Tool Support for Teaching Hoare Logic

2014 ◽  
pp. 332-346 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tadeusz Sznuk ◽  
Aleksy Schubert
Keyword(s):  
Tool Support ◽  
Hoare Logic

Synthesizing Conjunctive & Disjunctive Linear Invariants by K-means++ and SVM

2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (6) ◽  
pp. 847-856
Author(s):  
Shengbing Ren ◽  
Xiang Zhang
Keyword(s):  
Software Verification ◽  
State Of The Art ◽  
Positive Sample ◽  
Machine Learning Algorithms ◽  
Support Vector ◽  
Hoare Logic ◽  
Excellent Performance ◽  
Automated Software ◽  
Inductive Invariants ◽  
Linear Invariants

The problem of synthesizing adequate inductive invariants lies at the heart of automated software verification. The state-of-the-art machine learning algorithms for synthesizing invariants have gradually shown its excellent performance. However, synthesizing disjunctive invariants is a difficult task. In this paper, we propose a method k++ Support Vector Machine (SVM) integrating k-means++ and SVM to synthesize conjunctive and disjunctive invariants. At first, given a program, we start with executing the program to collect program states. Next, k++SVM adopts k-means++ to cluster the positive samples and then applies SVM to distinguish each positive sample cluster from all negative samples to synthesize the candidate invariants. Finally, a set of theories founded on Hoare logic are adopted to check whether the candidate invariants are true invariants. If the candidate invariants fail the check, we should sample more states and repeat our algorithm. The experimental results show that k++SVM is compatible with the algorithms for Intersection Of Half-space (IOH) and more efficient than the tool of Interproc. Furthermore, it is shown that our method can synthesize conjunctive and disjunctive invariants automatically

scholarly journals Reasoning with the HERMIT: tool support for equational reasoning on GHC core programs

2016 ◽  
Vol 50 (12) ◽  
pp. 23-34 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Farmer ◽  
Neil Sculthorpe ◽  
Andy Gill
Keyword(s):  
Tool Support ◽  
Equational Reasoning

scholarly journals Correct program parallelisations

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Blom ◽  
S. Darabi ◽  
M. Huisman ◽  
M. Safari
Keyword(s):  
Composition Operators ◽  
Parallel Programs ◽  
Parallel Program ◽  
Tool Support ◽  
Intermediate Representation ◽  
Data Race ◽  
Sequential Program ◽  
Functional Correctness ◽  
Correct Program ◽  
Basic Blocks

AbstractA commonly used approach to develop deterministic parallel programs is to augment a sequential program with compiler directives that indicate which program blocks may potentially be executed in parallel. This paper develops a verification technique to reason about such compiler directives, in particular to show that they do not change the behaviour of the program. Moreover, the verification technique is tool-supported and can be combined with proving functional correctness of the program. To develop our verification technique, we propose a simple intermediate representation (syntax and semantics) that captures the main forms of deterministic parallel programs. This language distinguishes three kinds of basic blocks: parallel, vectorised and sequential blocks, which can be composed using three different composition operators: sequential, parallel and fusion composition. We show how a widely used subset of OpenMP can be encoded into this intermediate representation. Our verification technique builds on the notion of iteration contract to specify the behaviour of basic blocks; we show that if iteration contracts are manually specified for single blocks, then that is sufficient to automatically reason about data race freedom of the composed program. Moreover, we also show that it is sufficient to establish functional correctness on a linearised version of the original program to conclude functional correctness of the parallel program. Finally, we exemplify our approach on an example OpenMP program, and we discuss how tool support is provided.

Tool Support for Confidentiality-by-Construction

2019 ◽  
Vol 38 (2) ◽  
pp. 64-68
Author(s):  
Tobias Runge ◽  
Ina Schaefer ◽  
Alexander Knüppel ◽  
Loek Cleophas ◽  
Derrick Kourie ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Tool Support

scholarly journals Security assurance cases—state of the art of an emerging approach

2021 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mazen Mohamad ◽  
Jan-Philipp Steghöfer ◽  
Riccardo Scandariato
Keyword(s):  
State Of The Art ◽  
Tool Support ◽  
Security Assurance ◽  
The Past ◽  
Depth Analysis ◽  
Structured Argumentation ◽  
Security Properties ◽  
Standards And Regulations ◽  
Assurance Cases ◽  
Security Standards

AbstractSecurity Assurance Cases (SAC) are a form of structured argumentation used to reason about the security properties of a system. After the successful adoption of assurance cases for safety, SAC are getting significant traction in recent years, especially in safety-critical industries (e.g., automotive), where there is an increasing pressure to be compliant with several security standards and regulations. Accordingly, research in the field of SAC has flourished in the past decade, with different approaches being investigated. In an effort to systematize this active field of research, we conducted a systematic literature review (SLR) of the existing academic studies on SAC. Our review resulted in an in-depth analysis and comparison of 51 papers. Our results indicate that, while there are numerous papers discussing the importance of SAC and their usage scenarios, the literature is still immature with respect to concrete support for practitioners on how to build and maintain a SAC. More importantly, even though some methodologies are available, their validation and tool support is still lacking.

A Hoare Logic for GPU Kernels

2017 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-43 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kensuke Kojima ◽  
Atsushi Igarashi
Keyword(s):  
Hoare Logic
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document