Symbolic Reachability Analysis of B through ProB and LTSmin

We present a symbolic reachability analysis approach for B that can provide a significant speedup over traditional explicit state model checking. The symbolic analysis is implemented by linking ProB to LTSmin, a high-performance language independent model checker. The link is achieved via LTSmin's PINS interface, allowing ProB to benefit from LTSmin's analysis algorithms, while only writing a few hundred lines of glue-code, along with a bridge between ProB and C using ZeroMQ. ProB supports model checking of several formal specification languages such as B, Event-B, Z and TLA. Our experiments are based on a wide variety of B-Method and Event-B models to demonstrate the efficiency of the new link. Among the tested categories are state space generation and deadlock detection; but action detection and invariant checking are also feasible in principle. In many cases we observe speedups of several orders of magnitude. We also compare the results with other approaches for improving model checking, such as partial order reduction or symmetry reduction. We thus provide a new scalable, symbolic analysis algorithm for the B-Method and Event-B, along with a platform to integrate other model checking improvements via LTSmin in the future

Partial Orders for Efficient BMC of Concurrent Software

This version previously deposited at arXiv:1301.1629v1 [cs.LO]The vast number of interleavings that a concurrent program can have is typically identified as the root cause of the difficulty of automatic analysis of concurrent software. Weak memory is generally believed to make this problem even harder. We address both issues by modelling programs' executions with partial orders rather than the interleaving semantics (SC). We implemented a software analysis tool based on these ideas. It scales to programs of sufficient size to achieve first-time formal verification of non-trivial concurrent systems code over a wide range of models, including SC, Intel x86 and IBM Power

Creating R Packages: A Tutorial

This tutorial gives a practical introduction to creating R packages. We discuss how object oriented programming and S formulas can be used to give R code the usual look and feel, how to start a package from a collection of R functions, and how to test the code once the package has been created. As running example we use functions for standard linear regression analysis which are developed from scratch

LTSmin: high-performance language-independent model checking

In recent years, the LTSmin model checker has been extended with support for several new modelling languages, including probabilistic (Mapa) and timed systems (Uppaal). Also, connecting additional language front-ends or ad-hoc state-space generators to LTSmin was simplified using custom C-code. From symbolic and distributed reachability analysis and minimisation, LTSmin’s functionality has developed into a model checker with multi-core algorithms for on-the-fly LTL checking with partial-order reduction, and multi-core symbolic checking for the modal μ calculus, based on the multi-core decision diagram package Sylvan.\ud In LTSmin, the modelling languages and the model checking algorithms are connected through a Partitioned Next-State Interface (Pins), that allows to abstract away from language details in the implementation of the analysis algorithms and on-the-fly optimisations. In the current paper, we present an overview of the toolset and its recent changes, and we demonstrate its performance and versatility in two case studies

Partial Order Reduction for Security Protocols

Security protocols are concurrent processes that communicate using cryptography with the aim of achieving various security properties. Recent work on their formal verification has brought procedures and tools for deciding trace equivalence properties (e.g., anonymity, unlinkability, vote secrecy) for a bounded number of sessions. However, these procedures are based on a naive symbolic exploration of all traces of the considered processes which, unsurprisingly, greatly limits the scalability and practical impact of the verification tools. In this paper, we overcome this difficulty by developing partial order reduction techniques for the verification of security protocols. We provide reduced transition systems that optimally eliminate redundant traces, and which are adequate for model-checking trace equivalence properties of protocols by means of symbolic execution. We have implemented our reductions in the tool Apte, and demonstrated that it achieves the expected speedup on various protocols

A Survey of Symbolic Execution Techniques

Many security and software testing applications require checking whether certain properties of a program hold for any possible usage scenario. For instance, a tool for identifying software vulnerabilities may need to rule out the existence of any backdoor to bypass a program's authentication. One approach would be to test the program using different, possibly random inputs. As the backdoor may only be hit for very specific program workloads, automated exploration of the space of possible inputs is of the essence. Symbolic execution provides an elegant solution to the problem, by systematically exploring many possible execution paths at the same time without necessarily requiring concrete inputs. Rather than taking on fully specified input values, the technique abstractly represents them as symbols, resorting to constraint solvers to construct actual instances that would cause property violations. Symbolic execution has been incubated in dozens of tools developed over the last four decades, leading to major practical breakthroughs in a number of prominent software reliability applications. The goal of this survey is to provide an overview of the main ideas, challenges, and solutions developed in the area, distilling them for a broad audience. The present survey has been accepted for publication at ACM Computing Surveys. If you are considering citing this survey, we would appreciate if you could use the following BibTeX entry: http://goo.gl/Hf5FvcComment: This is the authors pre-print copy. If you are considering citing this survey, we would appreciate if you could use the following BibTeX entry: http://goo.gl/Hf5Fv