Automating Verification of Loops by Parallelization
Loops are a major bottleneck in formal software verification, because they generally require user interaction: typically, induction hypotheses or invariants must be found or modified by hand. This involves expert knowledge of the underlying calculus and proof engine. We show that one can replace interactive proof techniques, such as induction, with automated first-order reasoning in order to deal with parallelizable loops, where a loop can be parallelized whenever it avoids dependence of the loop iterations from each other. We develop a dependence analysis that ensures parallelizability. It guarantees soundness of a proof rule that transforms a loop into a universally quantified update of the state change information represented by the loop body. This makes it possible to use automatic first order reasoning techniques to deal with loops. The method has been implemented in the KeY verification tool. We evaluated it with representative case studies from the Java Card domain.
KeywordsDependence Analysis Loop Variable Loop Iteration Dynamic Logic Symbolic Execution
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 7.Breunesse, C.-B.: On JML: Topics in Tool-assisted Verification of Java Programs. PhD thesis, Radboud University of Nijmegen (2006)Google Scholar
- 8.Bundy, A., Basin, D., Hutter, D., Ireland, A.: Rippling: Meta-Level Guidance for Mathematical Reasoning. Cambridge Tracts in Theoretical Computer Science, vol. 56. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2005)Google Scholar
- 9.Cook, B., Podelski, A., Rybalchenko, A.: Termination proofs for systems code. In: Proc. ACM SIGPLAN Conf. on Programming Language Design and Implementation. ACM Press, New York (to appear, 2006)Google Scholar
- 13.Holzmann, G.J.: Software analysis and model checking. In: Brinksma, E., Larsen, K.G. (eds.) Proc. Intl. Conf. on Computer-Aided Verification CAV, Copenhagen. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)Google Scholar
- 15.Olsson, O., Wallenburg, A.: Customised induction rules for proving correctness of imperative programs. In: Beckert, B., Aichernig, B. (eds.) Proc., Software Engineering and Formal Methods (SEFM), Koblenz, Germany, pp. 180–189. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos (2005)Google Scholar
- 16.Platzer, A.: Using a program verification calculus for constructing specifications from implementations. Master’s thesis, Univ. Karlsruhe, Dept. of Computer Science (2004)Google Scholar
- 17.Rümmer, P.: Sequential, parallel, and quantified updates of first-order structures. In: Proceedings, 13th International Conference on Logic for Programming, Artificial Intelligence and Reasoning. LNCS. Springer, Heidelberg (to appear, 2006)Google Scholar