Program transformation for development, verification, and synthesis of programs

This paper briefly describes the use of the program transformation methodology for the development of correct and efficient programs. In particular, we will refer to the case of constraint logic programs and, through some examples, we will show how by program transformation, one can improve, synthesize, and verify programs

Program Transformation for Development, Verification, and Synthesis of Software

In this paper we briefly describe the use of the program transformation methodology for the development of correct and efficient programs. We will consider, in particular, the case of the transformation and the development of constraint logic programs

Proving theorems by program transformation

In this paper we present an overview of the unfold/fold proof method, a method for proving theorems about programs, based on program transformation. As a metalanguage for specifying programs and program properties we adopt constraint logic programming (CLP), and we present a set of transformation rules (including the familiar unfolding and folding rules) which preserve the semantics of CLP programs. Then, we show how program transformation strategies can be used, similarly to theorem proving tactics, for guiding the application of the transformation rules and inferring the properties to be proved. We work out three examples: (i) the proof of predicate equivalences, applied to the verification of equality between CCS processes, (ii) the proof of first order formulas via an extension of the quantifier elimination method, and (iii) the proof of temporal properties of infinite state concurrent systems, by using a transformation strategy that performs program specialization

Verification of Imperative Programs by Constraint Logic Program Transformation

We present a method for verifying partial correctness properties of imperative programs that manipulate integers and arrays by using techniques based on the transformation of constraint logic programs (CLP). We use CLP as a metalanguage for representing imperative programs, their executions, and their properties. First, we encode the correctness of an imperative program, say prog, as the negation of a predicate 'incorrect' defined by a CLP program T. By construction, 'incorrect' holds in the least model of T if and only if the execution of prog from an initial configuration eventually halts in an error configuration. Then, we apply to program T a sequence of transformations that preserve its least model semantics. These transformations are based on well-known transformation rules, such as unfolding and folding, guided by suitable transformation strategies, such as specialization and generalization. The objective of the transformations is to derive a new CLP program TransfT where the predicate 'incorrect' is defined either by (i) the fact 'incorrect.' (and in this case prog is not correct), or by (ii) the empty set of clauses (and in this case prog is correct). In the case where we derive a CLP program such that neither (i) nor (ii) holds, we iterate the transformation. Since the problem is undecidable, this process may not terminate. We show through examples that our method can be applied in a rather systematic way, and is amenable to automation by transferring to the field of program verification many techniques developed in the field of program transformation.Comment: In Proceedings Festschrift for Dave Schmidt, arXiv:1309.455

Transformations of Logic Programs on Infinite Lists

We consider an extension of logic programs, called \omega-programs, that can be used to define predicates over infinite lists. \omega-programs allow us to specify properties of the infinite behavior of reactive systems and, in general, properties of infinite sequences of events. The semantics of \omega-programs is an extension of the perfect model semantics. We present variants of the familiar unfold/fold rules which can be used for transforming \omega-programs. We show that these new rules are correct, that is, their application preserves the perfect model semantics. Then we outline a general methodology based on program transformation for verifying properties of \omega-programs. We demonstrate the power of our transformation-based verification methodology by proving some properties of Buechi automata and \omega-regular languages.Comment: 37 pages, including the appendix with proofs. This is an extended version of a paper published in Theory and Practice of Logic Programming, see belo

Transformations of CCP programs

We introduce a transformation system for concurrent constraint programming (CCP). We define suitable applicability conditions for the transformations which guarantee that the input/output CCP semantics is preserved also when distinguishing deadlocked computations from successful ones and when considering intermediate results of (possibly) non-terminating computations. The system allows us to optimize CCP programs while preserving their intended meaning: In addition to the usual benefits that one has for sequential declarative languages, the transformation of concurrent programs can also lead to the elimination of communication channels and of synchronization points, to the transformation of non-deterministic computations into deterministic ones, and to the crucial saving of computational space. Furthermore, since the transformation system preserves the deadlock behavior of programs, it can be used for proving deadlock freeness of a given program wrt a class of queries. To this aim it is sometimes sufficient to apply our transformations and to specialize the resulting program wrt the given queries in such a way that the obtained program is trivially deadlock free.Comment: To appear in ACM TOPLA

A survey of program transformation with special reference to unfold/fold style program development

This paper consists of a survey of current, and past, work on *program transformation* for the purpose of optimization. We first discuss some of the general methodological frameworks for program modification, such as *analogy*, *explanation based learning*, *partial evaluation*, *proof theoretic optimization*, and the *unfold/fold* technique. These frameworks are not mutually exclusive, and the latter, unfold/fold, is certainly the most widely used technique, in various guises, for program transformation. Thus we shall often have occasion to: compare the relative merits of systems that employ the technique in some form, *and*; compare the unfold/fold systems with those that employ alternative techniques. We also include (and compare with unfold/fold) a brief survey of recent work concerning the use of *formal methods* for program transformation

Finite Countermodel Based Verification for Program Transformation (A Case Study)

Both automatic program verification and program transformation are based on program analysis. In the past decade a number of approaches using various automatic general-purpose program transformation techniques (partial deduction, specialization, supercompilation) for verification of unreachability properties of computing systems were introduced and demonstrated. On the other hand, the semantics based unfold-fold program transformation methods pose themselves diverse kinds of reachability tasks and try to solve them, aiming at improving the semantics tree of the program being transformed. That means some general-purpose verification methods may be used for strengthening program transformation techniques. This paper considers the question how finite countermodels for safety verification method might be used in Turchin's supercompilation method. We extract a number of supercompilation sub-algorithms trying to solve reachability problems and demonstrate use of an external countermodel finder for solving some of the problems.Comment: In Proceedings VPT 2015, arXiv:1512.0221