3,337 research outputs found
Relational Symbolic Execution
Symbolic execution is a classical program analysis technique used to show
that programs satisfy or violate given specifications. In this work we
generalize symbolic execution to support program analysis for relational
specifications in the form of relational properties - these are properties
about two runs of two programs on related inputs, or about two executions of a
single program on related inputs. Relational properties are useful to formalize
notions in security and privacy, and to reason about program optimizations. We
design a relational symbolic execution engine, named RelSym which supports
interactive refutation, as well as proving of relational properties for
programs written in a language with arrays and for-like loops
Modular, higher order cardinality analysis in theory and practice
Since the mid '80s, compiler writers for functional languages (especially lazy ones) have been writing papers about identifying and exploiting thunks and lambdas that are used only once. However, it has proved difficult to achieve both power and simplicity in practice. In this paper, we describe a new, modular analysis for a higher order language, which is both simple and effective. We prove the analysis sound with respect to a standard call-by-need semantics, and present measurements of its use in a full-scale, state-of-the-art optimising compiler. The analysis finds many single-entry thunks and one-shot lambdas and enables a number of program optimisations. This paper extends our preceding conference publication (Sergey et al. 2014 Proceedings of the 41st Annual ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages (POPL 2014). ACM, pp. 335–348) with proofs, expanded report on evaluation and a detailed examination of the factors causing the loss of precision in the analysis
A Relational Logic for Higher-Order Programs
Relational program verification is a variant of program verification where
one can reason about two programs and as a special case about two executions of
a single program on different inputs. Relational program verification can be
used for reasoning about a broad range of properties, including equivalence and
refinement, and specialized notions such as continuity, information flow
security or relative cost. In a higher-order setting, relational program
verification can be achieved using relational refinement type systems, a form
of refinement types where assertions have a relational interpretation.
Relational refinement type systems excel at relating structurally equivalent
terms but provide limited support for relating terms with very different
structures.
We present a logic, called Relational Higher Order Logic (RHOL), for proving
relational properties of a simply typed -calculus with inductive types
and recursive definitions. RHOL retains the type-directed flavour of relational
refinement type systems but achieves greater expressivity through rules which
simultaneously reason about the two terms as well as rules which only
contemplate one of the two terms. We show that RHOL has strong foundations, by
proving an equivalence with higher-order logic (HOL), and leverage this
equivalence to derive key meta-theoretical properties: subject reduction,
admissibility of a transitivity rule and set-theoretical soundness. Moreover,
we define sound embeddings for several existing relational type systems such as
relational refinement types and type systems for dependency analysis and
relative cost, and we verify examples that were out of reach of prior work.Comment: Submitted to ICFP 201
Computer-aided verification in mechanism design
In mechanism design, the gold standard solution concepts are dominant
strategy incentive compatibility and Bayesian incentive compatibility. These
solution concepts relieve the (possibly unsophisticated) bidders from the need
to engage in complicated strategizing. While incentive properties are simple to
state, their proofs are specific to the mechanism and can be quite complex.
This raises two concerns. From a practical perspective, checking a complex
proof can be a tedious process, often requiring experts knowledgeable in
mechanism design. Furthermore, from a modeling perspective, if unsophisticated
agents are unconvinced of incentive properties, they may strategize in
unpredictable ways.
To address both concerns, we explore techniques from computer-aided
verification to construct formal proofs of incentive properties. Because formal
proofs can be automatically checked, agents do not need to manually check the
properties, or even understand the proof. To demonstrate, we present the
verification of a sophisticated mechanism: the generic reduction from Bayesian
incentive compatible mechanism design to algorithm design given by Hartline,
Kleinberg, and Malekian. This mechanism presents new challenges for formal
verification, including essential use of randomness from both the execution of
the mechanism and from the prior type distributions. As an immediate
consequence, our work also formalizes Bayesian incentive compatibility for the
entire family of mechanisms derived via this reduction. Finally, as an
intermediate step in our formalization, we provide the first formal
verification of incentive compatibility for the celebrated
Vickrey-Clarke-Groves mechanism
- …