The COST IC0701 Verification Competition 2011

  • Thorsten Bormer
  • Marc Brockschmidt
  • Dino Distefano
  • Gidon Ernst
  • Jean-Christophe Filliâtre
  • Radu Grigore
  • Marieke Huisman
  • Vladimir Klebanov
  • Claude Marché
  • Rosemary Monahan
  • Wojciech Mostowski
  • Nadia Polikarpova
  • Christoph Scheben
  • Gerhard Schellhorn
  • Bogdan Tofan
  • Julian Tschannen
  • Mattias Ulbrich
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7421)

Abstract

This paper reports on the experiences with the program verification competition held during the FoVeOOS conference in October 2011. There were 6 teams participating in this competition. We discuss the three different challenges that were posed and the solutions developed by the teams. We conclude with a discussion about the value of such competitions and lessons learned from them.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Barnett, M., Chang, B.-Y.E., DeLine, R., Jacobs, B., Leino, K.R.M.: Boogie: A Modular Reusable Verifier for Object-Oriented Programs. In: de Boer, F.S., Bonsangue, M.M., Graf, S., de Roever, W.-P. (eds.) FMCO 2005. LNCS, vol. 4111, pp. 364–387. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Beckert, B., Hähnle, R., Schmitt, P.H. (eds.): Verification of Object-Oriented Software. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 4334. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bobot, F., Filliâtre, J.-C., Marché, C., Paskevich, A.: Why3: Shepherd your herd of provers. In: Boogie 2011: First International Workshop on Intermediate Verification Languages, Wrocław, Poland (August 2011)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Brockschmidt, M., Otto, C., Giesl, J.: Modular termination proofs of recursive Java Bytecode programs by term rewriting. In: Proc. RTA  2011. LIPIcs, vol. 10, pp. 155–170 (2011)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    de Moura, L., Bjørner, N.: 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
  6. 6.
    Distefano, D., Parkinson, M.J.: jStar: towards practical verification for Java. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGPLAN Conference on Object-Oriented Programming Systems Languages and Applications, OOPSLA 2008, pp. 213–226. ACM, New York (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Filliâtre, J.-C., Marché, C.: The Why/Krakatoa/Caduceus Platform for Deductive Program Verification. In: Damm, W., Hermanns, H. (eds.) CAV 2007. LNCS, vol. 4590, pp. 173–177. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fuhs, C., Giesl, J., Plücker, M., Schneider-Kamp, P., Falke, S.: Proving Termination of Integer Term Rewriting. In: Treinen, R. (ed.) RTA 2009. LNCS, vol. 5595, pp. 32–47. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Giesl, J., Schneider-Kamp, P., Thiemann, R.: AProVE 1.2: Automatic Termination Proofs in the Dependency Pair Framework. In: Furbach, U., Shankar, N. (eds.) IJCAR 2006. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 4130, pp. 281–286. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kaldewaij, A.: Programming: the derivation of algorithms. Prentice-Hall, Inc. (1990)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kassios, I.T.: Dynamic Frames: Support for Framing, Dependencies and Sharing Without Restrictions. In: Misra, J., Nipkow, T., Karakostas, G. (eds.) FM 2006. LNCS, vol. 4085, pp. 268–283. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Klebanov, V., Müller, P., Shankar, N., Leavens, G.T., Wüstholz, V., Alkassar, E., Arthan, R., Bronish, D., Chapman, R., Cohen, E., Hillebrand, M., Jacobs, B., Leino, K.R.M., Monahan, R., Piessens, F., Polikarpova, N., Ridge, T., Smans, J., Tobies, S., Tuerk, T., Ulbrich, M., Weiß, B.: The 1st Verified Software Competition: Experience Report. In: Butler, M., Schulte, W. (eds.) FM 2011. LNCS, vol. 6664, pp. 154–168. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Leino, K.R.M.: Dafny: An Automatic Program Verifier for Functional Correctness. In: Clarke, E.M., Voronkov, A. (eds.) LPAR-16 2010. LNCS, vol. 6355, pp. 348–370. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Moy, Y., Marché, C.: The Jessie plugin for Deduction Verification in Frama-C — Tutorial and Reference Manual. INRIA & LRI (2011), http://krakatoa.lri.fr/
  15. 15.
    Reif, W., Schellhorn, G., Stenzel, K., Balser, M.: Structured specifications and interactive proofs with KIV. In: Bibel, W., Schmitt, P. (eds.) Automated Deduction—A Basis for Applications, vol. II.1, pp. 13–39. Kluwer (1998)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Schmitt, P.H., Ulbrich, M., Weiß, B.: Dynamic Frames in Java Dynamic Logic. In: Beckert, B., Marché, C. (eds.) FoVeOOS 2010. LNCS, vol. 6528, pp. 138–152. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Stenzel, K.: A Formally Verified Calculus for Full Java Card. In: Rattray, C., Maharaj, S., Shankland, C. (eds.) AMAST 2004. LNCS, vol. 3116, pp. 491–505. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Thorsten Bormer
    • 6
  • Marc Brockschmidt
    • 1
  • Dino Distefano
    • 2
    • 3
  • Gidon Ernst
    • 4
  • Jean-Christophe Filliâtre
    • 7
    • 8
  • Radu Grigore
    • 2
  • Marieke Huisman
    • 5
  • Vladimir Klebanov
    • 6
  • Claude Marché
    • 7
    • 8
  • Rosemary Monahan
    • 9
  • Wojciech Mostowski
    • 5
  • Nadia Polikarpova
    • 10
  • Christoph Scheben
    • 6
  • Gerhard Schellhorn
    • 4
  • Bogdan Tofan
    • 4
  • Julian Tschannen
    • 10
  • Mattias Ulbrich
    • 6
  1. 1.RWTH AachenGermany
  2. 2.Queen Mary, University of LondonUK
  3. 3.Monoidics Ltd.UK
  4. 4.Universität AugsburgGermany
  5. 5.University of TwenteThe Netherlands
  6. 6.Karlsruhe Institute of TechnologyGermany
  7. 7.LRIFrance
  8. 8.INRIA SaclayFrance
  9. 9.National University of Ireland MaynoothIreland
  10. 10.ETH ZürichSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations