Proceedings of the 21st Conference on Formal Methods in Computer-Aided Design – FMCAD 2021

The Conference on Formal Methods in Computer-Aided Design (FMCAD) is an annual conference on the theory and applications of formal methods in hardware and system verification. FMCAD provides a leading forum to researchers in academia and industry for presenting and discussing groundbreaking methods, technologies, theoretical results, and tools for reasoning formally about computing systems. FMCAD covers formal aspects of computer-aided system design including verification, specification, synthesis, and testing

Proceedings of the 22nd Conference on Formal Methods in Computer-Aided Design – FMCAD 2022

The Conference on Formal Methods in Computer-Aided Design (FMCAD) is an annual conference on the theory and applications of formal methods in hardware and system verification. FMCAD provides a leading forum to researchers in academia and industry for presenting and discussing groundbreaking methods, technologies, theoretical results, and tools for reasoning formally about computing systems. FMCAD covers formal aspects of computer-aided system design including verification, specification, synthesis, and testing

Proceedings of the 22nd Conference on Formal Methods in Computer-Aided Design – FMCAD 2022

The Conference on Formal Methods in Computer-Aided Design (FMCAD) is an annual conference on the theory and applications of formal methods in hardware and system verification. FMCAD provides a leading forum to researchers in academia and industry for presenting and discussing groundbreaking methods, technologies, theoretical results, and tools for reasoning formally about computing systems. FMCAD covers formal aspects of computer-aided system design including verification, specification, synthesis, and testing

Extracting proofs from documents

Often, theorem checkers like PVS are used to check an existing proof, which is part of some document. Since there is a large difference between the notations used in the documents and the notations used in the theorem checkers, it is usually a laborious task to convert an existing proof into a format which can be checked by a machine. In the system that we propose, the author is assisted in the process of converting an existing proof into the PVS language and having it checked by PVS. 1 Introduction The now-classic ALGOL 60 report [5] recognized three different levels of language: a reference language, a publication language and several hardware representations, whereby the publication language was intended to admit variations on the reference language and was to be used for stating and communicating processes. The importance of publication language ---often referred to nowadays as "pseudo-code"--- is difficult to exaggerate since a publication language is the most effective way..

The Dynamic Creation of Induction Rules Using Proof Planning

Centre for Intelligent Systems and their ApplicationsA key problem in automating proof by mathematical induction is choosing an induction rule suitable for a given conjecture. Since Boyer & Moore’s NQTHM system the standard approach has been based on recursion analysis, which uses a combination of induction rules based on the relevant recursive function definitions. However, there are practical examples on which such techniques are known to fail. Recent research has tried to improve automation by delaying the choice of inductive rule until later in the proof, but these techniques suffer from two serious problems. Firstly, a lack of search control: specifically, in controlling the application of ‘speculative’ proof steps that partially commit to a choice of induction rule. Secondly, a lack of generality: they place significant restrictions on the form of induction rule that can be chosen. In this thesis we describe a new delayed commitment strategy for inductive proof that addresses these problems. The strategy dynamically creates an appropriate induction rule by proving schematic proof goals, where unknown rule structure is represented by meta-variables which become instantiated during the proof. This is accompanied by a proof that the generated rule is valid. The strategy achieves improved control over speculative proof steps via a novel speculation critic. It also generates a wider range of useful induction rules than other delayed commitment techniques, partly because it removes unnecessary restrictions on the individual proof cases, and partly because of a new technique for generating the rule’s overall case structure. The basic version of the strategy has been implemented using the lamdaClam proof planner. The system was extended with a novel proof critics architecture for this purpose. An evaluation shows the strategy is a useful and practical technique, and demonstrates its advantages

Aspects of the theory of containers within automated theorem proving

This thesis explores applications of the theory of containers within automated theorem proving. Container theory provides a foundational analysis of data types as containers, specified by a type $S$ of shapes and a function P assigning to each shape its set of positions for data.More importantly, a representation theorem guarantees that polymorphic functions between container data types are given by container morphisms, which are characterised by mappings between shapes and positions. Container theory is interesting, in this context, for the following reasons. A mechanism for representing and reasoning with ellipsis (the dots in x_1, x_2, ... , x_n) in lists, existing in the literature, has proved to be very useful for formalisations involving abstractions. Success with this mechanism came by means of a meta-level representation through which many functions that normally require recursive definitions can be given explicit ones. As a result, not only can induction and generalisation be eliminated from proofs but, by means of an associated portrayal system, the resulting proofs are also intuitive and much closer to informal mathematical proofs. This ellipsis mechanism, however, is not based on any formal theory, making it rather exiguous in comparison with rival techniques. There also remains questions about its scope and applications. Our aim is to improve this ellipsis mechanism. In this connection, we hypothesize that the theory of containers provides a formal underpinning for such representations. In order to test our hypothesis, we identify limitations of the ellipsis mechanism and show how they can be addressed within the theory of containers. We subsequently develop a new reasoning system based on containers, which does not suffer from these limitations. This judicious container-based system endorses representations of polymorphic rewrite rules using arithmetic, which naturally lends itself to applications of arithmetic decision procedures. We exploit this facet to develop a new technique for deciding properties of lists. Our technique is developed within a quasi-container setting: shape maps are given as piecewise-linear functions, while a new representation is derived for re-indexing functions that obviates the need for dependent types, which are fundamental in a judicious container approach. We show that this new setting enables us to represent and reason about a large class of properties