Formal verification of software source code through semi-automatic modeling

Eisner, Cindy

doi:10.1007/s10270-003-0042-x

Cited by 8 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It becomes common that model checkers work directly on the source code of software implementations rather than on a model provided by a user or a standard. We can the model checkers BLAST and SLAM [Eisner 2005;Gunter and Peled 2005], which work on C source code. For Java programs, we mention Bandera [Corbett et al 2000] and Java PathFinder [Havelund and Pressburger 2000], and for C++ programs Verisoft [Godefroid 1997].…”

Section: Verification Techniquesmentioning

confidence: 99%

One step forward

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Wireless self-organizing networks (WSONs) have attracted considerable attention from the network research community; however, the key for their success is the rigorous validation of the properties of the network protocols. Applications of risk or those demanding precision (like alert-based systems) require a rigorous and reliable validation of deployed network protocols. While the main goal is to ensure the reliability of the protocols, validation techniques also allow the establishment of their correctness regarding the related protocols' requirements. Nevertheless, even if different communities have carried out intensive research activities on the validation domain, WSONs still raise new issues for and challenging constraints to these communities. We thus, advocate the use of complementary techniques coming from different research communities to efficiently address the validation of WSON protocols. The goal of this tutorial is to present a comprehensive review of the literature on protocol engineering techniques and to discuss difficulties imposed by the characteristics of WSONs on the protocol engineering community. Following the formal and nonformal classification of techniques, we provide a discussion about components and similarities of existing protocol validation approaches. We also investigate how to take advantage of such similarities to obtain complementary techniques and outline new challenges.

show abstract

Section: Verification Techniquesmentioning

confidence: 99%

One step forward

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…An example of the former is [Eisner 2005] who reports success applying symbolic model-checking to a C program implementing a cache. Reference [King et al 2000] reports that proving conformance of a large safety-critical system written in Spark ADA to its Z specification proved more effective in finding faults than testing, because people involved in proof construction had to understand what is being proven.…”

Section: Automated Reasoningmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We have already mentioned BLAST and SLAM [Eisner 2005;Gunter and Peled 2005] which operate on C source code. Model checkers for Java code include Bandera [Corbett et al 2000], Java PathFinder [Havelund and Pressburger 1998] and SAL [Park et al 2000], which combine model checking with abstraction and theorem proving techniques, too.…”

Section: Formal Verification and Testingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Using formal specifications to support testing

et al. 2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Using these, we set up our model checking problem as follows. We compile a pair of benefit code functions into an smv [7] model constructed in a straightforward manner, similar to the method described in [5,6]. A dedicated state variable keeps track of the control flow, whose behavior may depend on the value of other state variables.…”

Section: Model Checking Setupmentioning

confidence: 99%

Relative Equivalence in the Presence of Ambiguity

Adler

Eisner

Veksler

2013

Computer Aided Verification

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We examine the problem of defining equivalence between two functions (pieces of code) that are intended to perform analogous tasks, but whose interfaces do not correspond in a straightforward way, even to the point of ambiguity. We formalize the notion of what equivalence means in such a case and show how to check it using constraints on a model checking problem. We show that the presence of constraints complicates the issue of predicate abstraction, and show that nevertheless we can use predicates no finer than those needed in the absence of constraints. Our solution is being used to verify the migration of tens of millions of lines of health insurance claims processing code from icd-9 to icd-10, two versions of the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (icd), whose correspondence is complex and ambiguous in both directions. We present experimental results on 90,000 real life functions.

show abstract

Formal verification of software source code through semi-automatic modeling

Abstract: We describe the experience of modeling and formally verifying a software cache algorithm using the model checker RuleBase. Contrary to prevailing wisdom, we used a highly detailed model created directly from the C code itself, rather than a high-level abstract model.

Cited by 8 publications

References 41 publications

One step forward

One step forward

Using formal specifications to support testing

Relative Equivalence in the Presence of Ambiguity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About