Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Behavioral Program Logic

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Automated Reasoning with Analytic Tableaux and Related Methods (TABLEAUX 2019)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 11714))

Abstract

We present Behavioral Program Logic (BPL), a dynamic logic for trace properties that incorporates concepts from behavioral types and allows reasoning about non-functional properties within a sequent calculus. BPL uses behavioral modalities , to verify statements against behavioral specifications \(\tau \). Behavioral specifications generalize postconditions and behavioral types. They can be used to specify other static analyses, e.g., data flow analyses. This enables deductive reasoning about the results of multiple analyses on the same program, potentially implemented in different formalisms. Our calculus for BPL verifies the behavioral specification gradually, as common for behavioral types. This vastly simplifies specification, calculus and composition of local results. We present a sequent calculus for object-oriented actors with futures that integrates a pointer analysis and bridges the gap between behavioral types and deductive verification.

This work is supported by the FormbaR project, part of AG Signalling/DB RailLab.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    This justifies our use of the term “modality”. Contrary to standard modalities, behavioral modalities are not formulas that express modal statements about formulas, but formulas that express a modal statement about more general specifications.

  2. 2.

    Behavioral types are sometimes (informally) distinguished from data types by having a subject reduction theorem where the typing relation is preserved, but not the type itself [10]. In \(\text {BPL}\) this would correspond to the property that one of the rules has a premise where the type in the behavioral modality is different than in the conclusion.

References

  1. Ahrendt, W., Beckert, B., Bubel, R., Hähnle, R., Schmitt, P.H., Ulbrich, M. (eds.): Deductive Software Verification - The KeY Book - From Theory to Practice. LNCS, vol. 10001. Springer, Cham (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-49812-6

    Book  Google Scholar 

  2. Beckert, B.: A dynamic logic for the formal verification of Java Card programs. In: Attali, I., Jensen, T. (eds.) JavaCard 2000. LNCS, vol. 2041, pp. 6–24. Springer, Heidelberg (2001). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45165-X_2

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  3. Beckert, B., Bruns, D.: Dynamic logic with trace semantics. In: Bonacina, M.P. (ed.) CADE 2013. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 7898, pp. 315–329. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-38574-2_22

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  4. Berger, M., Honda, K., Yoshida, N.: Completeness and logical full abstraction in modal logics for typed mobile processes. In: Aceto, L., Damgård, I., Goldberg, L.A., Halldórsson, M.M., Ingólfsdóttir, A., Walukiewicz, I. (eds.) ICALP 2008. LNCS, vol. 5126, pp. 99–111. Springer, Heidelberg (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-70583-3_9

    Chapter  MATH  Google Scholar 

  5. Bocchi, L., Lange, J., Tuosto, E.: Three algorithms and a methodology for amending contracts for choreographies. Sci. Ann. Comput. Sci. 22(1), 61–104 (2012)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  6. Bubel, R., et al.: Proof repositories for compositional verification of evolving software systems - managing change when proving software correct. In: Steffen, B. (ed.) Transactions on Foundations for Mastering Change I. LNCS, vol. 9960, pp. 130–156. Springer, Cham (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-46508-1_8

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  7. Bubel, R., Din, C.C., Hähnle, R., Nakata, K.: A dynamic logic with traces and coinduction. In: De Nivelle, H. (ed.) TABLEAUX 2015. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 9323, pp. 307–322. Springer, Cham (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-24312-2_21

    Chapter  MATH  Google Scholar 

  8. Caires, L., Pfenning, F.: Session types as intuitionistic linear propositions. In: Gastin, P., Laroussinie, F. (eds.) CONCUR 2010. LNCS, vol. 6269, pp. 222–236. Springer, Heidelberg (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-15375-4_16

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  9. de Boer, F.S., et al.: A survey of active object languages. ACM Comput. Surv. 50(5), 76:1–76:39 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Dezani-Ciancaglini, M.: Personal Communication, 19 October 2018

    Google Scholar 

  11. Din, C.C., Hähnle, R., Johnsen, E.B., Pun, K.I., Tapia Tarifa, S.L.: Locally abstract, globally concrete semantics of concurrent programming languages. In: Schmidt, R.A., Nalon, C. (eds.) TABLEAUX 2017. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 10501, pp. 22–43. Springer, Cham (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-66902-1_2

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  12. Din, C.C., Owe, O.: A sound and complete reasoning system for asynchronous communication with shared futures. J. Log. Algebraic Methods Program. 83(5–6), 360–383 (2014)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  13. Din, C.C., Tapia Tarifa, S.L., Hähnle, R., Johnsen, E.B.: History-based specification and verification of scalable concurrent and distributed systems. In: Butler, M., Conchon, S., Zaïdi, F. (eds.) ICFEM 2015. LNCS, vol. 9407, pp. 217–233. Springer, Cham (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-25423-4_14

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  14. Flores-Montoya, A.E., Albert, E., Genaim, S.: May-happen-in-parallel based deadlock analysis for concurrent objects. In: Beyer, D., Boreale, M. (eds.) FMOODS/FORTE -2013. LNCS, vol. 7892, pp. 273–288. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-38592-6_19

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  15. García-Matos, M., Väänänen, J.: Abstract model theory as a framework for universal logic. In: Beziau, J.-Y. (ed.) Logica Universalis, pp. 19–33. Basel, Birkhäuser Basel (2005)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  16. Giachino, E., Johnsen, E.B., Laneve, C., Pun, K.I.: Time complexity of concurrent programs. In: Braga, C., Ölveczky, P.C. (eds.) FACS 2015. LNCS, vol. 9539, pp. 199–216. Springer, Cham (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-28934-2_11

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  17. Henkin, L.: Relativization with respect to formulas and its use in proofs of independence. Compositio Mathematica 20, 88–106 (1968)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  18. Henrio, L., Laneve, C., Mastandrea, V.: Analysis of synchronisations in stateful active objects. In: Polikarpova, N., Schneider, S. (eds.) IFM 2017. LNCS, vol. 10510, pp. 195–210. Springer, Cham (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-66845-1_13

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  19. Honda, K., Yoshida, N., Carbone, M.: Multiparty asynchronous session types. JACM 63, 9:1–9:67 (2016)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  20. Hüttel, H., et al.: Foundations of session types and behavioural contracts. ACM Comput. Surv. 49(1), 3:1–3:36 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Johnsen, E.B., Hähnle, R., Schäfer, J., Schlatte, R., Steffen, M.: ABS: a core language for abstract behavioral specification. In: Aichernig, B.K., de Boer, F.S., Bonsangue, M.M. (eds.) FMCO 2010. LNCS, vol. 6957, pp. 142–164. Springer, Heidelberg (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-25271-6_8

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  22. Kamburjan, E. Behavioral program logic and LAGC semantics without continuations (technical report). CoRR abs/1904.13338 (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Kamburjan, E., Chen, T.-C.: Stateful behavioral types for active objects. In: Furia, C.A., Winter, K. (eds.) IFM 2018. LNCS, vol. 11023, pp. 214–235. Springer, Cham (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-98938-9_13

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  24. Kamburjan, E., Din, C.C., Chen, T.-C.: Session-based compositional analysis for actor-based languages using futures. In: Ogata, K., Lawford, M., Liu, S. (eds.) ICFEM 2016. LNCS, vol. 10009, pp. 296–312. Springer, Cham (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-47846-3_19

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  25. Kamburjan, E., Hähnle, R.: Deductive verification of railway operations. In: Fantechi, A., Lecomte, T., Romanovsky, A.B. (eds.) RSSRail 2017. LNCS, vol. 10598, pp. 131–147. Springer, Uk (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-68499-4_9

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  26. Neykova, R., Yoshida, N.: Multiparty session actors. Log. Methods Comput. Sci. 13, 1 (2017)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  27. Wadler, P.: Propositions as types. Commun. ACM 58(12), 75–84 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computer Science, Technische Universität Darmstadt, Darmstadt, Germany

    Eduard Kamburjan

Authors
  1. Eduard Kamburjan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Eduard Kamburjan .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. IBISC, Univ. Evry, Université Paris-Saclay, Evry, France

    Serenella Cerrito

  2. Middlesex University London, London, UK

    Andrei Popescu

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Kamburjan, E. (2019). Behavioral Program Logic. In: Cerrito, S., Popescu, A. (eds) Automated Reasoning with Analytic Tableaux and Related Methods. TABLEAUX 2019. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 11714. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-29026-9_22

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-29026-9_22

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-29025-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-29026-9

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation