Advertisement

Optimal data flow analysis via observational equivalence

  • Bernhard Steffen
Communications
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 379)

Abstract

In [18] a three level model was presented to establish a concept of completeness or optimality for data flow analysis algorithms in the framework of abstract interpretation [2]. The notion of observational equivalence introduced here generalizes the idea of the three level model, which can only deal with hierarchies of abstract interpretations. Investigating this more general notion, it actually turns out that the three level model is general in a theoretical sense: it determines the most abstract computation level which delivers complete results. However, consideration of other aspects of data flow analysis profit from the extra generality of our observation directed approach. For example the completeness or optimality proof for a “real life” optimizer could be shortened significantly this way.

Keywords

Level Model Abstract Model Abstract Interpretation Flow Graph Equivalence Theorem 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    G. L. Burn, C. L. Hankin, and S. Abramsky. The theory of strictness analysis for higher order functions. Science of Computer Programming, 7:249–278, 1986.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    P. Cousot and R. Cousot. Abstract interpretation: A unified lattice model for static analysis of programs by construction or approximation of fixpoints. In 4th POPL, pages 238–252, 1977.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    P. Cousot and R. Cousot. Automatic synthesis of optimal invariant assertions: Mathematical foundations. ACM Sigplan Notices, 12:1–12, 1977.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    P. Cousot and R. Cousot. Systematic design of program analysis frameworks. In 6th POPL, pages 269–282, 1979.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    R. De Nicola and M. Hennessy. Testing equivalences for processes. Theoretical Computer Science, 34:83–133, 1984.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    C. A. R. Hoare and H. Jifeng. Data refinement in a categorical setting. Technical report, Oxford University, Computing Laboratory, Programming Research Group, February 1988.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    J. B. Kam and J. D. Ullman. Monotone data flow analysis frameworks. Acta Informatica, 7:309–317, 1975.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    R. Milner. Fully abstract models of typed lambda calculi. Theoretical Computer Science, 4:1–22, 1977.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    A. Mycroft. Abstract Interpretation and Optimizing Transformations for Applicative Programs. PhD thesis, Edinburgh Univ., Dept. of Comp. Sci., 1981.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    A. Mycroft and F. Nielson. Strong abstract interpretation using power domains. In ICALP '83, pages 536–547. LNCS 154, 1983.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    F. Nielson. Abstract interpretation of denotational definitions. In STACS '86, pages 1–20. LNCS 210, 1986.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    F. Nielson. A bibliography on abstract interpretations. ACM Sigplan Notices, 21:31–38, 1986.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    F. Nielson. Strictness analysis and denotational abstract interpretation. In 14th POPL, pages 120–131, Munich, West-Germany, 1987.Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    H. R. Nielson and F. Nielson. Pragmatic aspects of two-level denotational meta-languages. In ESOP '86, pages 133–143. LNCS 213, 1986.Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    B. K. Rosen, M. N. Wegmann, and F. K. Zadeck. Global value numbers and redundant computations. In 15th POPL, pages 12–27, San Diego, California, 1988.Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    D. Sannella and A. Tarlecki. On observational equivalence and algebraic specifications. Journal of Computer and System Sciences, pages 150–178, 1987.Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    B. Steffen. Abstrakte Interpretationen beim Optimieren von Programmlaufzeiten. Ein Optimalitätskonzept und seine Anwendung. PhD thesis, Christian-Albrechts-Universität Kiel, 1987.Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    B. Steffen. Optimal run time optimization — proved by a new look at abstract interpretations. In TAPSOFT '87, pages 52–68. LNCS 249, 1987.Google Scholar
  19. [19]
    B. Steffen and M. Mendler. Compositional characterization of observable program properties. LFCS report series, LFCS, Edinburgh Univ., Dept. of Comp. Sci., 1989.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1989

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bernhard Steffen
    • 1
  1. 1.Laboratory for Foundations of Computer ScienceUniversity of EdinburghUK

Personalised recommendations