A shallow embedding of Z in HOL

Bowen, Jonathan P.; Gordon, Mike

doi:10.1016/0950-5849(95)99362-q

Cited by 28 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For example embeddings of Z into HOL are presented in [35] and [36]. The former embedding [35] is called shallow, in the sense that the Z logic is not encoded in HOL, but the HOL logic is re-used.…”

Section: Related Work Outside Of B and Tla +mentioning

confidence: 99%

Translating B to TLA+ for validation with TLC

Hansen

Leuschel

2016

Science of Computer Programming

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The state-based formal methods B and TLA + share the common base of predicate logic, arithmetic and set theory. However, there are still considerable differences, such as the way to specify state transitions, the different approaches to typing, and the available tool support. In this paper, we present a translation from B to TLA + so as to validate B specifications using the model checker TLC. The translation includes many adaptations and optimizations to allow for efficient checking by TLC. Moreover, we present a way to validate liveness properties for B specifications under fairness conditions. Our implemented translator, Tlc4B, automatically translates a B specification to TLA + , invokes the model checker TLC, and translates the results back to B. We use ProB to double check the counter examples produced by TLC and replay them in the ProB animator. Tlc4B can also transmit constant values, precalculated by ProB, to TLC. This allows the user to combine the strength of both tools, i.e. ProB's constraint solving abilities and TLC's highly tuned model checking core. Furthermore, we demonstrate an approach to optimize the model checking process by encoding proof information in the translated TLA + specification. We also present a series of case studies and benchmark tests comparing Tlc4B and ProB.

show abstract

Section: Related Work Outside Of B and Tla +mentioning

confidence: 99%

Translating B to TLA+ for validation with TLC

Hansen

Leuschel

2016

Science of Computer Programming

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In this latter embedding style, VeriFormal formulas would become predicates (on states) in Isabelle/HOL. Examples of shallow and deep embeddings in the higher order logic of HOL theorem prover are given in [11] and [50], respectively. Both, deep and shallow, embeddings have pros and cons.…”

Section: Deep or Shallow Embeddingmentioning

confidence: 99%

On embedding a hardware description language in Isabelle/HOL

Khan

Sanán

Hóu

et al. 2019

Des Autom Embed Syst

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In order to define executable hardware description language while at the same time be fit for formal proofs of properties, a hardware description language VeriFormal, embedded in Isabelle/HOL, was created. VeriFormal, together with a translator and Isabelle/HOL proof facility, provides a platform for designing, simulating and reasoning about hardware designs. Building such an environment is challenging due to the fact that the designer must have expertise in programming language design, the specific domain and theorem prover. It requires selection of a language design criteria, host language, grammar, embedding approach and techniques and mechanisms to address determinism and termination issues. When the language in question is a hardware description language, it requires specialized treatment of events, their scheduling, data types and assignments. In this paper, we report on our experience of embedding hardware description language VeriFormal in theorem prover Isabelle/HOL. In particular, the structure and execution of programs in the context of theorem provers and their impact on the overall language design are discussed. Among the main features of VeriFormal include formal semantics of the language, support for mechanical reasoning about designs and compiler and type checking of modules using Isabelle/HOL as well as VeriFormal type checkers.

show abstract

“…2 Overview approach of PVS theorem prover for semistructured data design first step towards ensuring data consistency, the data model, the semantics captured in the data model, and the correctness criteria for semistructured data normalization must be formally described at the conceptual level. In the conceptual level specification, the ORA-SS data modeling language and its semantics were formally specified with PVS, serving as a shallow embedding [6] of the target notation. In addition, the criteria that defines the correct normalization of semistructured data is derived and formally specified with PVS.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Theorem prover approach to semistructured data design

Lee

Dobbie

Sun

et al. 2010

Form Methods Syst Des

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The wide adoption of semistructured data has created a growing need for effective ways to ensure the correctness of its organization. One effective way to achieve this goal is through formal specification and automated verification. This paper presents a theorem proving approach towards verifying that a particular design or organization of semistructured data is correct. We formally specify the semantics of the Object Relationship Attribute data model for Semistructured Data (ORA-SS) modeling notation and its correctness criteria for semistructured data normalization using the Prototype Verification System (PVS). The result is that effective verification on semistructured data models and their normalization can be carried out using the PVS theorem prover.

show abstract

A shallow embedding of Z in HOL

Cited by 28 publications

References 13 publications

Translating B to TLA+ for validation with TLC

Translating B to TLA+ for validation with TLC

On embedding a hardware description language in Isabelle/HOL

Theorem prover approach to semistructured data design

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About