Termination Analysis by Learning Terminating Programs

Heizmann, Matthias; Hoenicke, Jochen; Podelski, Andreas

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-08867-9_53

Cited by 67 publications

(61 citation statements)

References 53 publications

(77 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Also there, spuriousness of local refutations can occur due to lack of context information: To find a counterexample to termination one needs to find a stem from the entry point. Compositionality in this context has been explored in the Ultimate tool [17]. We would also consider performance comparisons with testing, i.e.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Compositional Safety Refutation Techniques

Madhukar

Schrammel

Srivas

2017

Automated Technology for Verification and Analysis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. One of the most successful techniques for refuting safety properties is to find counterexamples by bounded model checking. However, for large programs, bounded model checking instances often exceed the limits of resources available. Generating such counterexamples in a modular way could speed up refutation, but it is challenging because of the inherently non-compositional nature of these counterexamples. We start from the monolithic safety verification problem and present a stepby-step derivation of the compositional safety refutation problem. We give three algorithms that solve this problem, discuss their properties with respect to efficiency and completeness, and evaluate them experimentally.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Compositional Safety Refutation Techniques

Madhukar

Schrammel

Srivas

2017

Automated Technology for Verification and Analysis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To evaluate our approach, we compare our tool against state-ofthe-art systems, i.e. T2 [7], ULTIMATE [25] and AProVE [20]. The last tool is the recent winner for several categories of problems in the annual Termination Competition 2014 (TermCOMP'14) [45] and the Termination category in the Competition on Software Verification 2015 (SV-COMP'15) [44].…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Specifically, when the scc has only one unknown node U pr without any cyclic edge and successor (line 20), we resolve the unknown pre-predicate U pr ≡ Term and its corresponding post-predicate U po ≡ true for trivial termination (line 22). Moreover, when the set O is nonempty, the procedure invokes prove_Term with ranking function synthesis only if every element of O is a known Term [e] predicate (line [24][25].…”

Section: Resolving Temporal Reachability Graphmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Most of these termination provers, such as TERMINATOR [12] and its successor T2 [7,16], ARMC [38], TAN [28] and ULTIMATE [25], either show that a program terminates for all (given) inputs or return a counterexample to termination upon the failure of termination proofs. However, due to the incompleteness of termination-based techniques, these provers cannot guarantee that every returned counterexample (from failed termination proofs) leads to a definitely non-terminating execution.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Termination and non-termination specification inference

Qin

Chin

2015

Proceedings of the 36th ACM SIGPLAN Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Techniques for proving termination and non-termination of imperative programs are usually considered as orthogonal mechanisms. In this paper, we propose a novel mechanism that analyzes and proves both program termination and non-termination at the same time. We first introduce the concept of second-order termination constraints and accumulate a set of relational assumptions on them via a Hoare-style verification. We then solve these assumptions with case analysis to determine the (conditional) termination and nontermination scenarios expressed in some specification logic form. In contrast to current approaches, our technique can construct a summary of terminating and non-terminating behaviors for each method. This enables modularity and reuse for our termination and non-termination proving processes. We have tested our tool on sample programs from a recent termination competition, and compared favorably against state-of-the-art termination analyzers.

show abstract

“…This distinguishes our work from most of the related approaches [7,18,20,23,30,32,36,39,40]. The key insight, adapted from [14,16], is that the syntactical structures that appear in the program give rise to a formal grammar, from which many candidates could be sampled.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Syntax-Guided Termination Analysis

Fedyukovich

Zhang

Gupta

2018

Computer Aided Verification

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. We present new algorithms for proving program termination and non-termination using syntax-guided synthesis. They exploit the symbolic encoding of programs and automatically construct a formal grammar for symbolic constraints that are used to synthesize either a termination argument or a non-terminating program refinement. The constraints are then added back to the program encoding, and an offthe-shelf constraint solver decides on their fitness and on the progress of the algorithms. The evaluation of our implementation, called FreqTerm, shows that although the formal grammar is limited to the syntax of the program, in the majority of cases our algorithms are effective and fast. Importantly, FreqTerm is competitive with state-of-the-art on a wide range of terminating and non-terminating benchmarks, and it significantly outperforms state-of-the-art on proving non-termination of a class of programs arising from large-scale Event-Condition-Action systems.

show abstract

Termination Analysis by Learning Terminating Programs

Cited by 67 publications

References 53 publications

Compositional Safety Refutation Techniques

Compositional Safety Refutation Techniques

Termination and non-termination specification inference

Syntax-Guided Termination Analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About