11 research outputs found

    Transforming ASN.1 Specifications into CafeOBJ to assist with Property Checking

    Full text link
    The adoption of algebraic specification/formal method techniques by the networks' research community is happening slowly but steadily. We work towards a software environment that can translate a protocol's specification, from Abstract Syntax Notation One (ASN.1 - a very popular specification language with many applications), into the powerful algebraic specification language CafeOBJ. The resulting code can be used to check, validate and falsify critical properties of systems, at the pre-coding stage of development. In this paper, we introduce some key elements of ASN.1 and CafeOBJ and sketch some first steps towards the implementation of such a tool including a case study.Comment: 8 pages, 12 figure

    Behavioral equivalence of hidden k-logics: an abstract algebraic approach

    Get PDF
    This work advances a research agenda which has as its main aim the application of Abstract Algebraic Logic (AAL) methods and tools to the speciïŹcation and veriïŹcation of software systems. It uses a generalization of the notion of an abstract deductive system to handle multi-sorted deductive systems which diïŹ€erentiate visible and hidden sorts. Two main results of the paper are obtained by generalizing properties of the Leibniz congruence — the central notion in AAL. In this paper we discuss a question we posed in [1] about the relationship between the behavioral equivalences of equivalent hidden logics. We also present a necessary and suïŹƒcient intrinsic condition for two hidden logics to be equivalent

    Architectural Refinement in HETS

    Get PDF
    The main objective of this work is to bring a number of improvements to the Heterogeneous Tool Set HETS, both from a theoretical and an implementation point of view. In the first part of the thesis we present a number of recent extensions of the tool, among which declarative specifications of logics, generalized theoroidal comorphisms, heterogeneous colimits and integration of the logic of the term rewriting system Maude. In the second part we concentrate on the CASL architectural refinement language, that we equip with a notion of refinement tree and with calculi for checking correctness and consistency of refinements. Soundness and completeness of these calculi is also investigated. Finally, we present the integration of the VSE refinement method in HETS as an institution comorphism. Thus, the proof manangement component of HETS remains unmodified

    The role of logical interpretations on program development

    Get PDF
    Stepwise refinement of algebraic specifications is a well known formal methodology for program development. However, traditional notions of refinement based on signature morphisms are often too rigid to capture a number of relevant transformations in the context of software design, reuse, and adaptation. This paper proposes a new approach to refinement in which signature morphisms are replaced by logical interpretations as a means to witness refinements. The approach is first presented in the context of equational logic, and later generalised to deductive systems of arbitrary dimension. This allows, for example, refining sentential into equational specifications and the latter into modal ones.The authors express their gratitude to the anonymous referees who raised a number of pertinent questions entailing a more precise characterisation of the paper's contributions and a clarification of their scope. This work was funded by HRDF - European Regional Development Fund through the COMPETE Programme (operational programme for competitiveness) and by National Funds through the FCT (Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology) within project FCOMP-01-0124-FEDER-028923 (Nasoni) and the project PEst-C/MAT/UI4106/2011 with COMPETE number FCOMP-01-0124-FEDER-022690 (CIDMA-UA). The first author also acknowledges the financial assistance by the projects GetFun, reference FP7-PEOPLE-2012-IRSES, and NOCIONES IDE COMPLETUD, reference FFI2009-09345 (MICINN - Spain). A. Madeira was supported by the FCT within the project NORTE-01-0124-FEDER-000060

    Automatic Synthesis of Logical Models for Order-Sorted First-Order Theories

    Full text link
    [EN] In program analysis, the synthesis of models of logical theories representing the program semantics is often useful to prove program properties. We use order-sorted first- order logic as an appropriate framework to describe the semantics and properties of programs as given theories. Then we investigate the automatic synthesis of models for such theories. We use convex polytopic domains as a flexible approach to associate different domains to different sorts. We introduce a framework for the piecewise definition of functions and predicates. We develop its use with linear expressions (in a wide sense, including linear transformations represented as matrices) and inequalities to specify functions and predicates. In this way, algorithms and tools from linear algebra and arithmetic constraint solving (e.g., SMT) can be used as a backend for an efficient implementation.Partially supported by the EU (FEDER), projects TIN2015-69175-C4-1-R, and GV PROMETEOII/2015/ 013. R. GutiĂ©rrez also supported by Juan de la Cierva Fellowship JCI-2012-13528.Lucas Alba, S.; GutiĂ©rrez Gil, R. (2018). Automatic Synthesis of Logical Models for Order-Sorted First-Order Theories. Journal of Automated Reasoning. 60(4):465-501. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10817-017-9419-3S465501604AlarcĂłn, B., GutiĂ©rrez, R., Lucas, S., Navarro-Marset, R.: Proving termination properties with MU-TERM. In: Proceedings of AMAST’10. LNCS, vol. 6486, pp. 201–208 (2011)AlarcĂłn, B., Lucas, S., Navarro-Marset, R.: Using matrix interpretations over the reals in proofs of termination. In: Proceedings of PROLE’09, pp. 255–264 (2009)Albert, E., Genaim, S., GutiĂ©rrez, R.: A Transformational Approach to Resource Analysis with Typed-Norms. Revised Selected Papers from LOPSTR’13. LNCS, vol. 8901, pp 38–53 (2013)de Angelis, E., Fioravante, F., Pettorossi, A., Proietti, M.: Proving correctness of imperative programs by linearizing constrained Horn clauses. Theory Pract. Log. Program. 15(4–5), 635–650 (2015)de Angelis, E., Fioravante, F., Pettorossi, A., Proietti, M.: Semantics-based generation of verification conditions by program specialization. In: Proceedings of PPDP’15, pp. 91–102. ACM Press, New York (2015)Aoto, T.: Solution to the problem of zantema on a persistent property of term rewriting systems. J. Funct. Log. Program. 2001(11), 1–20 (2001)Barwise, J.: An Introduction to First-Order Logic. In: Barwise, J. (ed.) Handbook of Mathematical Logic. North-Holland, Amsterdam (1977)Barwise, J.: Axioms for Abstract Model Theory. Ann. Math. Log. 7, 221–265 (1974)Bochnak, J., Coste, M., Roy, M.-F.: Real Algebraic Geometry. Springer, Berlin (1998)Birkhoff, G., Lipson, J.D.: Heterogeneous algebras. J. Comb. Theory 8, 115–133 (1970)Bofill, M., Nieuwenhuis, R., Oliveras, A., RodrĂ­guez-Carbonell, E., Rubio, A.: The Barcelogic SMT Solver. In: Proceedings of CAV’08. LNCS, vol. 5123, pp. 294–298 (2008)BjĂžrner, N., Gurfinkel, A., McMillan, K., Rybalchenko, A.: Horn-clause solvers for program verification. In: Fields of Logic and Computation II—Essays Dedicated to Yuri Gurevich on the Occasion of His 75th Birthday. LNCS, vol. 9300, pp. 24–51 (2015)BjĂžrner, N., McMillan, K., Rybalchenko, A.: On solving universally quantified horn-clauses. In: Proceedings of SAS’13. LNCS vol. 7935, pp. 105–125 (2013)BjĂžrner, N., McMillan, K., Rybalchenko, A.: Program verification as satisfiability modulo theories. In: Proceedings of SMT’12, EPiC Series in Computing, vol. 20, pp. 3–11 (2013)Bliss, G.A.: Algebraic Functions. Dover (2004)Bonfante, G., Marion, J.-Y., Moyen, J.-Y.: On Lexicographic Termination Ordering With Space Bound Certifications. Revised Papers from PSI 2001. LNCS, vol. 2244, pp. 482–493 (2001)Boolos, G.S., Burgess, J.P., Jeffrey, R.C.: Computability and Logic, 4th edn. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2002)Borralleras, C., Lucas, S., Oliveras, A., RodrĂ­guez, E., Rubio, A.: SAT modulo linear arithmetic for solving polynomial constraints. J. Autom. Reason. 48, 107–131 (2012)BĂŒrckert, H.-J., Hollunder, B., Laux, A.: On Skolemization in constrained logics. Ann. Math. Artif. Intell. 18, 95–131 (1996)Burstall, R.M., Goguen, J.A.: Putting Theories together to make specifications. In: Proceedings of IJCAI’77, pp. 1045–1058. William Kaufmann (1977)Caplain, M.: Finding invariant assertions for proving programs. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Reliable Software, pp. 165–171. ACM Press, New York (1975)Chang, C.L., Lee, R.C.: Symbolic Logic and Mechanical Theorem Proving. Academic Press, Orlando (1973)Clavel, M., DurĂĄn, F., Eker, S., Lincoln, P., MartĂ­-Oliet, N., Meseguer, J., Talcott, C.: All About Maude—A High-Performance Logical Framework. LNCS 4350, (2007)Cohn, A.G.: Improving the expressiveness of many sorted logic. In: Proceedings of the National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 84–87. AAAI Press, Menlo Park (1983)Contejean, E., MarchĂ©, C., TomĂĄs, A.-P., Urbain, X.: Mechanically proving termination using polynomial interpretations. J. Autom. Reason. 34(4), 325–363 (2006)Cooper, D.C.: Programs for mechanical program verification. Mach. Intell. 6, 43–59 (1971). Edinburgh University PressCooper, D.C.: Theorem proving in arithmetic without multiplication. Mach. Intell. 7, 91–99 (1972)Courtieu, P., Gbedo, G., Pons, O.: Improved matrix interpretations. In: Proceedings of SOFSEM’10. LNCS, vol. 5901, pp. 283–295 (2010)Cousot, P., Cousot, R., Mauborgne, L.: Logical abstract domains and interpretations. In: The Future of Sofware Engineering, pp. 48–71. Springer, New York (2011)Cousot, P., Halbwachs, N.: Automatic Discovery of linear restraints among variables of a program. In: Conference Record of POPL’78, pp. 84–96. ACM Press, New York (1978)Davey, B.A., Priestley, H.A.: Introduction to Lattices and Order. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1990)Elspas, B., Levitt, K.N., Waldinger, R.J., Waksman, A.: An assessment of techniques for proving program correctness. Comput. Surv. 4(2), 97–147 (1972)van Emdem, M.H., Kowalski, R.A.: The semantics of predicate logic as a programming language. J. ACM 23(4), 733–742 (1976)Endrullis, J., Waldmann, J., Zantema, H.: Matrix interpretations for proving termination of term rewriting. In: Proceedings of IJCAR’06. LNCS, vol. 4130, pp. 574–588 (2006)Endrullis, J., Waldmann, J., Zantema, H.: Matrix interpretations for proving termination of term rewriting. J. Autom. Reason. 40(2–3), 195–220 (2008)Floyd, R.W.: Assigning meanings to programs. Math. Asp. Comput. Sci. 19, 19–32 (1967)Fuhs, C., Giesl, J., Middeldorp, A., Schneider-Kamp, P., Thiemann, R., Zankl, H.: Maximal termination. In: Proceedings of RTA’08. LNCS, vol. 5117, pp. 110–125 (2008)Fuhs, C., Giesl, J., Parting, M., Schneider-Kamp, P., Swiderski, S.: Proving termination by dependency pairs and inductive theorem proving. J. Autom. Reason. 47, 133–160 (2011)Fuhs, C., Kop, C.: Polynomial interpretations for higher-order rewriting. In: Proceedings of RTA’12. LIPIcs, vol. 15, pp. 176–192 (2012)Futatsugi, K., Diaconescu, R.: CafeOBJ Report. World Scientific, AMAST Series, (1998)Gaboardi, M., PĂ©choux, R.: On bounding space usage of streams using interpretation analysis. Sci. Comput. Program. 111, 395–425 (2015)Giesl, J., Mesnard, F., Rubio, A., Thiemann, R., Waldmann, J.: Termination competition (termCOMP 2015). In: Proceedings of CADE’15. LNCS, vol. 9195, pp. 105–108 (2015)Giesl, J., Ströder, T., Schneider-Kamp, P., Emmes, F., Fuhs, C.: Symbolic evaluation graphs and term rewriting—a general methodology for analyzing logic programs. In: Proceedings of the PPDP’12, pp. 1–12. ACM Press (2012)Giesl, J., Raffelsieper, M., Schneider-Kamp, P., Swiderski, S., Thiemann, R.: Automated termination proofs for haskell by term rewriting. ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst. 33(2), 7 (2011)Gnaedig, I.: Termination of Order-sorted Rewriting. In: Proceedings of ALP’92. LNCS, vol. 632, pp. 37–52 (1992)Goguen, J.A.: Order-Sorted Algebra. Semantics and Theory of Computation Report 14, UCLA (1978)Goguen, J.A., Burstall, R.M.: Some fundamental algebraic tools for the semantics of computation. Part 1: comma categories, colimits, signatures and theories. Theoret. Comput. Sci. 31, 175–209 (1984)Goguen, J.A., Burstall, R.M.: Some fundamental algebraic tools for the semantics of computation. Part 2 signed and abstract theories. Theoret. Comput. Sci. 31, 263–295 (1984)Goguen, J., Meseguer, J.: Models and equality for logical programming. In: Proceedings of TAPSOFT’87. LNCS, vol. 250, pp. 1–22 (1987)Goguen, J.A., Thatcher, J.W., Wagner, E.G.: An initial algebra approach to the specification, correctness and implementation of abstract data types. In: Current Trends in Programming Methodology, pp. 80–149. Prentice Hall (1978)Goguen, J.A., Meseguer, J.: Remarks on remarks on many-sorted equational logic. Sigplan Notices 22(4), 41–48 (1987)Goguen, J., Meseguer, J.: Order-sorted algebra I: equational deduction for multiple inheritance, overloading, exceptions and partial operations. Theoret. Comput. Sci. 105, 217–273 (1992)Goguen, J.A., Winkler, T., Meseguer, J., Futatsugi, K., Jouannaud, J.-P.: Introducing OBJ. In: Goguen, J., Malcolm, G. (eds.) Software Engineering with OBJ: Algebraic Specification in Action. Kluwer, Boston (2000)Grebenshikov, S., Lopes, N.P., Popeea, C., Rybalchenko, A.: Synthesizing software verifiers from proof rules. In: Proceedings of PLDI’12, pp. 405–416. ACM Press (2012)Gulwani, S., Tiwari, A.: Combining Abstract Interpreters. In: Proceedings of PLDI’06, pp. 376–386. ACM Press (2006)Gurfinkel, A., Kahsai, T., Komuravelli, A., Navas, J.A.: The seahorn verification framework. In: Proceedings of CAV’15, Part I. LNCS, vol. 9206, pp. 343–361 (2015)GutiĂ©rrez, R., Lucas, S., Reinoso, P.: A tool for the automatic generation of logical models of order-sorted first-order theories. In: Proceedings of PROLE’16, pp. 215–230 (2016). http://zenon.dsic.upv.es/ages/Hantler, S.L., King, J.C.: An introduction to proving the correctness of programs. ACM Comput. Surv. 8(3), 331–353 (1976)Hayes, P.: A logic of actions. Mach. Intell. 6, 495–520 (1971). Edinburgh University Press, EdinburghHeidergott, B., Olsder, G.J., van der Woude, J.: Max plus at work. A course on max-plus algebra and its applications. In: Modeling and Analysis of Synchronized Systems, Princeton University Press (2006)Hirokawa, N., Moser, G.: Automated complexity analysis based on the dependency pair method. In: Proceedings of IJCAR 2008. LNCS, vol. 5195, pp. 364–379 (2008)Hoare, C.A.R.: An axiomatic basis for computer programming. Commun. ACM 12(10), 576–583 (1969)Hodges, W.: Elementary Predicate Logic. Handbook of Philosophical Logic, vol. 1, pp. 1–131. Reidel Publishing Company (1983)Hodges, W.: A Shorter Model Theory. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1997)Hofbauer, D.: Termination proofs by context-dependent interpretation. In: Proceedings of RTA’01. LNCS, vol. 2051, pp. 108–121 (2001)Hofbauer, D.: Termination proofs for ground rewrite systems. interpretations and derivational complexity. Appl. Algebra Eng. Commun. Comput. 12, 21–38 (2001)Hofbauer, D., Lautemann, C.: Termination proofs and the length of derivations. In: Proceedings of RTA’89. LNCS, vol. 355, pp. 167–177 (1989)Hull, T.E., Enright, W.H., Sedgwick, A.E.: The correctness of numerical algorithms. In: Proceedings of PAAP’72, pp. 66–73 (1972)Igarashi, S., London, R.L., Luckham, D.: Automatic program verification I: a logical basis and its implementation. Acta Inform. 4, 145–182 (1975)Iwami, M.: Persistence of termination of term rewriting systems with ordered sorts. In: Proceedings of 5th JSSST Workshop on Programming and Programming Languages, Shizuoka, Japan, pp. 47–56. (2003)Iwami, M.: Persistence of termination for non-overlapping term rewriting systems. In: Proceedings of Algebraic Systems, Formal Languages and Conventional and Unconventional Computation Theory, Kokyuroku RIMS, University of Kyoto, vol. 1366, pp. 91–99 (2004)Katz, S., Manna, Z.: Logical analysis of programs. Commun. ACM 19(4), 188–206 (1976)Langford, C.H.: Review: Über deduktive Theorien mit mehreren Sorten von Grunddingen. J. Symb. Log. 4(2), 98 (1939)Lankford, D.S.: Some approaches to equality for computational logic: a survey and assessment. Memo ATP-36, Automatic Theorem Proving Project, University of Texas, Austin, TXLondon, R.L.: The current state of proving programs correct. In: Proceedings of ACM’72, vol. 1, pp. 39–46. ACM (1972)Lucas, S.: Polynomials over the reals in proofs of termination: from theory to practice. RAIRO Theor. Inform. Appl. 39(3), 547–586 (2005)Lucas, S.: Synthesis of models for order-sorted first-order theories using linear algebra and constraint solving. Electron. Proc. Theor. Comput. Sci. 200, 32–47 (2015)Lucas, S.: Use of logical models for proving operational termination in general logics. In: Selected Papers from WRLA’16. LNCS, vol. 9942, pp. 1–21 (2016)Lucas, S., MarchĂ©, C., Meseguer, J.: Operational termination of conditional term rewriting systems. Inform. Proces. Lett. 95, 446–453 (2005)Lucas, S., Meseguer, J.: Models for logics and conditional constraints in automated proofs of termination. In: Proceedings of AISC’14. LNAI, vol. 8884, pp. 7–18 (2014)Lucas, S., Meseguer, J.: Order-sorted dependency pairs. In: Proceedings of PPDP’08 , pp. 108–119. ACM Press (2008)Lucas, S., Meseguer, J.: Proving operational termination of declarative programs in general logics. In: Proceedings of PPDP’14, pp. 111–122. ACM Digital Library (2014)Lucas, S., Meseguer, J.: Dependency pairs for proving termination properties of conditional term rewriting systems. J. Log. Algebr. Methods Program. 86, 236–268 (2017)Manna, Z.: The correctness of programs. J. Comput. Syst. Sci. 3, 119–127 (1969)Manna, Z.: Properties of programs and the first-order predicate calculus. J. ACM 16(2), 244–255 (1969)Manna, Z.: Termination of programs represented as interpreted graphs. In: Proceedings of AFIPS’70, pp. 83–89 (1970)Manna, Z., Ness, S.: On the termination of Markov algorithms. In: Proceedings of the Third Hawaii International Conference on System Science, pp. 789–792 (1970)Manna, Z., Pnueli, A.: Formalization of properties of functional programs. J. ACM 17(3), 555–569 (1970)Marion, Y.-I., PĂ©choux, R.: Sup-interpretations, a semantic method for static analysis of program resources. ACM Trans. Comput. Log. 10(4), 27 (2009)MartĂ­-Oliet, N., Meseguer, J., Palomino, M.: Theoroidal maps as algebraic simulations. Revised Selected Papers from WADT’04. LNCS, vol. 3423, pp. 126–143 (2005)McCarthy, J.: Recursive functions of symbolic expressions and their computation by machine. Part I. Commun. ACM 3(4), 184–195 (1960)Meseguer, J.: General logics. In: Ebbinghaus, H.D., et al. (eds.) Logic Colloquium’87, pp. 275–329. North-Holland (1989)Meseguer, J., Skeirik, S.: Equational formulas and pattern operations in initial order-sorted algebras. Revised Selected Papers from LOPSTR’15. LNCS, vol. 9527, pp. 36–53 (2015)Middeldorp, A.: Matrix interpretations for polynomial derivational complexity of rewrite systems. In: Proceedings of LPAR’12. LNCS, vol. 7180, p. 12 (2012)Monin, J.-F.: Understanding Formal Methods. Springer, London (2003)Montenegro, M., Peña, R., Segura, C.: Space consumption analysis by abstract interpretation: inference of recursive functions. Sci. Comput. Program. 111, 426–457 (2015)de Moura, L., BjĂžrner, N.: Satisfiability modulo theories: introduction and applications. Commun. ACM 54(9), 69–77 (2011)Naur, P.: Proof of algorithms by general snapshots. Bit 6, 310–316 (1966)Neurauter, F., Middeldorp, A.: Revisiting matrix interpretations for proving termination of term rewriting. In: Proceedings of RTA’11. LIPICS, vol. 10, pp. 251–266 (2011)Ohlebusch, E.: Advanced Topics in Term Rewriting. Springer, New York (2002)Ölveczky, P.C., Lysne, O.: Order-sorted termination: the unsorted way. In: Proceedings of ALP’96. LNCS, vol. 1139, pp. 92–106 (1996)Otto, C., Brockschmidt, M., von Essen, C., Giesl, J.: Automated termination analysis of java bytecode by term rewriting. In: Proceedings of RTA’10. LIPICS, vol. 6, pp. 259–276 (2010)PĂ©choux, R.: Synthesis of sup-interpretations: a survey. Theoret. Comput. Sci. 467, 30–52 (2013)Podelski, A., Rybalchenko, A.: Transition invariants. In: IEEE Computer Society Proceedings of LICS’04, pp. 32–41 (2004)Prestel, A., Delzell, C.N.: Positive Polynomials. From Hilbert’s 17th Problem to Real Algebra. Springer, Berlin (2001)Robinson, D.J.S.: A Course in Linear Algebra with Applications, 2nd edn. World Scientific Publishing, Co, Singapore (2006)RĂŒmmer, P., Hojjat, H., Kuncak, V.: Disjunctive interpolants for horn-clause verification. In: Proceedings of CAV’13, vol. 8044, pp. 347–363 (2013)Schrijver, A.: Theory of Linear and Integer Programming. Wiley, Amsterdam (1986)Schmidt, A.: Über deduktive Theorien mit mehreren Sorten von Grunddingen. Matematische Annalen 115(4), 485–506 (1938)Schmidt-Schauss, M.: Computational Aspects Of An Order-Sorted Logic With Term Declarations. PhD Thesis, Fachbereich Informatik der UniversitĂ€t Kaiserslautern (1988)Shapiro, S.: Foundations without Foundationalism: A Case for Second-Order Logic. Clarendon Press, New York (1991)Shostak, R.E.: A practical decision procedure for arithmetic with function symbols. J. ACM 26(2), 351–360 (1979)Smullyan, R.M.: Theory of Formal Systems. Princeton University Press, Princeton (1961)Tarski, A.: A Decision Method for Elementary Algebra and Geometry, 2nd edn. University of California Press, Berkeley (1951)Toyama, Y.: Counterexamples to termination for the direct sum of term rewriting systems. Inform. Process. Lett. 25, 141–143 (1987)Turing, A.M.: Checking a large routine. In: Report of a Conference on High Speed Automatic Calculating Machines, University Mathematics Laboratory, Cambridge, pp. 67–69 (1949)Urban, C.: The abstract domain of segmented ranking functions. In: Proceeding of SAS’13. LNCS, vol. 7935, pp. 43–62 (2013)Urban, C., Gurfinkel, A., Kahsai, T.: Synthesizing ranking functions from bits and pieces. In: Proceedings of TACAS’16. LNCS, vol. 9636, pp. 54–70 (2016)Waldmann, J.: Matrix interpretations on polyhedral domains. In: Proceedings of RTA’15. LIPICS, vol. 26, pp. 318–333 (2015)Waldmann, J., Bau, A., Noeth, E.: Matchbox termination prover. http://github.com/jwaldmann/matchbox/ (2014)Walther, C.: A mechanical solution of schubert’s steamroller by many-sorted resolution. Aritif. Intell. 26, 217–224 (1985)Wang, H.: Logic of many-sorted theories. J. Symb. Logic 17(2), 105–116 (1952)Zantema, H.: Termination of term rewriting: interpretation and type elimination. J. Symb. Comput. 17, 23–50 (1994

    An Automaton-Theoretic View of Algebraic Specifications

    Get PDF
    We compare two methods for software specification: algebraic specifications and automata. While algebraic specifications have been around since the 1970s and have been studied extensively, specification by automata is relatively new. Its origins are in another veteran method called trace assertions, which considers a software module as a set of traces, that is, a sequences of function executions. A module is specified by a set of canonical traces and an equivalence relation matching one of the canonical traces to each non-canonical trace. It has been recently shown that trace assertions is an equivalent method to specification by automata. In continuation of this work on trace assertions and automata, we study how automata compare with algebraic specifications. We prove that every specification using an automaton can be converted into an algebraic specification describing the same abstract data type. This conversion utilises a set of canonical words, representing states in the automaton. We next consider varieties of monoids as a heuristic for obtaining more concise algebraic specifications from automata. Finally, we discuss the opposite conversion of algebraic specifications into automata. We show that, while an automaton always exists for every abstract data type described by an algebraic specification, this automaton may not be finitely describable and therefore may not be considered as a viable method for software specification

    Computer Aided Verification

    Get PDF
    This open access two-volume set LNCS 10980 and 10981 constitutes the refereed proceedings of the 30th International Conference on Computer Aided Verification, CAV 2018, held in Oxford, UK, in July 2018. The 52 full and 13 tool papers presented together with 3 invited papers and 2 tutorials were carefully reviewed and selected from 215 submissions. The papers cover a wide range of topics and techniques, from algorithmic and logical foundations of verification to practical applications in distributed, networked, cyber-physical, and autonomous systems. They are organized in topical sections on model checking, program analysis using polyhedra, synthesis, learning, runtime verification, hybrid and timed systems, tools, probabilistic systems, static analysis, theory and security, SAT, SMT and decisions procedures, concurrency, and CPS, hardware, industrial applications

    Termination and Productivity

    Get PDF
    Klop, J.W. [Promotor]Vrijer, R.C. de [Copromotor
    corecore