Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Abstraction in Deductive Verification: Model Fields and Model Methods

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Leveraging Applications of Formal Methods, Verification and Validation. Verification Principles (ISoLA 2022)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 13701))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

This Experience report compares using model fields and model methods for specifying abstractions in abstract implementations. Our experience is connected to past discussions of alternatives in modeling heap state changes and the axiomatic basis for deductive verification of programs with uninterpreted, underspecified or recursive methods.

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 79.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 99.99
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.

    In this paper, as generally in DV, we are concerned to establish that implementations concur with their specifications. But both can be wrong together. Thus a specification that can be written more cleanly and readably is more amenable to human review and can be “more obviously” in agreement with the intent of the software.

  2. 2.

    The presence of quantified expressions often yields a response of unknown.

  3. 3.

    Private communication with Clark Barrett regarding CVC5. April 2022.

  4. 4.

    Private communication. Rustan Leino regarding encoding in Dafny and Boogie. April 2022.

  5. 5.

    The full program is available from the author, but not included for reasons of space.

  6. 6.

    There is not space here to explain the use of datagroups; see [16] for a justification of the datagroup approach used in JML.

References

  1. ACSL. ANSI-C Specification Language (2021). https://github.com/acsl-language/acsl/

  2. Ahrendt, W., Beckert, B., Bubel, R., Hähnle, R., Schmitt, P.H., Ulbrich, M.: Deductive software verification - The KeY Book. In: LNCS, Springer, Cham (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-49812-6

  3. Barbosa, H., et al.: CVC5: a versatile and industrial-strength SMT solver. In: TACAS 2022. LNCS, vol. 13243, pp. 415–442. Springer, Cham (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-99524-9_24

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  4. Barrett, C., et al.: CVC5 web site (2022). https://cvc5.github.io/

  5. Böhme, S., Moskal, M.: Heaps and data structures: a challenge for automated provers. In: Bjørner, N., Sofronie-Stokkermans, V. (eds.) CADE 2011. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 6803, pp. 177–191. Springer, Heidelberg (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-22438-6_15

    Chapter  MATH  Google Scholar 

  6. Cok, D.R.: (2021)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Cok, D.R.: JML and OpenJML for Java 16. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM International Workshop on Formal Techniques for Java-like Programs (FTfJP 2021), pp. 65–67. Association for Computing Machinery, NY (2021). https://www.openjml.org

  8. Cok, D.R., Déharbe, D., Weber, T.: The 2014 SMT competition. J. Satisfiability Boolean Model. Comput. 9, 207–242 (2014)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  9. Cok, D.R., Kiniry, J.R.: ESC/Java2: Uniting ESC/Java and JML. In: Barthe, G., Burdy, L., Huisman, M., Lanet, J.-L., Muntean, T. (eds.) CASSIS 2004. LNCS, vol. 3362, pp. 108–128. Springer, Heidelberg (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-30569-9_6

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  10. Cok, D.R., Leavens, G.T., Ulbrich, M.: Java Modeling Language (JML) Reference Manual, 2nd edn (2022). www.openjml.org/documentation/JML_Reference_Manual.pdf

  11. de Moura, L., Bjørner, N.: Z3: an efficient SMT solver. In: Ramakrishnan, C.R., Rehof, J. (eds.) TACAS 2008. LNCS, vol. 4963, pp. 337–340. Springer, Heidelberg (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-78800-3_24

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  12. Flanagan, C., Leino, K.R.M., Lillibridge, M., Nelson, G., Saxe, J.B., Stata, R.: Extended static checking for Java. In: Proceedings of the ACM SIGPLAN 2002 Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation (PLDI 2002), vol. 37(5), pp. 234–245. SIGPLAN, NY. ACM (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Frama-C: (2021). https://frama-c.com

  14. KeY: The KeY project (2021). www.key-project.org

  15. Leavens, G.T., Baker, A.L., Ruby, C.: Preliminary design of JML: a behavioral interface specification language for Java. Technical Report 98-06-rev29, Iowa State University, Department of Computer Science (2006). Also ACM SIGSOFT Softw. Eng. Notes 31(3), 1–38 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Leino, K.R.M.: Data groups: specifying the modification of extended state. SIGPLAN Not. 33(10), 144–153 (1998)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Leino, K.R.M.: This is boogie 2 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Leino, K.R.M., et al.: Dafny github site (2021). https://github.com/dafny-lang/dafny. Accessed Sept 2021

  19. Leino, K.R.M., Ford, R.L., Cok, D.R.: Dafny reference manual. https://github.com/dafny-lang/dafny/blob/master/docs/DafnyRef/out/DafnyRef.pdf. Accessed Jul 2021

  20. Leino, K.R.M., Rümmer, P.: A polymorphic intermediate verification language: design and logical encoding. In: Esparza, J., Majumdar, R. (eds.) TACAS 2010. LNCS, vol. 6015, pp. 312–327. Springer, Heidelberg (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-12002-2_26

    Chapter  MATH  Google Scholar 

  21. Mostowski, W., Ulbrich, M.: Dynamic dispatch for method contracts through abstract predicates. In: Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Modularity (MODULARITY 2015), pp. 109–116. Association for Computing Machinery, NY (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Müller, P.: Modular Specification and Verification of Object-Oriented Programs, pp. 143–194. Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg (2002). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45651-1_5

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  23. SMTCOMP: Smtcomp competition (2022). https://smt-comp.github.io/2022/

  24. Tinelli, C., et al.: SMT-LIB web site (2003). https://smtlib.cs.uiowa.edu/

  25. Weber, T., Conchon, S., Déharbe, D., Heizmann, M., Niemetz, A., Reger, G.: The SMT competition 2015–2018. J. Satisf. Boolean Model. Comput. 11(1), 221–259 (2019)

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  26. Weiß, B.: Deductive verification of object-oriented software: dynamic frames, dynamic logic and predicate abstraction. PhD thesis, KIT (2011)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Work on JML and OpenJML has benefited from various NSF research grants. OpenJML has also benefited from sponsorship by various industrial clients, including AWS and Goldman Sachs. Thanks also to Rustan Leino and Mattias Ulbrich for private conversations regarding heap encodings in their various tools.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Safer Software Consulting, Rochester, NY, USA

    David R. Cok

  2. University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL, USA

    Gary T. Leavens

Authors
  1. David R. Cok
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Gary T. Leavens
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to David R. Cok .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of Limerick, CSIS and Lero, Limerick, Ireland

    Tiziana Margaria

  2. TU Dortmund, Dortmund, Germany

    Bernhard Steffen

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Cok, D.R., Leavens, G.T. (2022). Abstraction in Deductive Verification: Model Fields and Model Methods. In: Margaria, T., Steffen, B. (eds) Leveraging Applications of Formal Methods, Verification and Validation. Verification Principles. ISoLA 2022. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 13701. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-19849-6_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-19849-6_3

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-031-19848-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-031-19849-6

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation