Invariant Synthesis for Incomplete Verification Engines

We propose a framework for synthesizing inductive invariants for incomplete verification engines, which soundly reduce logical problems in undecidable theories to decidable theories. Our framework is based on the counter-example guided inductive synthesis principle (CEGIS) and allows verification engines to communicate non-provability information to guide invariant synthesis. We show precisely how the verification engine can compute such non-provability information and how to build effective learning algorithms when invariants are expressed as Boolean combinations of a fixed set of predicates. Moreover, we evaluate our framework in two verification settings, one in which verification engines need to handle quantified formulas and one in which verification engines have to reason about heap properties expressed in an expressive but undecidable separation logic. Our experiments show that our invariant synthesis framework based on non-provability information can both effectively synthesize inductive invariants and adequately strengthen contracts across a large suite of programs

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

Hybrid analysis techniques for software fault detection

Since the question "Does program P obey specification S" is undecidable in general, every practical software validation technique must compromise accuracy in some way. Testing techniques admit the possibility that a fault will go undetected, as the price for quitting after a finite number of test cases. Formal verification admits the possibility that a proof will not be found for a valid assertion, as the price for quitting after a finite amount of proof effort. No technique so dominates others that a wise validation strategy consists of applying that technique alone; rather, effective validation requires applying several techniques

Integrated Reasoning and Proof Choice Point Selection in the Jahob System – Mechanisms for Program Survival

In recent years researchers have developed a wide range of powerful automated reasoning systems. We have leveraged these systems to build Jahob, a program specification, analysis, and verification system. In contrast to many such systems, which use a monolithic reasoning approach, Jahob provides a general integrated reasoning framework, which enables multiple automated reasoning systems to work together to prove the desired program correctness properties. We have used Jahob to prove the full functional correctness of a collection of linked data structure implementations. The automated reasoning systems are able to automatically perform the vast majority of the reasoning steps required for this verification. But there are some complex verification conditions that they fail to prove. We have therefore developed a proof language, integrated into the underlying imperative Java programming language, that developers can use to control key choice points in the proof search space. Once the developer has resolved these choice points, the automated reasoning systems are able to complete the verification. This approach appropriately leverages both the developer’s insight into the high-level structure of the proof and the ability of the automated reasoning systems to perform the mechanical steps required to prove the verification conditions. Building on Jahob’s success with this challenging program verification problem, we contemplate the possibility of verifying the complete absence of fatal errors in large software systems. We envision combining simple techniques that analyze the vast majority of the program with heavyweight techniques that analyze those more sophisticated parts of the program that may require arbitrarily sophisticated reasoning. Modularity mechanisms such as abstract data types enable the sound division of the program for this purpose. The goal is not a completely correct program, but a program that can survive any remaining errors to continue to provide acceptable service

Investigation, Development, and Evaluation of Performance Proving for Fault-tolerant Computers

A number of methodologies for verifying systems and computer based tools that assist users in verifying their systems were developed. These tools were applied to verify in part the SIFT ultrareliable aircraft computer. Topics covered included: STP theorem prover; design verification of SIFT; high level language code verification; assembly language level verification; numerical algorithm verification; verification of flight control programs; and verification of hardware logic

Diagrammatic Languages and Formal Verification : A Tool-Based Approach

The importance of software correctness has been accentuated as a growing number of safety-critical systems have been developed relying on software operating these systems. One of the more prominent methods targeting the construction of a correct program is formal verification. Formal verification identifies a correct program as a program that satisfies its specification and is free of defects. While in theory formal verification guarantees a correct implementation with respect to the specification, applying formal verification techniques in practice has shown to be difficult and expensive. In response to these challenges, various support methods and tools have been suggested for all phases from program specification to proving the derived verification conditions. This thesis concerns practical verification methods applied to diagrammatic modeling languages. While diagrammatic languages are widely used in communicating system design (e.g., UML) and behavior (e.g., state charts), most formal verification platforms require the specification to be written in a textual specification language or in the mathematical language of an underlying logical framework. One exception is invariant-based programming, in which programs together with their specifications are drawn as invariant diagrams, a type of state transition diagram annotated with intermediate assertions (preconditions, postconditions, invariants). Even though the allowed program states—called situations—are described diagrammatically, the intermediate assertions defining a situation’s meaning in the domain of the program are still written in conventional textual form. To explore the use of diagrams in expressing the intermediate assertions of invariant diagrams, we designed a pictorial language for expressing array properties. We further developed this notation into a diagrammatic domain-specific language (DSL) and implemented it as an extension to the Why3 platform. The DSL supports expression of array properties. The language is based on Reynolds’s interval and partition diagrams and includes a construct for mapping array intervals to logic predicates. Automated verification of a program is attained by generating the verification conditions and proving that they are true. In practice, full proof automation is not possible except for trivial programs and verifying even simple properties can require significant effort both in specification and proof stages. An animation tool which supports run-time evaluation of the program statements and intermediate assertions given any user-defined input can support this process. In particular, an execution trace leading up to a failed assertion constitutes a refutation of a verification condition that requires immediate attention. As an extension to Socos, a verificion tool for invariant diagrams built on top of the PVS proof system, we have developed an execution model where program statements and assertions can be evaluated in a given program state. A program is represented by an abstract datatype encoding the program state, together with a small-step state transition function encoding the evaluation of a single statement. This allows the program’s runtime behavior to be formally inspected during verification. We also implement animation and interactive debugging support for Socos. The thesis also explores visualization of system development in the context of model decomposition in Event-B. Decomposing a software system becomes increasingly critical as the system grows larger, since the workload on the theorem provers must be distributed effectively. Decomposition techniques have been suggested in several verification platforms to split the models into smaller units, each having fewer verification conditions and therefore imposing a lighter load on automatic theorem provers. In this work, we have investigated a refinement-based decomposition technique that makes the development process more resilient to change in specification and allows parallel development of sub-models by a team. As part of the research, we evaluated the technique on a small case study, a simplified version of a landing gear system verification presented by Boniol and Wiels, within the Event-B specification language.Vikten av programvaras korrekthet har accentuerats då ett växande antal säkerhetskritiska system, vilka är beroende av programvaran som styr dessa, har utvecklas. En av de mer framträdande metoderna som riktar in sig på utveckling av korrekt programvara är formell verifiering. Inom formell verifiering avses med ett korrekt program ett program som uppfyller sina specifikationer och som är fritt från defekter. Medan formell verifiering teoretiskt sett kan garantera ett korrekt program med avseende på specifikationerna, har tillämpligheten av formella verifieringsmetod visat sig i praktiken vara svår och dyr. Till svar på dessa utmaningar har ett stort antal olika stödmetoder och automatiseringsverktyg föreslagits för samtliga faser från specifikationen till bevisningen av de härledda korrekthetsvillkoren. Denna avhandling behandlar praktiska verifieringsmetoder applicerade på diagrambaserade modelleringsspråk. Medan diagrambaserade språk ofta används för kommunikation av programvarudesign (t.ex. UML) samt beteende (t.ex. tillståndsdiagram), kräver de flesta verifieringsplattformar att specifikationen kodas medelst ett textuellt specifikationsspåk eller i språket hos det underliggande logiska ramverket. Ett undantag är invariantbaserad programmering, inom vilken ett program tillsammans med dess specifikation ritas upp som sk. invariantdiagram, en typ av tillståndstransitionsdiagram annoterade med mellanliggande logiska villkor (förvillkor, eftervillkor, invarianter). Även om de tillåtna programtillstånden—sk. situationer—beskrivs diagrammatiskt är de logiska predikaten som beskriver en situations betydelse i programmets domän fortfarande skriven på konventionell textuell form. För att vidare undersöka användningen av diagram vid beskrivningen av mellanliggande villkor inom invariantbaserad programming, har vi konstruerat ett bildbaserat språk för villkor över arrayer. Vi har därefter vidareutvecklat detta språk till ett diagrambaserat domän-specifikt språk (domain-specific language, DSL) och implementerat stöd för det i verifieringsplattformen Why3. Språket låter användaren uttrycka egenskaper hos arrayer, och är baserat på Reynolds intevall- och partitionsdiagram samt inbegriper en konstruktion för mappning av array-intervall till logiska predikat. Automatisk verifiering av ett program uppnås genom generering av korrekthetsvillkor och åtföljande bevisning av dessa. I praktiken kan full automatisering av bevis inte uppnås utom för trivial program, och även bevisning av enkla egenskaper kan kräva betydande ansträngningar både vid specifikations- och bevisfaserna. Ett animeringsverktyg som stöder exekvering av såväl programmets satser som mellanliggande villkor för godtycklig användarinput kan vara till hjälp i denna process. Särskilt ett exekveringspår som leder upp till ett falskt mellanliggande villkor utgör ett direkt vederläggande (refutation) av ett bevisvillkor, vilket kräver omedelbar uppmärksamhet från programmeraren. Som ett tillägg till Socos, ett verifieringsverktyg för invariantdiagram baserat på bevissystemet PVS, har vi utvecklat en exekveringsmodell där programmets satser och villkor kan evalueras i ett givet programtillstånd. Ett program representeras av en abstrakt datatyp för programmets tillstånd tillsammans med en small-step transitionsfunktion för evalueringen av en enskild programsats. Detta möjliggör att ett programs exekvering formellt kan analyseras under verifieringen. Vi har också implementerat animation och interaktiv felsökning i Socos. Avhandlingen undersöker också visualisering av systemutveckling i samband med modelluppdelning inom Event-B. Uppdelning av en systemmodell blir allt mer kritisk då ett systemet växer sig större, emedan belastningen på underliggande teorembe visare måste fördelas effektivt. Uppdelningstekniker har föreslagits inom många olika verifieringsplattformar för att dela in modellerna i mindre enheter, så att varje enhet har färre verifieringsvillkor och därmed innebär en mindre belastning på de automatiska teorembevisarna. I detta arbete har vi undersökt en refinement-baserad uppdelningsteknik som gör utvecklingsprocessen mer kapabel att hantera förändringar hos specifikationen och som tillåter parallell utveckling av delmodellerna inom ett team. Som en del av forskningen har vi utvärderat tekniken på en liten fallstudie: en förenklad modell av automationen hos ett landningsställ av Boniol and Wiels, uttryckt i Event-B-specifikationspråket

Deductive verification of object-oriented software : dynamic frames, dynamic logic and predicate abstraction

Software systems play a central role in modern society, and their correctness is often crucially important. Formal specification and verification are promising approaches for ensuring correctness more rigorously than just by testing. This work presents an approach for deductively verifying design-by-contract specifications of object-oriented programs. The approach is based on dynamic logic, and addresses the challenges of modularity and automation using dynamic frames and predicate abstraction

Invariant Synthesis for Incomplete Verification Engines

We propose a framework for synthesizing inductive invariants for incomplete verification engines, which soundly reduce logical problems in undecidable theories to decidable theories. Our framework is based on the counter-example guided inductive synthesis principle (CEGIS) and allows verification engines to communicate non-provability information to guide invariant synthesis. We show precisely how the verification engine can compute such non-provability information and how to build effective learning algorithms when invariants are expressed as Boolean combinations of a fixed set of predicates. Moreover, we evaluate our framework in two verification settings, one in which verification engines need to handle quantified formulas and one in which verification engines have to reason about heap properties expressed in an expressive but undecidable separation logic. Our experiments show that our invariant synthesis framework based on non-provability information can both effectively synthesize inductive invariants and adequately strengthen contracts across a large suite of programs