Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Automated Flaw Detection in Algebraic Specifications

  • Published:
Journal of Automated Reasoning Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In interactive theorem proving practice a significant amount of time is spent on unsuccessful proof attempts of wrong conjectures. An automatic method that reveals them by generating finite counter examples would offer an extremely valuable support for a proof engineer by saving his time and effort. In practice, such counter examples tend to be small, so usually there is no need to search for big instances. Most definitions of functions or predicates on infinite structures do not preserve the semantics if a transition to arbitrary finite substructures is made. We propose constraints which guarantee a correct axiomatization on finite structures and present an approach which uses the Alloy Analyzer to generate finite instances of theories in the theorem prover KIV. It is evaluated on the library of basic data types as well as on some challenging case studies in KIV. The technique is implemented using the Kodkod constraint solver which is a successor of Alloy.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Ahrendt, W.: Deductive search for errors in free data type specifications using model generation. In: Voronkov, A. (ed.) 18th International Conference on Automated Deduction. LNCS, vol. 2392. Springer, New York (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Ahrendt, W., Beckert, B., Hähnle, R., Menzel, W., Reif, W., Schellhorn, G., Schmitt, P.: Integrating automated and interactive theorem proving. In: Bibel, W., Schmitt, P. (eds.) Automated Deduction—a Basis for Applications. Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Balser, M., Bäumler, S., Reif, W., Schellhorn, G.: Interactive verification of concurrent systems using symbolic execution. In: Proceedings of 7th International Workshop of Implementation of Logics (IWIL 08) (2008)

  4. Balser, M.: Verifying Concurrent Systems with Symbolic Execution. PhD thesis, Universität Augsburg, Fakultät für Informatik (2005)

  5. Balser, M., Bäumler, S., Knapp, A., Reif, W., Thums, A.: Interactive verification of UML state machines. In: ICFEM, pp. 434–448 (2004)

  6. Claessen, K.: Equinox, a new theorem prover for full first-order logic with equality. Presentation at Dagstuhl Seminar 05431 on Deduction and Applications (2005)

  7. Claessen, K., Sörensson, N.: New techniques that improve MACE-style model finding. In: Proc. of Workshop on Model Computation (MODEL) (2003)

  8. Dijkstra, E.W.: A Discipline of Programming, chapter 14. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs (1976)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Dunets, A., Schellhorn, G., Reif, W.: Automating algebraic specifications of non-freely generated data types. In: Cha et al. (eds.) ATVA. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 5311, pp. 141–155. Springer, New York (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Dunets, A., Schellhorn, G., Reif, W.: Bounded relational analysis of free data types. In: Beckert, B., Hähnle, R. (eds.) TAP. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 4966, pp. 99–115. Springer, New York (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Ehrig, H., Mahr, B.: Fundamentals of Algebraic Specification. Springer, Heidelberg (1985)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. Ehrig, H., Mahr, B.: Algebraic techniques in software development: a review of progress up to the mid nineties. In: Current Trends in Theoretical Computer Science, pp. 134–152 (2001)

  13. Harel, D., Kozen, D., Tiuryn, J.: Dynamic Logic. MIT, Cambridge (2000)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  14. Harris, T.L.: A pragmatic implementation of non-blocking linked-lists. In: Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 300–314. Springer, New York (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Harrison, J.: Inductive definitions: automation and application. In: TPHOLs, pp. 200–213 (1995)

  16. Heller, S., Herlihy, M., Luchangco, V., Moir, M., Scherer III, W.N., Shavit, N.: A lazy concurrent list-based set algorithm. In: OPODIS, pp. 3–16 (2005)

  17. Jackson, D.: Automating first-order relational logic. In: Proceedings of the 8th ACM SIGSOFT Symposium, pp. 130–139. ACM, New York (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Jackson, D.: Software Abstractions: Logic, Language, and Analysis. MIT, Cambridge (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Web presentation of the linearizability case study. URL: http://www.informatik.uni-augsburg.de/swt/projects/linearizability.html

  20. Kuncak, V., Jackson, D.: Relational analysis of algebraic datatypes. In: Proceedings of the 13th ACM SIGSOFT Symposium (2005)

  21. McCune, W.: Mace4 Reference Manual and Guide. Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  22. McCune, W.: Prover9 Manual. Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Meng, J., Quigley, C., Paulson, L.C.: Automation for interactive proof: first prototype. Inf. Comput. 204(10), 1575–1596 (2006)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  24. Moskewicz, M.W., Madigan, C.F., Zhao, Y., Zhang, L., Malik, S.: Chaff: engineering an efficient SAT solver. In: In Dac ’01: Proceedings of the 38th Conference on Design Automation, pp. 530–535. ACM, New York (2001)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  25. Mosses, P.D.: CASL Reference Manual, The Complete Documentation of the Common Algebraic Specification Language. In: Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 2960. Springer, New York (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Owre, S., Rushby, J.M., Shankar, N.: PVS: a prototype verification system. In: Kapur, D. (ed.) 11th International Conference on Automated Deduction (CADE). Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, vol. 607, pp. 748–752. Springer, Saratoga (1992)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Paulson, L.C.: Isabelle—a Generic Theorem Prover (with a contribution by T. Nipkow). In: Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 828. Springer, New York (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  28. Pike, L., Miner, P., Torres-Pomales, W.: Diagnosing a failed proof in fault-tolerance: a disproving challenge problem. In: DISPROVING 2006 Participants’ Proceedings, pp. 24–33 (2006)

  29. Ramananandro, T.: Mondex, an electronic purse : specification and refinement checks with the Alloy model-finding method. Form. Asp. Comput. 20(1), 21–39 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Reif, W., Schellhorn, G., Stenzel, K., Balser, M.: Structured specifications and interactive proofs with KIV. In: Bibel, W., Schmitt, P. (eds.) Automated Deduction—a Basis for Applications, vol. II: Systems and Implementation Techniques, chapter 1: Interactive Theorem Proving, pp. 13–39. Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  31. Reif, W.: Korrektheit von Spezifikationen und generischen Moduln. Ph.D. thesis, Universität Karlsruhe, Germany (1991) (in German)

  32. Reif, W., Schellhorn, G.: Theorem proving in large theories. In: Bibel, W., Schmitt, P. (eds.) Automated Deduction—a Basis for Applications, vol. III, 2. Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  33. Reif, W., Schellhorn, G., Stenzel, K.: Interactive correctness proofs for software modules using KIV. In: COMPASS’95—Tenth Annual Conference on Computer Assurance. IEEE, Gaithersburg (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  34. Reif, W., Schellhorn, G., Thums, A.: Flaw detection in formal specifications. In: IJCAR, pp. 642–657 (2001)

  35. Schellhorn, G.: Completeness of fair ASM refinement. Sci. Comput. Program. URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6V17-4XGGWF3-1&_user=616134&_coverDate=10%2F18%2F2009&_rdoc=1&_fmt=high&_orig=search&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_searchStrId=1179162534&_rerunOrigin=google&_acct=C000032318&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=616134&md5=ebeb568bc69c748d948a3d6d2f58530f (2009)

  36. Schellhorn, G., Ahrendt, W.: The WAM case study: verifying compiler correctness for prolog with KIV. In: Bibel, W., Schmitt, P. (eds.) Automated Deduction—a Basis for Applications, vol. III: Applications, chapter 3: Automated Theorem Proving in Software Engineering, pp. 165–194. Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  37. Slaney, J.K.: Finder: finite domain enumerator—system description. In: CADE, pp. 798–801 (1994)

  38. Stenzel, K.: A formally verified calculus for full Java Card. In: Rattray, C., Maharaj, S., Shankland, C. (eds.) AMAST. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 3116, pp. 491–505. Springer, New York (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  39. Torlak, E., Jackson, D.: Kodkod: a relational model finder. In: TACAS, pp. 632–647 (2007)

  40. Weber, T.: SAT-Based Finite Model Generation for Higher-Order Logic. Ph.D. thesis, Institut für Informatik, Technische Universität München, Germany (2008)

  41. Zhang, J., Zhang, H.: SEM: a system for enumerating models. In: Proceedings of the 14th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI), pp. 298–303. Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo (1995)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute for Software and Systems Engineering, University of Augsburg, 86135, Augsburg, Germany

    Andriy Dunets, Gerhard Schellhorn & Wolfgang Reif

Authors
  1. Andriy Dunets
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Gerhard Schellhorn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Wolfgang Reif
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Andriy Dunets.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Dunets, A., Schellhorn, G. & Reif, W. Automated Flaw Detection in Algebraic Specifications. J Autom Reasoning 45, 359–395 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10817-010-9166-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10817-010-9166-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation