Featherweight VeriFast

VeriFast is a leading research prototype tool for the sound modular verification of safety and correctness properties of single-threaded and multithreaded C and Java programs. It has been used as a vehicle for exploration and validation of novel program verification techniques and for industrial case studies; it has served well at a number of program verification competitions; and it has been used for teaching by multiple teachers independent of the authors. However, until now, while VeriFast's operation has been described informally in a number of publications, and specific verification techniques have been formalized, a clear and precise exposition of how VeriFast works has not yet appeared. In this article we present for the first time a formal definition and soundness proof of a core subset of the VeriFast program verification approach. The exposition aims to be both accessible and rigorous: the text is based on lecture notes for a graduate course on program verification, and it is backed by an executable machine-readable definition and machine-checked soundness proof in Coq

Alien Registration- Jacobs, Frank (Rumford, Oxford County)

https://digitalmaine.com/alien_docs/12462/thumbnail.jp

Olfactory Orientation and Navigation in Humans.

Although predicted by theory, there is no direct evidence that an animal can define an arbitrary location in space as a coordinate location on an odor grid. Here we show that humans can do so. Using a spatial match-to-sample procedure, humans were led to a random location within a room diffused with two odors. After brief sampling and spatial disorientation, they had to return to this location. Over three conditions, participants had access to different sensory stimuli: olfactory only, visual only, and a final control condition with no olfactory, visual, or auditory stimuli. Humans located the target with higher accuracy in the olfaction-only condition than in the control condition and showed higher accuracy than chance. Thus a mechanism long proposed for the homing pigeon, the ability to define a location on a map constructed from chemical stimuli, may also be a navigational mechanism used by humans

Business Associations - Uniform Limited Partnership Act - Activites Making a Limited Partner Liable as a General Partner

Marback Motor Co., a limited partnership, was formed in 1951 pursuant to the California Uniform Limited Partnership Act. Defendant limited partner held a chattel mortgage on partnership assets and owned the building in which the business was located. He had authority to co-sign checks of the partnership, but checks could be drawn on the firm\u27s account without his signature and he could not withdraw funds himself. In August 1953, without a prior dissolution of the limited partnership, defendant bought some assets of the firm at a purchase price found to represent the fair market value of the properties. At the time of sale the firm had more than sufficient assets to pay all creditors. The limited partnership then went out of active business and defendant took over operation of a similar business on the same premises under a different name. In 1954, the limited partnership was adjudicated bankrupt. Actions were brought by the trustee of the bankrupt limited partnership and a creditor\u27s executor seeking to hold defendant as a general partner. Held, defendant did not exercise such control over the business as to become liable as a general partner under the California Uniform Limited Partnership Act. Grainger v. Antoyan, (Cal. 1957) 313 P. (2d) 848

Torts - Libel and Slander - Effect of an Unsustained Plea of Truth

Plaintiff, superintendent of a state training school for boys, was removed from that office by his superior in the state department of social welfare. The defendant corporation, publisher and owner of two newspapers in the state, published certain articles in its newspapers relating to plaintiff\u27s conduct in office, his management of the school, and his removal from office. Plaintiff brought action of libel. Defendant, in addition to a plea of general issue, filed a plea of truth. The trial court instructed the jury that where truth is pleaded as a defense, but is not successful, such plea will sustain an award of punitive damages at the discretion of the jury. The jury found for the plaintiff, awarding $25,000 which included punitive damages. On appeal defendant contended that an unsuccessful plea of truth could be considered evidence of actual malice allowing assessment of punitive damages only if it appeared to the jury that the defense was made in bad faith, maliciously, or without proper motives. Held, reversed on other grounds. In an action of libel the plea of truth of itself constitutes a reaffirmation of the libel and may be regarded by the jury as showing actual malice and warranting an award of punitive damages. Marley v. Providence Journal Co., (R.I. 1957) 134 A. (2d) 180

A study of content and methods by which industrial arts can implement the framework for education in California

The problem for this study is “How can the Industrial Arts Program implement the Framework for Education in California?” The Framework was designed as a basic guide for all areas and levels. The principles and recommendations are of necessity, broad and general. The problem then resolved itself into converting these broad principles and recommendations into specific suggestions to be applied in the Industrial Arts classroom. In solving this problem it is intended to develop (1) specific types of experiences needed and (2) methods and organization required to achieve maximum utilization of these experiences

Municipal Corporations - Zoning - The Granting of a Variance Based on Unnecessary Hardship

Defendant purchased a tract of vacant land located in the most highly restricted residence zone of his city. The local zoning ordinance prescribed minimum area, width, and depth measurements for building plots in that district. Defendant desired to subdivide the property into two building plots in order to build a one-family residence on each plot. Although the first plot complied with the minimum requirements of the ordinance, the other plot was deficient in area and depth measurements. Defendant was unsuccessful in his attempts both to purchase adjoining land and to sell parts of his property to adjoining owners. He then applied to the local Board of Adjustment for a variance from the zoning ordinance, claiming hardship because of the shape of his property. The board granted the variance holding that the strict application of the zoning ordinance under the circumstances would work an undue hardship on the owner. Plaintiffs, property owners in the immediate neighborhood, contested the validity of the variance. The lower court affirmed the grant of the variance. On appeal, held, reversed. The defendant failed to establish a case of undue hardship as required by the zoning ordinance. Bierce v. Gross, (N.J. 1957) 135 A. (2d) 561

Just a\u27wearyin\u27 for you

https://digitalcommons.ithaca.edu/sheetmusic/1109/thumbnail.jp