Advertisement

A Generic Intermediate Representation for Verification Condition Generation

  • Manuel MontenegroEmail author
  • Ricardo Peña
  • Jaime Sánchez-Hernández
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9527)

Abstract

As part of a platform for computer-assisted verification, we present an intermediate representation of programs that is both language independent and appropriate for the generation of verification conditions. We show how many imperative and functional languages can be translated to this generic intermediate representation, and how the generated conditions reflect the axiomatic semantics of the original program. At this representation level, loop invariants and preconditions of recursive functions belonging to the original program are represented by assertions placed at certain edges of a directed graph.

The paper defines the generic representation, sketches the transformation algorithms, and describes how the places where the invariants should be placed are computed. Assuming that, either manually or assisted by the platform, the invariants have been settled, it is shown how the verification conditions are generated. A running example illustrates the process.

Keywords

Verification platforms Intermediate representation Verification conditions Program transformation 

References

  1. 1.
    Ahrendt, W., Beckert, B., Bruns, D., Bubel, R., Gladisch, C., Grebing, S., Hähnle, R., Hentschel, M., Herda, M., Klebanov, V., Mostowski, W., Scheben, C., Schmitt, P.H., Ulbrich, M.: The key platform for verification and analysis of java programs. In: Giannakopoulou, D., Kroening, D. (eds.) VSTTE 2014. LNCS, vol. 8471, pp. 55–71. Springer, Heidelberg (2014) Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Allen, F.E.: Control flow analysis. In: Proceedings of a Symposium on Compiler Optimization, pp. 1–19. ACM, New York (1970)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Appel, A.W., Palsberg, J.: Modern Compiler Implementation in Java, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press, New York (2003) Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Carlsson, R.: An introduction to core erlang. In: Proceedings of the PLI01 Erlang Workshop (2001)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cormen, T.H., Leiserson, C.E., Rivest, R.L., Stein, C.: Introduction to Algorithms, 3rd edn. The MIT Press, Cambridge (2009) zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    De Angelis, E., Fioravanti, F., Pettorossi, A., Proietti, M.: Semantics-based generation of verification conditions by program specialization. In: PPDP 2015, pp. 91–102. ACM (2015)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    de Moura, L., Bjørner, N.S.: Z3: An efficient SMT solver. In: Ramakrishnan, C.R., Rehof, J. (eds.) TACAS 2008. LNCS, vol. 4963, pp. 337–340. Springer, Heidelberg (2008) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Deters, M., Reynolds, A., King, T., Barrett, C.W., Tinelli, C.: A tour of CVC4: how it works, and how to use it. In: FMCAD 2014, p. 7. IEEE (2014)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Filliâtre, J.-C.: One logic to use them all. In: Bonacina, M.P. (ed.) CADE 2013. LNCS, vol. 7898, pp. 1–20. Springer, Heidelberg (2013) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Filliâtre, J.-C., Paskevich, A.: Why3 — Where programs meet provers. In: Felleisen, M., Gardner, P. (eds.) ESOP 2013. LNCS, vol. 7792, pp. 125–128. Springer, Heidelberg (2013) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Flanagan, C., Sabry, A., Duba, B.F., Felleisen, M.: The essence of compiling with continuations. In: PLDI 1993, pp. 237–247. ACM (1993)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gallagher, J.P., Kafle, B.: Analysis and transformation tools for constrained horn clause verification. CoRR, abs/1405.3883 (2014)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Grebenshchikov, S., Lopes, N.P., Popeea, C., Rybalchenko, A.: Synthesizing software verifiers from proof rules. In: PLDI 2012, pp. 405–416. ACM (2012)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Klein, G., Nipkow, T.: A machine-checked model for a java-like language, virtual machine, and compiler. ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst. 28(4), 619–695 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Leino, K.R.M.: Developing verified programs with dafny. In: Brosgol, B., Boleng, J., Taft, S.T. (eds.) HILT, pp. 9–10. ACM (2012)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Jones, S.L.P., Lester, D.R.: Implementing functional languages (Prentice Hall international series in computer science). Prentice Hall, New York (1992)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Rémy, D.: Using, understanding, and unraveling the OCaml language from practice to theory and vice versa. In: Barthe, G., Dybjer, P., Pinto, L., Saraiva, J. (eds.) APPSEM 2000. LNCS, vol. 2395, p. 413. Springer, Heidelberg (2002) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Team, G.: Glasgow Haskell Compiler core Language. https://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/wiki/Commentary/Compiler/CoreSynType. Accessed 30 April 2015

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Manuel Montenegro
    • 1
    Email author
  • Ricardo Peña
    • 1
  • Jaime Sánchez-Hernández
    • 1
  1. 1.Universidad Complutense de MadridMadridSpain

Personalised recommendations