Logotyp: till Uppsala universitets webbplats

Verification of programs operating on heap-allocated data structures, for instance lists or trees, poses significant challenges due to the potentially unbounded size of such data structures. We present time-indexed heap invariants, a novel invariant-based heap encoding leveraging uninterpreted predicates and prophecy variables to reduce verification of heap-manipulating programs to verification of programs over integers only. Our encoding of heap is general and agnostic to specific data structures. To the best of our knowledge, our approach is the first heap invariant-based method that achieves both soundness and completeness. We provide formal proofs establishing the correctness of our encodings. Through an experimental evaluation, we demonstrate that time-indexed heap invariants significantly extend the capability of existing verification tools, allowing automatic verification of programs with heap that were previously out of reach for state-of-the-art tools.

A common approach in software verification is to encode a program as a set of Constrained Horn Clauses (CHCs), which are then processed and solved automatically by a CHC solver. To streamline this verification approach for the case of programs operating on mutable linked data-structures, we have in earlier work proposed a theory of heaps, defined within the SMT-LIB framework, which enables us to represent programs as CHCs with minimal loss of structural information. By preserving high-level program information in the encoding, the theory of heaps enables CHC solvers to apply various internal techniques for handling program heap; among others, to encode the heap further using the theory of arrays, to apply shape analysis, or to translate to a heap-less program with the help of invariants. This paper explores the third option, developing transformation rules that rewrite a set of CHCs into an equisatisfiable set of CHCs with additional predicates representing heap invariants. The proposed method generalises the notion of space invariants, which were previously introduced for verifying Java programs, by lifting the entire transformation process to the CHC level. The paper defines the transformation rules, provides detailed correctness proofs, and discusses the strengths and limitations of the approach. We also outline possible extensions of the method.

Sledgehammer, a component of the interactive proof assistant Isabelle/HOL, aims to increase proof automation by automatically discharging proof goals with the help of external provers. Among these provers are a group of satisfiability modulo theories (SMT) solvers with support for the SMT-LIB input language. Despite existing formalizations of IEEE floating-point arithmetic in both Isabelle/HOL and SMT-LIB, Sledgehammer employs an abstract translation of floating-point types and constants, depriving the SMT solvers of the opportunity to make use of their dedicated decision procedures for floating-point arithmetic. We show that, by extending Sledgehammer's translation from the language of Isabelle/HOL into SMT-LIB with an interpretation of floating-point types and constants, floating-point reasoning in SMT solvers can be made available to Isabelle/HOL. Our main contribution is a description and implementation of such an extension. An evaluation of the extended translation shows a significant increase of Sledgehammer's success rate on proof goals involving floating-point arithmetic.

Definitions of new symbols merely abbreviate expressions in logical frameworks, and no new facts (regarding previously defined symbols) should hold because of a new definition. In Isabelle/HOL, definable symbols are types and constants. The latter may be ad-hoc overloaded, i.e. have different definitions for non-overlapping types. We prove that symbols that are independent of a new definition may keep their interpretation in a model extension. This work revises our earlier notion of model-theoretic conservative extension and generalises an earlier model construction. We obtain consistency of theories of definitions in higher-order logic (HOL) with ad-hoc overloading as a corollary. Our results are mechanised in the HOL4 theorem prover.

We define a general notion of transition system where states and action labels can be from arbitrary nominal sets, actions may bind names, and state predicates from an arbitrary logic define properties of states. A Hennessy-Milner logic for these systems is introduced, and proved adequate and expressively complete for bisimulation equivalence. A main technical novelty is the use of finitely supported infinite conjunctions. We show how to treat different bisimulation variants such as early, late, open and weak in a systematic way, explore the folklore theorem that state predicates can be replaced by actions, and make substantial comparisons with related work. The main definitions and theorems have been formalised in Nominal Isabelle.

Logical frameworks are often equipped with an extensional mechanism to define new symbols. The definitional mechanism is expected to be conservative, i.e. it shall not introduce new theorems of the original language. The theorem proving framework Isabelle implements a variant of higher-order logic where constants may be ad-hoc overloaded, allowing a constant to have different definitions for non-overlapping types. In this paper we prove soundness and completeness for the logic of Isabelle/HOL with general (Henkin-style) semantics, and we prove model-theoretic and proof-theoretic conservativity for theories of definitions.

Evaluation of scientific contributions can be done in many different ways. For the various research communities working on the verification of systems (software, hardware, or the underlying involved mechanisms), it is important to bring together the community and to compare the state of the art, in order to identify progress of and new challenges in the research area. Competitions are a suitable way to do that.

The first verification competition was created in 1992 (SAT competition), shortly followed by the CASC competition in 1996. Since the year 2000, the number of dedicated verification competitions is steadily increasing. Many of these events now happen regularly, gathering researchers that would like to understand how well their research prototypes work in practice. Scientific results have to be reproducible, and powerful computers are becoming cheaper and cheaper, thus, these competitions are becoming an important means for advancing research in verification technology.

TOOLympics 2019 is an event to celebrate the achievements of the various competitions, and to understand their commonalities and differences. This volume is dedicated to the presentation of the 16 competitions that joined TOOLympics as part of the celebration of the 25𝑡ℎ anniversary of the TACAS conference.

Many logical frameworks allow extensions, i.e. the introduction of new symbols, by definitions. Different from asserting arbitrary non-logical axioms, extensions by definitions are expected to be conservative: they should entail no new theorems in the original language. The popular theorem prover Isabelle implements a variant of higher-order logic that allows ad hoc overloading of constants. In 2015, Kunčar and Popescu introduced definitional theories, which impose a non-circularity condition on constant and type definitions in this logic, and showed that this condition is sufficient for definitional extensions to preserve consistency. We strengthen and generalize this result by showing that extensions of definitional theories are model-theoretic conservative, i.e. every model of the original theory can be expanded to a model of the extended theory.