Advertisement

The ICS Decision Procedures for Embedded Deduction

  • Leonardo de Moura
  • Sam Owre
  • Harald Rueß
  • John Rushby
  • Natarajan Shankar
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3097)

Abstract

Automated theorem proving lies at the heart of all tools for formal analysis of software and system descriptions. In formal verification systems such as PVS [10], the deductive capability is explicit and visible to the user, whereas in tools such as test case generators it is hidden and often ad-hoc. Many tools for formal analysis would benefit—both in performance and ease of construction—if they could draw on a powerful embedded service to perform common deductive tasks.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Barrett, C.W., Dill, D., Levitt, J.: Validity checking for combinations of theories with equality. In: Srivas, M., Camilleri, A. (eds.) FMCAD 1996. LNCS, vol. 1166, pp. 187–201. Springer, Heidelberg (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Barrett, C.W., Dill, D.L., Stump, A.: Checking satisfiability of first-order formulas by incremental translation to SAT. In: Brinksma, E., Larsen, K.G. (eds.) CAV 2002. LNCS, vol. 2404, p. 236. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bryant, R.E., Lahiri, S.K., Seshia, S.A.: Deciding CLU logic formulas via boolean and pseudo-boolean encodings. LNCS (2003)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    de Moura, L., Owre, S., Rueß, H., Rushby, J., Shankar, N., Sorea, M., Tiwari, A.: SAL 2. In: Alur, R., Peled, D.A. (eds.) CAV 2004. LNCS, vol. 3114, pp. 496–500. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    de Moura, L., Rueß, H.: An experimental evaluation of ground decision procedures. In: Alur, R., Peled, D.A. (eds.) CAV 2004. LNCS, vol. 3114, pp. 162–174. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    de Moura, L., Rueß, H., Sorea, M.: Lazy theorem proving for bounded model checking over infinite domains. In: Voronkov, A. (ed.) CADE 2002. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2392, pp. 438–455. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    de Moura, L., Rueß, H., Sorea, M.: Bounded model checking and induction: From refutation to verification. In: Hunt Jr., W.A., Somenzi, F. (eds.) CAV 2003. LNCS, vol. 2725, pp. 14–26. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Möller, O., Rueß, H.: Solving bit-vector equations. In: Gopalakrishnan, G.C., Windley, P. (eds.) FMCAD 1998. LNCS, vol. 1522, pp. 36–48. Springer, Heidelberg (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Nelson, G.: Techniques for program verification. Technical Report CSL-81-10, Xerox Palo Alto Research Center, Palo Alto, Ca. (1981)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Owre, S., Rushby, J., Shankar, N., von Henke, F.: Formal verification for faulttolerant architectures: Prolegomena to the design of PVS. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 21(2), 107–125 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Rueß, H., Shankar, N.: Deconstructing Shostak. In: 16th LICS, pp. 19–28. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2001)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rueß, H., Shankar, N.: Solving Linear Arithmetic Constraints. Technical Report SRI-CSL-04-01, CSL, SRI International, Menlo Park, CA, 94025 (March 2004)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Shankar, N., Rueß, H.: Combining Shostak theories. In: Tison, S. (ed.) RTA 2002. LNCS, vol. 2378, pp. 1–18. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Leonardo de Moura
    • 1
  • Sam Owre
    • 1
  • Harald Rueß
    • 1
  • John Rushby
    • 1
  • Natarajan Shankar
    • 1
  1. 1.Computer Science LaboratorySRI InternationalMenlo ParkUSA

Personalised recommendations