Smtlink 2.0

Peng, Yan; Greenstreet, Mark R.

doi:10.4204/eptcs.280.11

Cited by 6 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Reeber and Hunt [33] identified a decidable subclass of ACL2 list formulas and contributed a decision procedure that transforms such a formula into a SAT problem. Peng and Greenstreet [31] process a subclass of ACL2 formulas including integer and rational arithmetic, uninterpreted functions, and algebraic data structures, converting such problems to SMT queries. FGL differs by focusing on the efficient integration of user-extendible term rewriting and Boolean simplification and decision procedures.…”

Section: Fglmentioning

confidence: 99%

Balancing Automation and Control for Formal Verification of Microprocessors

Goel¹,

Slobodová²,

Sumners³

et al. 2021

Computer Aided Verification

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Formal methods are becoming an indispensable part of the design process in software and hardware industry. It takes robust tools and proofs to make formal validation of large scale projects reliable. In this paper, we will describe the current status of formal verification at Centaur Technology. We will explain our challenges and our methodology—how various proofs and verification artifacts are interconnected and how we keep them consistent over the duration of a project. We also describe our main engine—a powerful symbolic simulator with rewriting capabilities that is integrated in a theorem prover and proven correct.

show abstract

Section: Fglmentioning

confidence: 99%

Balancing Automation and Control for Formal Verification of Microprocessors

Goel¹,

Slobodová²,

Sumners³

et al. 2021

Computer Aided Verification

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There are many ways to extend the work presented. We would like to add an interface into SMTLINK [8] for either building the abstract graphs and/or the addition of ordering tags to the arcs in the graphs. SMTLINK is more limited than GL in what ACL2 definitions it can support, but SMTLINK would be a nice option to have in the cases where the definitions were viable for SMTLINK.…”

Section: Related Work and Future Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Computing and Proving Well-founded Orderings through Finite Abstractions

Sumners¹

2020

Electron. Proc. Theor. Comput. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A common technique for checking properties of complex state machines is to build a finite abstraction then check the property on the abstract system-where a passing check on the abstract system is only transferred to the original system if the abstraction is proven to be representative. This approach does require the derivation or definition of the finite abstraction, but can avoid the need for complex invariant definition. For our work in checking progress of memory transactions in microprocessors, we need to prove that transactions in complex state machines always make progress to completion. As a part of this effort, we developed a process for computing a finite abstract graph of the target state machine along with annotations on whether certain measures decrease or not on arcs in the abstract graph. We then iteratively divide the abstract graph by splitting into strongly connected components and then building a measure for every node in the abstract graph which is ensured to be reducing on every transition of the original system guaranteeing progress. For finite state target systems (e.g. hardware designs), we present approaches for extracting the abstract graph efficiently using incremental SAT through GL and then the application of our process to check for progress. We present an implementation of the Bakery algorithm as an example application.

show abstract

“…Since its inception, users of ACL2 [12,13,11,15] have developed many tools that extend ACL2 or use ACL2 as an integral component. Extensions include improved termination analysis [18], the use of external solvers [16,17,28,24,26], support for bit-blasting proofs [16,17,31] and automatic counterexample generation [5]. Systems that are built on top of ACL2 include ACL2r [10] and the ACL2 Sedan (ACL2s) [9].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

ACL2s Systems Programming

Walter¹,

Manolios²

2022

Electron. Proc. Theor. Comput. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ACL2 provides a systems programming capability that allows one to write code that uses and extends ACL2 inside of ACL2. However, for soundness reasons, ACL2 bars the unrestricted use of certain kinds of programming constructs, like destructive updates, higher-order functions, eval, and arbitrary macros. We devised a methodology for writing code in Common Lisp that allows one to access ACL2, ACL2s, and Common Lisp functionality in a unified way. We arrived at this methodology in the process of developing the ACL2 Sedan (ACL2s) and using it as a key component in formalmethods-enabled projects relating to gamified verification, education, proof checking, interfacing with external theorem provers and security. The methodology includes a library for performing ACL2 queries from Common Lisp, as well as guidelines and utilities that help address common needs. We call this methodology "ACL2s systems programming," to distinguish it from ACL2 systems programming. We show how our methodology makes it possible to easily develop tools that interface with ACL2 and ACL2s, and describe our experience using it in our research.

show abstract

Smtlink 2.0

Cited by 6 publications

References 21 publications

Balancing Automation and Control for Formal Verification of Microprocessors

Balancing Automation and Control for Formal Verification of Microprocessors

Computing and Proving Well-founded Orderings through Finite Abstractions

ACL2s Systems Programming

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About