Integrating Model Checking and Theorem Proving for Relational Reasoning

Arkoudas, Konstantine; Khurshid, Sarfraz; Marinov, Darko; Rinard, Martin

doi:10.1007/978-3-540-24771-5_3

Cited by 25 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There are two approaches that we are aware of in what respects to theorem proving of Alloy assertions. One is the theorem prover Prioni [2]. Prioni translates Alloy specifications to first-order formulas characterizing their first-order semantics, and then the first-order logic theorem prover Athena [1] is used in order to prove the resulting theorem.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Alloy Analyzer+PVS in the Analysis and Verification of Alloy Specifications

Frias

Pombo

Moscato

2007

Tools and Algorithms for the Construction and Analysis of Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. This article contains two main contributions. On the theoretical side, it presents a novel complete proof calculus for Alloy. On the applied side we present Dynamite, a tool that combines the semiautomatic theorem prover PVS with the Alloy Analyzer. Dynamite allows one to prove an Alloy assertion from an Alloy specification using PVS, while using the Alloy Analyzer for the automated analysis of hypotheses introduced during the proof process. As a means to assess the usability of the tool, we present a complex case-study based on Zave's Alloy model of addressing for interoperating networks.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Alloy Analyzer+PVS in the Analysis and Verification of Alloy Specifications

Frias

Pombo

Moscato

2007

Tools and Algorithms for the Construction and Analysis of Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Prioni [AKMR03] translates an Alloy specification into the input language of the Athena [Ath] proof assistant, which is based on a logic with powerful relational calculus. But the problem is that Athena, as a proof assistant, is not automated enough.…”

Section: Limits To the Use Of The Alloy Analyzermentioning

confidence: 99%

“…So, other formal methods have to complete the use of the Alloy Analyzer. Prioni [AKMR03] intends to use Alloy specifications with the Athena proof assistant, which is not fully automatic. But trying to handle Alloy models in first-order logic could be also interesting.…”

Section: Conclusion and Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mondex , an electronic purse: specification and refinement checks with the Alloy model-finding method

Ramananandro

2008

Form. Asp. Comput.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper explains how the Alloy model-finding method has been used to check the specification of an electronic purse (also called smart card) system, called the Mondex case study, initially written in Z. After describing the payment protocol between two electronic purses, and presenting an overview of the Alloy model-finding method, this paper explains how technical issues about integers and conceptual issues about the object layout in Z have been tackled in Alloy, giving general methods that can be used in most case studies with Alloy. This work has also pointed out some significant bugs in the original Z specification such as reasoning bugs in the proofs, and proposes a way to solve them.

show abstract

“…Both the current version of NuSMV and nuXmv support the description and verfication of real-time systems. Combining model checking and theorem proving is a recent important trend of formal verification [6][7][8], however, the existing work focuses on the state explosion problem and seldom considers the complementarity of the two technologies in software engineering practice. Therefore, a practical scheme is proposed in this paper, which combines model checking and theorem proving for software development.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Combining Theorem Proving and Model Checking in the Safety-Critical Software Development through Translating Event-B to SMV

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Model checking and theorem proving are two key vertification techniques in the formal method, but each has its advantages and disadvantages. In this paper, we first try to present the general model transformation rules from Event-B to SMV in order to realize complementary advantages, and then design the model converter of Event-B to SMV according to the rules. ProB is the only tool to implement Event-B model checking, but it lacks the real-time property verification, while nuXmv is able to verify temporal logic formulas with the real-time property for SMV models. After completing the model transformation, we use ProB and nuXmv to make the verification of LTL and CTL formulas for two equivalent models respectively. Compared to the experimental results, in solving the same problem, nuXmv has more advantages over memory consumption, time efficiency and so on than ProB, especially when the formula to be verified is very complex. Therefore, if complex verifications of system models need to be performed, it is necessary to implement the model transformation between Event-B and SMV by using our translation rules, which is of great significance for the development, design and verification of safety-critical system softwares.

show abstract

Integrating Model Checking and Theorem Proving for Relational Reasoning

Cited by 25 publications

References 10 publications

Alloy Analyzer+PVS in the Analysis and Verification of Alloy Specifications

Alloy Analyzer+PVS in the Analysis and Verification of Alloy Specifications

Mondex , an electronic purse: specification and refinement checks with the Alloy model-finding method

Combining Theorem Proving and Model Checking in the Safety-Critical Software Development through Translating Event-B to SMV

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About