## Abstract

This book is about program verification, with a special emphasis on verification of concurrent programs. Concurrent programs are usually difficult to design, and errors are more a rule than an exception. Consider, for example, the following simple problem.

## Keywords

Temporal Logic Parallel Program Proof System Parallel Composition Sequential Program
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.

## References

- [ABS89]M. Aspnäs, R.J.R. Back, and K. Sere. The Hathi project: a project on parallel programming technology. Technical Report Ser. A, No 95, Departments of Computer Science and Mathematics, Abo Akademi, Finland, 1989.Google Scholar
- [AFR80]K.R. Apt, N. Francez, and W.P. de Roever. A proof system for communicating sequential processes.
*ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems*, 2 (3): 359–385, 1980.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar - [AM71]E. Ashcroft and Z. Manna Formalization of properties of parallel programs
*Machine Intelligence*, 6: 17–41, 1971.MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar - [AO83]K.R. Apt and E.-R. Olderog. Proof rules and transformations dealing with fairness.
*Science of Computer Programming*, 3: 65100, 1983.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar - [Apt86]K.R. Apt. Correctness proofs of distributed termination algorithms.
*ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems*, 8: 388–405, 1986.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar - [Bac86]R.C. Backhouse.
*Program Construction and Verification*. Prentice-Hall International, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1986.Google Scholar - Bac89] R.J.R. Back. A method for refining atomicity in parallel algorithms. In
*PARLE Conference on Parallel Architectures and Languages Europe*,pages 199–216, New York, 1989. Lecture Notes in Computer Science 366, Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar - [BK84]J.A. Bergstra and J.W. Klop. Process algebra for synchronous communication.
*Information and Control*, 60: 109–137, 1984.MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar - [BK85]J.A. Bergstra and J.W. Klop. Algebra of communicating processes with abstraction.
*Theoretical Computer Science*, 37: 77121, 1985.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar - [BK86]J.A. Bergstra and J.W. Klop. Algebra of communicating processes. In J.W. de Bakker, M. Hazewinkel, and J.K. Lenstra, editors,
*Proceedings CWI Symposium on Mathematics and Computer Science*, pages 89–138, Amsterdam, 1986. North-Holland.Google Scholar - [CM88]K.M. Chandy and J. Misra.
*Parallel Program Design: A Foundation*. Addison-Wesley, New York, 1988.MATHGoogle Scholar - CPS90] R. Cleaveland, J.G. Parrow, and B. Steffen. The concurrency workbench. In J. Sifakis, editor,
*Proceedings Workshop on Automatic Verification Methods for Finite State Systems*,pages 2437, New York, 1990. Lecture Notes in Computer Science 407, Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar - [Dij75]E.W. Dijkstra. Guarded commands, nondeterminacy and formal derivation of programs
*Communications of the ACM*, 18: 453457, 1975.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar - [Dij76]E.W. Dijkstra. A
*Discipline of Programming*. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J., 1976.MATHGoogle Scholar - [EC82]E.A. Emerson and E.M. Clarke. Using branching time temporal logic to synthesize synchronization skeletons.
*Science of Computer Programming*, 2 (3): 241–266, 1982.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar - [F1o67]R. Floyd. Assigning meaning to programs. In J.T. Schwartz, editor,
*Proceedings of Symposium on Applied Mathematics**19*,*Mathematical Aspects of Computer Science*, pages 19–32, American Mathematical Society, New York, 1967.Google Scholar - [FS81]L. Flon and N. Suzuki. The total correctness of parallel programs.
*SIAM Journal on Computing*, pages 227–246, 1981.Google Scholar - [Gri81]D. Gries.
*The Science of Programming*. Springer-Verlag, New York, 1981.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar - [Hoa69]C.A.R. Hoare. An axiomatic basis for computer programming.
*Communications of the ACM*, 12: 576–580, 583, 1969.Google Scholar - [Hoa75]C.A.R. Hoare. Parallel programming• an axiomatic approach.
*Computer Languages*, 1: 151–160, 1975.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar - [Hoa78]C.A.R. Hoare. Communicating sequential processes.
*Communications of the ACM*, 21: 666–677, 1978.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar - [Hoa85]C.A.R. Hoare.
*Communicating Sequential Processes*. Prentice-Hall International, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1985.MATHGoogle Scholar - HP79] M.C.B. Hennessy and G.D. Plotkin. Full abstraction for a simple programming language. In
*Proceedings of Mathematical Foundations of Computer Science*,pages 108–120, New York, 1979. Lecture Notes in Computer Science 74, Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar - [INM84]INMOS Limited.
*Occam Programming Manual*. Prentice-Hall International, Englewood Cliffs, N.J., 1984.Google Scholar - [Lam77]L. Lamport. Proving the correctness of multiprocess programs
*IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering*, SE-3: 2: 125–143, 1977.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar - [LG81]G. Levin and D. Gries. A proof technique for communicating sequential processes.
*Acta Informatica*, 15: 281–302, 1981.MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar - [Lip75]R. Lipton. Reduction: a method of proving properties of parallel programs
*Communications of the ACM*, 18: 717–721, 1975.MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar - [Mi180]R. Milner. A
*Calculus of Communicating Systems*. Lecture Notes in Computer Science 92, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1980.Google Scholar - [Mi189]R. Milner.
*Communication and Concurrency*. Prentice-Hall International, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1989.MATHGoogle Scholar - [MP81]Z. Manna and A. Pnueli. Verification of concurrent programs: the temporal framework. In R.S. Boyer and J.S. Moore, editors,
*The Correctness Problem in Computer Science*,*International Lecture Series in Computer Science*, London, 1981. Academic Press.Google Scholar - [MP83]Z. Manna and A. Pnueli. How to cook a temporal proof system for your pet language. In
*Proceedings of the 10th Annual ACM Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages*, pages 141154, Austin, Texas, U.S.A., 1983.Google Scholar - [MP84]Z. Manna and A. Pnueli. Adequate proof principles for invariance and liveness properties of concurrent programs.
*Science of Computer Programming*, 4: 257–289, 1984.MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar - [0A88]E.-R. Olderog and K.R. Apt. Fairness in parallel programs, the transformational approach.
*ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems*, 10: 420–455, 1988.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - [OG76a]S. Owicki and D. Gries. An axiomatic proof technique for parallel programs
*Acta Informatica*, 6: 319–340, 1976.MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar - [OG76b]S. Owicki and D. Gries. Verifying properties of parallel programs: an axiomatic approach.
*Communications of the ACM*, 19: 279285, 1976.Google Scholar - [OL82]S. Owicki and L. Lamport. Proving liveness properties of concurrent programs.
*ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems*, 4: 199–223, 1982.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - [P1o81]G.D. Plotkin. A structural approach to operational semantics. Technical Report DAIMI-FN 19, Department of Computer Science, Aarhus University, 1981.Google Scholar
- [Pnu77]A. Pnueli. The temporal logic of programs In Proceeding of the 18th IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, pages 46–57, 1977.Google Scholar
- [QS81]J.-P. Queille and J. Sifakis. Specification and verification of concurrent systems in CESAR. In
*Proceedings of the 5th International Symposium on Programming*, Paris, 1981.Google Scholar - [Sha89]E. Shapiro. The family of concurrent logic programming lan- guages.
*ACM Computing Surveys*, 21 (3): 412–510, 1989.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - [Tur49]A.M. Turing. On checking a large routine. Report of a Conference on High Speed Automatic Calculating Machines, pages 67–69, 1949. Univ. Math. Laboratory, Cambridge, 1949. (See also: F.L. Morris and C.B. Jones, An
*early program proof by Alan Turing, Annals of the History of Computing 6 pages*139–143, 1984).Google Scholar

## Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1991