Non-termination of Dalvik bytecode via compilation to CLP

We present a set of rules for compiling a Dalvik bytecode program into a logic program with array constraints. Non-termination of the resulting program entails that of the original one, hence the techniques we have presented before for proving non-termination of constraint logic programs can be used for proving non-termination of Dalvik programs.Comment: 5 pages, presented at the 13th International Workshop on Termination (WST) 201

Automated Termination Analysis for Logic Programs with Cut

Termination is an important and well-studied property for logic programs. However, almost all approaches for automated termination analysis focus on definite logic programs, whereas real-world Prolog programs typically use the cut operator. We introduce a novel pre-processing method which automatically transforms Prolog programs into logic programs without cuts, where termination of the cut-free program implies termination of the original program. Hence after this pre-processing, any technique for proving termination of definite logic programs can be applied. We implemented this pre-processing in our termination prover AProVE and evaluated it successfully with extensive experiments

Proving termination through conditional termination

We present a constraint-based method for proving conditional termination of integer programs. Building on this, we construct a framework to prove (unconditional) program termination using a powerful mechanism to combine conditional termination proofs. Our key insight is that a conditional termination proof shows termination for a subset of program execution states which do not need to be considered in the remaining analysis. This facilitates more effective termination as well as non-termination analyses, and allows handling loops with different execution phases naturally. Moreover, our method can deal with sequences of loops compositionally. In an empirical evaluation, we show that our implementation VeryMax outperforms state-of-the-art tools on a range of standard benchmarks.Peer ReviewedPostprint (author's final draft

Proving Termination Starting from the End

We present a novel technique for proving program termination which introduces a new dimension of modularity. Existing techniques use the program to incrementally construct a termination proof. While the proof keeps changing, the program remains the same. Our technique goes a step further. We show how to use the current partial proof to partition the transition relation into those behaviors known to be terminating from the current proof, and those whose status (terminating or not) is not known yet. This partition enables a new and unexplored dimension of incremental reasoning on the program side. In addition, we show that our approach naturally applies to conditional termination which searches for a precondition ensuring termination. We further report on a prototype implementation that advances the state-of-the-art on the grounds of termination and conditional termination.Comment: 16 page

Unrestricted Termination and Non-Termination Arguments for Bit-Vector Programs

Proving program termination is typically done by finding a well-founded ranking function for the program states. Existing termination provers typically find ranking functions using either linear algebra or templates. As such they are often restricted to finding linear ranking functions over mathematical integers. This class of functions is insufficient for proving termination of many terminating programs, and furthermore a termination argument for a program operating on mathematical integers does not always lead to a termination argument for the same program operating on fixed-width machine integers. We propose a termination analysis able to generate nonlinear, lexicographic ranking functions and nonlinear recurrence sets that are correct for fixed-width machine arithmetic and floating-point arithmetic Our technique is based on a reduction from program \emph{termination} to second-order \emph{satisfaction}. We provide formulations for termination and non-termination in a fragment of second-order logic with restricted quantification which is decidable over finite domains. The resulted technique is a sound and complete analysis for the termination of finite-state programs with fixed-width integers and IEEE floating-point arithmetic

Using Program Synthesis for Program Analysis

In this paper, we identify a fragment of second-order logic with restricted quantification that is expressive enough to capture numerous static analysis problems (e.g. safety proving, bug finding, termination and non-termination proving, superoptimisation). We call this fragment the {\it synthesis fragment}. Satisfiability of a formula in the synthesis fragment is decidable over finite domains; specifically the decision problem is NEXPTIME-complete. If a formula in this fragment is satisfiable, a solution consists of a satisfying assignment from the second order variables to \emph{functions over finite domains}. To concretely find these solutions, we synthesise \emph{programs} that compute the functions. Our program synthesis algorithm is complete for finite state programs, i.e. every \emph{function} over finite domains is computed by some \emph{program} that we can synthesise. We can therefore use our synthesiser as a decision procedure for the synthesis fragment of second-order logic, which in turn allows us to use it as a powerful backend for many program analysis tasks. To show the tractability of our approach, we evaluate the program synthesiser on several static analysis problems.Comment: 19 pages, to appear in LPAR 2015. arXiv admin note: text overlap with arXiv:1409.492

Proving Non-Termination via Loop Acceleration

We present the first approach to prove non-termination of integer programs that is based on loop acceleration. If our technique cannot show non-termination of a loop, it tries to accelerate it instead in order to find paths to other non-terminating loops automatically. The prerequisites for our novel loop acceleration technique generalize a simple yet effective non-termination criterion. Thus, we can use the same program transformations to facilitate both non-termination proving and loop acceleration. In particular, we present a novel invariant inference technique that is tailored to our approach. An extensive evaluation of our fully automated tool LoAT shows that it is competitive with the state of the art