Using the Bandera Tool Set to Model-Check Properties of Concurrent Java Software

Hatcliff, John; Dwyer, Matthew B.

doi:10.1007/3-540-44685-0_5

Cited by 82 publications

(64 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Based on this fact, we think that VisuaL can be a practical alternative to temporal logic formalisms such as LTL, especially for writing temporal and logical properties of algorithmic systems. Thus, VisuaL addresses the requirements specification problem stated by Hatcliff and Dwyer (Hatcliff and Dwyer 2001): "... the difficulty of expressing software requirements in the temporal specification languages of the existing modelchecking tools. Although model-checker property specification languages are built on the theoretically elegant temporal logics, practitioners and even researchers find it difficult to use them to accurately express complex event-sequencing properties.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Experimental evaluation of a tool for the verification and transformation of source code in event-driven systems

et al. 2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In event-driven systems, separating the reactive part of software (i.e., event-driven control) from the non-reactive part is a common design practice. The reactive part is typically structured according to the states and transitions of a system, whereas the non-reactive part is typically structured according to the concepts of the application domain (e.g., the services provided by the system). In such systems, the non-reactive part of software stimulates the reactive part with event calls. Whenever the non-reactive part is modified (e.g., during evolution), the existing event calls may become invalid, new event calls may become necessary, and the two parts of software may become incompatible. Manually finding and repairing these types of defects is a time-consuming and error-prone maintenance task. In this article, we present a solution that combines source code model checking and aspectoriented programming techniques, to reduce the time spent by developers and to automatically find defects, while performing the maintenance task mentioned above. In addition, we present controlled experiments showing that the solution can reduce the time by 75%, and enable the prevention of one defect per 140 lines of source code.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Experimental evaluation of a tool for the verification and transformation of source code in event-driven systems

et al. 2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Model checking [22,7] has recently made significant inroads in the domain of software verification [12,18,3,11,16,4]. In this setting, model checking typically follows a three-step iterative process of abstraction, verification and refinement [24,2,17,6].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Localizing Program Errors for Cimple Debugging

Basu

Saha

Smolka

2004

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. We present automated techniques for the explanation of counter-examples, where a counter-example should be understood as a sequence of program statements. Our approach is based on variable dependency analysis and is applicable to programs written in Cimple, an expressive subset of the C programming language. Central to our approach is the derivation of a focus-statement sequence (FSS) from a given counter-example: a subsequence of the counter-example containing only those program statements that directly or indirectly affect the variable valuation leading to the program error behind the counter-example. We develop a ranking procedure for FSSs where FSSs of higher rank are conceptually easier to understand and correct than those of lower rank. We also analyze constraints over uninitialized variables in order to localize program errors to specific program segments; this often allows the user to subsequently take appropriate debugging measures. We have implemented our techniques in the FocusCheck model checker, which efficiently checks for assertion violations in Cimple programs on a perprocedure basis. The practical utility of our approach is illustrated by its successful application to a fast, linear-time median identification algorithm commonly used in statistical analysis and in the Resolution Advisory module of the Traffic Collision Avoidance System.

show abstract

“…less susceptible to changes), and more concise. VisuaL addresses the requirements specification problem stated by Hatcliff and Dwyer [51]:…”

Section: Contributions Of This Thesismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Once written, the specifications are often hard to read and debug." [51] The algorithms of CheckSource, CheckDesign, and TransformSource are additional contributions of this thesis. CheckSource addresses the model construction problem and the output interpretation problem stated by Hatcliff and Dwyer [51]:…”

Section: Contributions Of This Thesismentioning

confidence: 99%

Evolvable behavior specifications using context-sensitive wildcards

Gülesir¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Using the Bandera Tool Set to Model-Check Properties of Concurrent Java Software

Cited by 82 publications

References 15 publications

Experimental evaluation of a tool for the verification and transformation of source code in event-driven systems

Experimental evaluation of a tool for the verification and transformation of source code in event-driven systems

Localizing Program Errors for Cimple Debugging

Evolvable behavior specifications using context-sensitive wildcards

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About