Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Symbolic Abstract Contract Synthesis in a Rewriting Framework

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Logic-Based Program Synthesis and Transformation (LOPSTR 2016)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNTCS,volume 10184))

Abstract

We propose an automated technique for inferring software contracts from programs that are written in a non-trivial fragment of C, called KernelC, that supports pointer-based structures and heap manipulation. Starting from the semantic definition of KernelC in the \(\mathbb {K}\) framework, we enrich the symbolic execution facilities recently provided by C with novel capabilities for assertion synthesis that are based on abstract subsumption. Roughly speaking, we define an abstract symbolic technique that explains the execution of a (modifier) C function by using other (observer) routines in the same program. We implemented our technique in the automated tool KindSpec 2.0, which generates logical axioms that define the precise input/output behavior of the C routines.

This work has been partially supported by the EU (FEDER) and Spanish MINECO project TIN2015-69175-C4-1-R, and by Generalitat Valenciana PROMETEOII/2015/013. D. Pardo is supported by FPU-ME grant FPU14/01830.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Symbolic values are preceded by aquestion mark.

  2. 2.

    An object in C is a region of data storage in the execution environment.

  3. 3.

    By abuse, we assume a logical constraint representation \(x_1= v_1 \wedge \ldots \wedge x_n= v_n\) of the symbolic heap \(\{x_1\mapsto v_1, \ldots , x_n\mapsto v_n\}\), where every \(x_i\) refers to a field of a data object, or to a primitive-type program variable if \(x_i\) occurs in .

References

  1. Alpuente, M., Feliú, M.A., Villanueva, A.: Automatic inference of specifications using matching logic. In: Proceedings of PEPM 2013, pp. 127–136. ACM (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Alpuente, M., Pardo, D., Villanueva, A.: Automatic inference of specifications in the K framework. EPTCS 200, 1–17 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Anand, S., Păsăreanu, C.S., Visser, W.: Symbolic execution with abstraction. STTT 11(1), 53–67 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Arusoaie, A., Lucanu, D., Rusu, V.: Symbolic execution based on language transformation. Comput. Lang. Syst. Struct. 44(Part A), 48–71 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Calcagno, C., Distefano, D., O’Hearn, P.W., Yang, H.: Footprint analysis: a shape analysis that discovers preconditions. In: Nielson, H.R., Filé, G. (eds.) SAS 2007. LNCS, vol. 4634, pp. 402–418. Springer, Heidelberg (2007). doi:10.1007/978-3-540-74061-2_25

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  6. Claessen, K., Smallbone, N., Hughes, J.: QuickSpec: guessing formal specifications using testing. In: Fraser, G., Gargantini, A. (eds.) TAP 2010. LNCS, vol. 6143, pp. 6–21. Springer, Heidelberg (2010). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-13977-2_3

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  7. Cousot, P., Cousot, R., Fähndrich, M., Logozzo, F.: Automatic inference of necessary preconditions. In: Giacobazzi, R., Berdine, J., Mastroeni, I. (eds.) VMCAI 2013. LNCS, vol. 7737, pp. 128–148. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-35873-9_10

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  8. Ellison, C., Roşu, G.: An executable formal semantics of C with applications. In: Proceedings of POPL 2012, pp. 533–544. ACM (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Gulavani, B.S., Chakraborty, S., Ramalingam, G., Nori, A.V.: Bottom-up shape analysis using LISF. ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst. 33(5), 17 (2011)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  10. Henkel, J., Diwan, A.: Discovering algebraic specifications from Java classes. In: Cardelli, L. (ed.) ECOOP 2003. LNCS, vol. 2743, pp. 431–456. Springer, Heidelberg (2003). doi:10.1007/978-3-540-45070-2_19

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  11. Khurshid, S., PĂsĂreanu, C.S., Visser, W.: Generalized symbolic execution for model checking and testing. In: Garavel, H., Hatcliff, J. (eds.) TACAS 2003. LNCS, vol. 2619, pp. 553–568. Springer, Heidelberg (2003). doi:10.1007/3-540-36577-X_40

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  12. King, J.C.: Symbolic execution and program testing. Comm. ACM 19(7), 385–394 (1976)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. Liskov, B., Guttag, J.: Abstraction and Specification in Program Development. MIT Press, Cambridge (1986)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  14. Magill, S., Nanevski, A., Clarke, E., Lee, P.: Inferring invariants in separation logic for imperative list-processing programs. In: Proceedings of SPACE Workshop (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Meyer, B.: Applying ‘design by contract’. Computer 25(10), 40–51 (1992)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Moura, L., Bjørner, N.: Z3: an efficient SMT solver. In: Ramakrishnan, C.R., Rehof, J. (eds.) TACAS 2008. LNCS, vol. 4963, pp. 337–340. Springer, Heidelberg (2008). doi:10.1007/978-3-540-78800-3_24

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  17. Moy, Y., Marché, C.: Modular inference of subprogram contracts for safety checking. J. Symbolic Comput. 45(11), 1184–1211 (2010)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  18. Roşu, G., Şerbănuţă, T.F.: An overview of the K semantic framework. JLAP 79(6), 397–434 (2010)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  19. Tillmann, N., Chen, F., Schulte, W.: Discovering likely method specifications. In: Liu, Z., He, J. (eds.) ICFEM 2006. LNCS, vol. 4260, pp. 717–736. Springer, Heidelberg (2006). doi:10.1007/11901433_39

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  20. Wei, Y., Furia, C.A., Kazmin, N., Meyer, B.: Inferring better contracts. In: Proceedings of the ICSE 2011, 191–200. ACM (2011)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. DSIC, Universitat Politècnica de València, Camino de Vera s/n, 46022, Valencia, Spain

    María Alpuente, Daniel Pardo & Alicia Villanueva

Authors
  1. María Alpuente
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Daniel Pardo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Alicia Villanueva
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Daniel Pardo .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. IMDEA Software Institute and Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, Madrid, Spain

    Manuel V Hermenegildo

  2. IMDEA Software Institute and CSIC, Madrid, Spain

    Pedro Lopez-Garcia

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this paper

Cite this paper

Alpuente, M., Pardo, D., Villanueva, A. (2017). Symbolic Abstract Contract Synthesis in a Rewriting Framework. In: Hermenegildo, M., Lopez-Garcia, P. (eds) Logic-Based Program Synthesis and Transformation. LOPSTR 2016. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 10184. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-63139-4_11

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-63139-4_11

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-63138-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-63139-4

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation