Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Systematic Generation of Non-equivalent Expressions for Relational Algebra

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Abstract State Machines, Alloy, B, TLA, VDM, and Z (ABZ 2018)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNTCS,volume 10817))

Abstract

Relational algebra forms the semantic foundation in multiple domains, e.g., Alloy models, OCL constraints, UML metamodels, and SQL queries. Synthesis and repair techniques in such domains require an efficient procedure to generate (non-equivalent) expressions subject to relational constraints, e.g., the types of sets and relations, their cardinality, size of expressions, maximum arity of the intermediate expressions, etc. This paper introduces the first generator for relational expressions that are non-equivalent with respect to the semantics of relational algebra. We present the algorithms that define our generator, its embodiment based on the Alloy tool-set, and an experimental evaluation to show the effectiveness of its non-equivalent generation for a variety of problems with relational constraints.

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

References

  1. Albarghouthi, A., Gulwani, S., Kincaid, Z.: Recursive program synthesis. In: Sharygina, N., Veith, H. (eds.) CAV 2013. LNCS, vol. 8044, pp. 934–950. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-39799-8_67

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  2. Alur, R., Bodík, R., Juniwal, G., Martin, M.M.K., Raghothaman, M., Seshia, S.A., Singh, R., Solar-Lezama, A., Torlak, E., Udupa, A.: Syntax-guided synthesis. In: FMCAD (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Alur, R., Radhakrishna, A., Udupa, A.: Scaling enumerative program synthesis via divide and conquer. In: Legay, A., Margaria, T. (eds.) TACAS 2017. LNCS, vol. 10205, pp. 319–336. Springer, Heidelberg (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-54577-5_18

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  4. Dennis, G., Chang, F.S., Jackson, D.: Modular verification of code with SAT. In: ISSTA (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Feng, Y., Martins, R., Wang, Y., Dillig, I., Reps, T.W.: Component-based synthesis for complex APIs. In: POPL (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Feser, J.K., Chaudhuri, S., Dillig, I.: Synthesizing data structure transformations from input-output examples. In: PLDI (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Frias, M.F., Galeotti, J.P., Pombo, C.G.L., Aguirre, N.M.: DynAlloy: upgrading Alloy with actions. In: ICSE (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Galenson, J., Reames, P., Bodik, R., Hartmann, B., Sen, K.: CodeHint: dynamic and interactive synthesis of code snippets. In: ICSE (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Galeotti, J.P., Rosner, N., Pombo, C.G.L., Frias, M.F.: TACO: efficient SAT-based bounded verification using symmetry breaking and tight bounds. TSE 39, 1283–1307 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Gopinath, D., Malik, M.Z., Khurshid, S.: Specification-based program repair using SAT. In: TACAS (2011)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  11. Gulwani, S., Hernández-Orallo, J., Kitzelmann, E., Muggleton, S.H., Schmid, U., Zorn, B.: Inductive programming meets the real world. CACM 58(11), 90–99 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Gvero, T., Kuncak, V., Piskac, R.: Interactive synthesis of code snippets. In: Gopalakrishnan, G., Qadeer, S. (eds.) CAV 2011. LNCS, vol. 6806, pp. 418–423. Springer, Heidelberg (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-22110-1_33

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  13. Hua, J., Khurshid, S.: A sketching-based approach for debugging using test cases. In: Artho, C., Legay, A., Peled, D. (eds.) ATVA 2016. LNCS, vol. 9938, pp. 463–478. Springer, Cham (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-46520-3_29

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  14. Hua, J., Khurshid, S.: EdSketch: execution-driven sketching for Java. In: SPIN (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Hua, J., Zhang, M., Wang, K., Khurshid, S.: Towards practical program repair with on-demand candidate generation. In: ICSE (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Jackson, D.: Alloy: a lightweight object modelling notation. TSE 11, 256–290 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Jackson, D., Fekete, A.: Lightweight analysis of object interactions. In: Kobayashi, N., Pierce, B.C. (eds.) TACS 2001. LNCS, vol. 2215, pp. 492–513. Springer, Heidelberg (2001). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45500-0_25

    Chapter  MATH  Google Scholar 

  18. Jackson, D., Vaziri, M.: Finding bugs with a constraint solver. In: ISSTA (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Jeon, J., Qiu, X., Foster, J.S., Solar-Lezama, A.: JSketch: sketching for Java. In: FSE (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Jobstmann, B., Griesmayer, A., Bloem, R.: Program repair as a game. In: Etessami, K., Rajamani, S.K. (eds.) CAV 2005. LNCS, vol. 3576, pp. 226–238. Springer, Heidelberg (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/11513988_23

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  21. Kang, E., Milicevic, A., Jackson, D.: Multi-representational security analysis. In: FSE (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Kneuss, E., Kuraj, I., Kuncak, V., Suter, P.: Synthesis modulo recursive functions. In: OOPSLA (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Koukoutos, M., Kneuss, E., Kuncak, V.: An update on deductive synthesis and repair in the leon tool. In: SYNT Workshop (2016)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  24. Long, F., Rinard, M.: Staged program repair with condition synthesis. In: FSE (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Maier, D.: Theory of Relational Databases. Computer Science Press, Rockville (1983)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  26. Maldonado-Lopez, F.A., Chavarriaga, J., Donoso, Y.: Detecting network policy conflicts using alloy. In: Ait Ameur, Y., Schewe, K.D. (eds.) ABZ 2014. LNCS, vol. 8477, pp. 314–317. Springer, Heidelberg (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-43652-3_31

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  27. Mandelin, D., Xu, L., Bodík, R., Kimelman, D.: Jungloid mining: helping to navigate the API jungle. In: PLDI (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Manna, Z., Waldinger, R.: Toward automatic program synthesis. CACM 14(3), 151–165 (1971)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Maoz, S., Ringert, J.O., Rumpe, B.: CD2Alloy: class diagrams analysis using Alloy revisited. In: MODELS (2011)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  30. Maoz, S., Ringert, J.O., Rumpe, B.: CDDiff: semantic differencing for class diagrams. In: Mezini, M. (ed.) ECOOP 2011. LNCS, vol. 6813, pp. 230–254. Springer, Heidelberg (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-22655-7_12

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  31. Marinov, D., Khurshid, S.: TestEra: a novel framework for automated testing of Java programs. In: ASE (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  32. Nelson, T., Danas, N., Dougherty, D.J., Krishnamurthi, S.: The power of “why” and “why not”: enriching scenario exploration with provenance. In: FSE (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  33. Nelson, T., Saghafi, S., Dougherty, D.J., Fisler, K., Krishnamurthi, S.: Aluminum: principled scenario exploration through minimality. In: ICSE (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  34. Nelson, T., Barratt, C., Dougherty, D.J., Fisler, K., Krishnamurthi, S.: The Margrave tool for firewall analysis. In: LISA (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  35. Pei, Y., Furia, C.A., Nordio, M., Meyer, B.: Automated program repair in an integrated development environment. In: ICSE (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  36. Perelman, D., Gulwani, S., Grossman, D., Provost, P.: Test-driven synthesis. In: PLDI (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  37. Polikarpova, N., Kuraj, I., Solar-Lezama, A.: Program synthesis from polymorphic refinement types. In: PLDI (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Polozov, O., Gulwani, S.: FlashMeta: a framework for inductive program synthesis. In: OOPSLA (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  39. Richters, M., Gogolla, M.: OCL: syntax, semantics, and tools. In: Clark, T., Warmer, J. (eds.) Object Modeling with the OCL. LNCS, vol. 2263, pp. 42–68. Springer, Heidelberg (2002). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45669-4_4

    Chapter  MATH  Google Scholar 

  40. Rothenberg, B.-C., Grumberg, O.: Sound and complete mutation-based program repair. In: Fitzgerald, J., Heitmeyer, C., Gnesi, S., Philippou, A. (eds.) FM 2016. LNCS, vol. 9995, pp. 593–611. Springer, Cham (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-48989-6_36

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  41. Ruchansky, N., Proserpio, D.: A (not) NICE way to verify the Openflow switch specification: formal modelling of the Openflow switch using Alloy. In: SIGCOMM (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  42. Rumbaugh, J., Jacobson, I., Booch, G.: Unified Modeling Language Reference Manual, 2nd edn. Pearson Education, London (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  43. Saghafi, S., Danas, R., Dougherty, D.J.: Exploring theories with a model-finding assistant. In: Felty, A.P., Middeldorp, A. (eds.) CADE 2015. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 9195, pp. 434–449. Springer, Cham (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-21401-6_30

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  44. Shlyakhter, I., Seater, R., Jackson, D., Sridharan, M., Taghdiri, M.: Debugging overconstrained declarative models using unsatisfiable cores. In: ASE (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  45. Singh, R., Solar-Lezama, A.: Synthesizing data structure manipulations from storyboards. In: FSE (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  46. Solar-Lezama, A., Tancau, L., Bodik, R., Seshia, S., Saraswat, V.: Combinatorial sketching for finite programs. In: ASPLOS (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Sullivan, A.: Automated testing and sketching of Alloy models. Ph.D. thesis, University of Texas at Austin (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  48. Sullivan, A., Wang, K., Khurshid, S.: AUnit: a test automation tool for Alloy. In: ICST (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  49. Sullivan, A., Wang, K., Khurshid, S., Marinov, D.: Evaluating state modeling techniques in alloy. In: SQAMIA (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  50. Sullivan, A., Wang, K., Zaeem, R.N., Khurshid, S.: Automated test generation and mutation testing for Alloy. In: ICST (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  51. Sullivan, A., Zaeem, R.N., Khurshid, S., Marinov, D.: Towards a test automation framework for alloy. In: SPIN (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  52. Torlak, E., Chang, F.S.-H., Jackson, D.: Finding minimal unsatisfiable cores of declarative specifications. In: Cuellar, J., Maibaum, T., Sere, K. (eds.) FM 2008. LNCS, vol. 5014, pp. 326–341. Springer, Heidelberg (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-68237-0_23

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  53. Torlak, E., Jackson, D.: Kodkod: a relational model finder. In: Grumberg, O., Huth, M. (eds.) TACAS 2007. LNCS, vol. 4424, pp. 632–647. Springer, Heidelberg (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-71209-1_49

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  54. Le, V., Afshari, M., Su, Z.: Compiler validation via equivalence modulo inputs. In: PLDI, vol. 49, no. 6, pp. 216–226 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Wang, K., Sullivan, A., Khurshid, S.: MuAlloy: a mutation testing framework for alloy. In: ICSE (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  56. Wang, K., Sullivan, A., Marinov, D., Khurshid, S.: Solver-based sketching Alloy models using test valuations. In: ABZ (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  57. Weimer, W., Nguyen, T., Le Goues, C., Forrest, S.: Automatically finding patches using genetic programming. In: ICSE (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  58. Yang, Z., Hua, J., Wang, K., Khurshid, S.: Test execution driven synthesis of API sequences with conditionals and loops. In: ICST (2018)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank Viktor Kuncak for his comments on this work. Manos Koukoutos is supported in part by the European Research Council (ERC) project Implicit Programming. This material is based upon work partially supported by the US National Science Foundation under Grant Nos. CCF-1409423, CCF-1421503, CNS-1646305, CCF-1718903, and CNS-1740916.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Texas at Austin, Austin, USA

    Kaiyuan Wang, Allison Sullivan & Sarfraz Khurshid

  2. École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland

    Manos Koukoutos

  3. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, USA

    Darko Marinov

Authors
  1. Kaiyuan Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Allison Sullivan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Manos Koukoutos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Darko Marinov
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Sarfraz Khurshid
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kaiyuan Wang .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of Southampton, Southampton, United Kingdom

    Michael Butler

  2. Universität Ulm, Ulm, Germany

    Alexander Raschke

  3. University of Southampton, Southampton, United Kingdom

    Thai Son Hoang

  4. Thales Austria GmbH, Vienna, Austria

    Klaus Reichl

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Wang, K., Sullivan, A., Koukoutos, M., Marinov, D., Khurshid, S. (2018). Systematic Generation of Non-equivalent Expressions for Relational Algebra. In: Butler, M., Raschke, A., Hoang, T., Reichl, K. (eds) Abstract State Machines, Alloy, B, TLA, VDM, and Z. ABZ 2018. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 10817. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-91271-4_8

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-91271-4_8

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-91270-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-91271-4

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation