.3) (2012), http://www.curry-language.orgHuch, F.: Verification of Erlang Programs using Abstract Interpretation and Model Checking. In: Rémi, D., Lee, P. (eds.) Proc. of ICFP 1999, pp. 261–272. ACM (1999)J.-M., H.: Canonical forms and unification. In: Bibel, W., Kowalski, R. (eds.) 5th Conference on Automated Deduction Les Arcs. LNCS, pp. 318–334. Springer, Heidelberg (1980)Leucker, M., Noll, T.: Rewriting Logic as a Framework for Generic Verification Tools. Electr. Notes Theor. Comput. Sci. 36, 121–137 (2000)Meseguer, J.: Conditioned Rewriting Logic as a United Model of Concurrency. Theor. Comput. Sci. 96(1), 73–155 (1992)Neuhäußer, M.R., Noll, T.: Abstraction and Model Checking of Core Erlang Programs in Maude. Electr. Notes Theor. Comput. Sci. 176(4), 147–163 (2007)Nishida, N., Vidal, G.: A finite representation of the narrowing space. In: Proc. of the 23th International Symposium on Logic-Based Program Synthesis and Transformation (LOPSTR 2013). Technical Report TR-11-13, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, pp. 113–128 (To appear in Springer LNCS, 2013). http://users.dsic.upv.es/~gvidal/Noll, T.: A Rewriting Logic Implementation of Erlang. Electr. Notes Theor. Comput. Sci. 44(2), 206–224 (2001)Noll, T.: Equational Abstractions for Model Checking Erlang Programs. Electr. Notes Theor. Comput. Sci. 118, 145–162 (2005)Noll, T.G., Fredlund, L., Gurov, D.: The Erlang Verification Tool. In: Margaria, T., Yi, W. (eds.) TACAS 2001. LNCS, vol. 2031, pp. 582–586. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)Roy, C.K.: Thomas Noll, Banani Roy, and James R. Cordy. Towards automatic verification of Erlang programs by pi-calculus translation. In: Feeley,M., Trinder, P.W. (eds.) Proc. of the 2006 ACM SIGPLAN Workshop on Erlang, pp. 38–50. ACM (2006)Slagle, J.R.: Automated theorem-proving for theories with simplifiers, commutativity and associativity. Journal of the ACM 21(4), 622–642 (1974)Svensson, H., Fredlund, L.-A.: A more accurate semantics for distributed Erlang. In: Thompson, S.J., Fredlund. L.-A., (eds.) Proceedings of the 2007 ACM SIGPLAN Workshop on Erlang, pp. 43–54. ACM (2007)Vidal, G.: Closed symbolic execution for verifying program termination. In: Proc. of the 12th IEEE International Working Conference on Source Code Analysis and Manipulation (SCAM 2012), pp. 34–43. IEEE (2012)Visser, W., Havelund, K., Brat, G.P., Park, S., Lerda, F.: Model checking programs. Autom. Softw. Eng. 10(2), 203–232 (2003

Two Decades of Maude

This paper is a tribute to José Meseguer, from the rest of us in the Maude team, reviewing the past, the present, and the future of the language and system with which we have been working for around two decades under his leadership. After reviewing the origins and the language's main features, we present the latest additions to the language and some features currently under development. This paper is not an introduction to Maude, and some familiarity with it and with rewriting logic are indeed assumed.Universidad de Málaga. Campus de Excelencia Internacional Andalucía Tech

Homeomorphic Embedding for Online Termination of Symbolic Methods

Well-quasi orders in general, and homeomorphic embedding in particular, have gained popularity to ensure the termination of techniques for program analysis, specialisation, transformation, and verification. In this paper we survey and discuss this use of homeomorphic embedding and clarify the advantages of such an approach over one using well-founded orders. We also discuss various extensions of the homeomorphic embedding relation. We conclude with a study of homeomorphic embedding in the context of metaprogramming, presenting some new (positive and negative) results and open problems

Finite Model Finding for Parameterized Verification

In this paper we investigate to which extent a very simple and natural "reachability as deducibility" approach, originated in the research in formal methods in security, is applicable to the automated verification of large classes of infinite state and parameterized systems. The approach is based on modeling the reachability between (parameterized) states as deducibility between suitable encodings of states by formulas of first-order predicate logic. The verification of a safety property is reduced to a pure logical problem of finding a countermodel for a first-order formula. The later task is delegated then to the generic automated finite model building procedures. In this paper we first establish the relative completeness of the finite countermodel finding method (FCM) for a class of parameterized linear arrays of finite automata. The method is shown to be at least as powerful as known methods based on monotonic abstraction and symbolic backward reachability. Further, we extend the relative completeness of the approach and show that it can solve all safety verification problems which can be solved by the traditional regular model checking.Comment: 17 pages, slightly different version of the paper is submitted to TACAS 201

Verification of Timed Automata Using Rewrite Rules and Strategies

ELAN is a powerful language and environment for specifying and prototyping deduction systems in a language based on rewrite rules controlled by strategies. Timed automata is a class of continuous real-time models of reactive systems for which efficient model-checking algorithms have been devised. In this paper, we show that these algorithms can very easily be prototyped in the ELAN system. This paper argues through this example that rewriting based systems relying on rules and strategies are a good framework to prototype, study and test rather efficiently symbolic model-checking algorithms, i.e. algorithms which involve combination of graph exploration rules, deduction rules, constraint solving techniques and decision procedures