Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Verifying Array Programs by Transforming Verification Conditions

  • Conference paper
Verification, Model Checking, and Abstract Interpretation (VMCAI 2014)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNTCS,volume 8318))

Abstract

We present a method for verifying properties of imperative programs manipulating integer arrays. We assume that we are given a program and a property to be verified. The interpreter (that is, the operational semantics) of the program is specified as a set of Horn clauses with constraints in the domain of integer arrays, also called constraint logic programs over integer arrays, denoted CLP(Array). Then, by specializing the interpreter with respect to the given program and property, we generate a set of verification conditions (expressed as a CLP(Array) program) whose satisfiability implies that the program verifies the given property. Our verification method is based on transformations that preserve the least model semantics of CLP(Array) programs, and hence the satisfiability of the verification conditions. In particular, we apply the usual rules for CLP transformation, such as unfolding, folding, and constraint replacement, tailored to the specific domain of integer arrays. We propose an automatic strategy that guides the application of those rules with the objective of deriving a new set of verification conditions which is either trivially satisfiable (because it contains no constrained facts) or is trivially unsatisfiable (because it contains the fact false). Our approach provides a very rich program verification framework where one can compose together several verification strategies, each of them being implemented by transformations of CLP(Array) programs.

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 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

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Alberti, F., Bruttomesso, R., Ghilardi, S., Ranise, S., Sharygina, N.: SAFARI: SMT-based abstraction for arrays with interpolants. In: Madhusudan, P., Seshia, S.A. (eds.) CAV 2012. LNCS, vol. 7358, pp. 679–685. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  2. Bjørner, N., McMillan, K., Rybalchenko, A.: Program verification as satisfiability modulo theories. In: SMT 2012, pp. 3–11 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bjørner, N., McMillan, K., Rybalchenko, A.: On solving universally quantified Horn clauses. In: Logozzo, F., Fähndrich, M. (eds.) SAS 2013. LNCS, vol. 7935, pp. 105–125. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  4. Bradley, A.R., Manna, Z., Sipma, H.B.: What’s decidable about arrays? In: Emerson, E.A., Namjoshi, K.S. (eds.) VMCAI 2006. LNCS, vol. 3855, pp. 427–442. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  5. Cousot, P., Cousot, R.: Abstract interpretation: A unified lattice model for static analysis of programs by construction of approximation of fixpoints. In: POPL 1977, pp. 238–252. ACM (1977)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Cousot, P., Cousot, R., Logozzo, F.: A parametric segmentation functor for fully automatic and scalable array content analysis. In: POPL 2011, pp. 105–118 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Cousot, P., Halbwachs, N.: Automatic discovery of linear restraints among variables of a program. In: POPL 1978, pp. 84–96. ACM (1978)

    Google Scholar 

  8. De Angelis, E., Fioravanti, F., Pettorossi, A., Proietti, M.: Verifying Programs via Iterated Specialization. In: PEPM 2013, pp. 43–52. ACM (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  9. De Angelis, E., Fioravanti, F., Pettorossi, A., Proietti, M.: Verification of Imperative Programs by Constraint Logic Program Transformation. In: SAIRP 2013, Festschrift for Dave Schmidt. Electronic Proceedings in Theoretical Computer Science, vol. 129, pp. 186–210 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Delzanno, G., Podelski, A.: Model checking in CLP. In: Cleaveland, W.R. (ed.) TACAS 1999. LNCS, vol. 1579, pp. 223–239. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  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)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  12. Dillig, I., Dillig, T., Aiken, A.: Fluid updates: Beyond strong vs. weak updates. In: Gordon, A.D. (ed.) ESOP 2010. LNCS, vol. 6012, pp. 246–266. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  13. Etalle, S., Gabbrielli, M.: Transformations of CLP modules. Theoretical Computer Science 166, 101–146 (1996)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  14. Fioravanti, F., Pettorossi, A., Proietti, M., Senni, V.: Generalization strategies for the verification of infinite state systems. Theory and Practice of Logic Programming 13(2), 175–199 (2013)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  15. Flanagan, C.: Automatic software model checking via constraint logic. Sci. Comput. Program. 50(1-3), 253–270 (2004)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  16. Flanagan, C., Qadeer, S.: Predicate abstraction for software verification. In: POPL 2002, pp. 191–202. ACM, New York (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Ghilardi, S., Nicolini, E., Ranise, S., Zucchelli, D.: Decision procedures for extensions of the theory of arrays. Ann. Math. Artif. Intell. 50(3-4), 231–254 (2007)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  18. Gopan, D., Reps, T.W., Sagiv, S.: A framework for numeric analysis of array operations. In: POPL 2005, pp. 338–350. ACM (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Grebenshchikov, S., Gupta, A., Lopes, N.P., Popeea, C., Rybalchenko, A.: HSF(C): A Software Verifier based on Horn Clauses. In: Flanagan, C., König, B. (eds.) TACAS 2012. LNCS, vol. 7214, pp. 549–551. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  20. Gulavani, B.S., Chakraborty, S., Nori, A.V., Rajamani, S.K.: Automatically Refining Abstract Interpretations. In: Ramakrishnan, C.R., Rehof, J. (eds.) TACAS 2008. LNCS, vol. 4963, pp. 443–458. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  21. Halbwachs, N., Péron, M.: Discovering properties about arrays in simple programs. In: PLDI 2008, pp. 339–348 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Jaffar, J., Maher, M.: Constraint logic programming: A survey. Journal of Logic Programming 19/20, 503–581 (1994)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  23. Jaffar, J., Santosa, A.E., Voicu, R.: An interpolation method for CLP traversal. In: Gent, I.P. (ed.) CP 2009. LNCS, vol. 5732, pp. 454–469. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  24. Jhala, R., McMillan, K.L.: Array abstractions from proofs. In: Damm, W., Hermanns, H. (eds.) CAV 2007. LNCS, vol. 4590, pp. 193–206. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  25. Kovács, L., Voronkov, A.: Finding loop invariants for programs over arrays using a theorem prover. In: Chechik, M., Wirsing, M. (eds.) FASE 2009. LNCS, vol. 5503, pp. 470–485. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  26. Lahiri, S.K., Bryant, R.E.: Predicate abstraction with indexed predicates. ACM Trans. Comput. Log. 9(1) (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Larraz, D., Rodríguez-Carbonell, E., Rubio, A.: SMT-based array invariant generation. In: Giacobazzi, R., Berdine, J., Mastroeni, I. (eds.) VMCAI 2013. LNCS, vol. 7737, pp. 169–188. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  28. Lloyd, J.W.: Foundations of Logic Programming, 2nd edn. Springer, Berlin (1987)

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  29. The MAP transformation system, http://www.iasi.cnr.it/~proietti/system.html

  30. McCarthy, J.: Towards a mathematical science of computation. In: Information Processing: Proc. of IFIP 1962, pp. 21–28. North Holland, Amsterdam (1963)

    Google Scholar 

  31. McMillan, K.L.: Quantified invariant generation using an interpolating saturation prover. In: Ramakrishnan, C.R., Rehof, J. (eds.) TACAS 2008. LNCS, vol. 4963, pp. 413–427. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  32. Necula, G.C., McPeak, S., Rahul, S.P., Weimer, W.: CIL: Intermediate language and tools for analysis and transformation of C programs. In: Nigel Horspool, R. (ed.) CC 2002. LNCS, vol. 2304, pp. 209–265. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  33. Peralta, J.C., Gallagher, J.P.: Convex hull abstractions in specialization of CLP programs. In: Leuschel, M. (ed.) LOPSTR 2002. LNCS, vol. 2664, pp. 90–108. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  34. Peralta, J.C., Gallagher, J.P., Saglam, H.: Analysis of Imperative Programs through Analysis of Constraint Logic Programs. In: Levi, G. (ed.) SAS 1998. LNCS, vol. 1503, pp. 246–261. Springer, Heidelberg (1998)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  35. Podelski, A., Rybalchenko, A.: ARMC: The Logical Choice for Software Model Checking with Abstraction Refinement. In: Hanus, M. (ed.) PADL 2007. LNCS, vol. 4354, pp. 245–259. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  36. Reynolds, C.J.: Theories of Programming Languages. Cambridge Univ. Press (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  37. Seghir, M.N., Podelski, A., Wies, T.: Abstraction refinement for quantified array assertions. In: Palsberg, J., Su, Z. (eds.) SAS 2009. LNCS, vol. 5673, pp. 3–18. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  38. van Emden, M.H., Kowalski, R.: The semantics of predicate logic as a programming language. Journal of the ACM 23(4), 733–742 (1976)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. DEC, University ‘G. D’Annunzio’, Pescara, Italy

    Emanuele De Angelis & Fabio Fioravanti

  2. DICII, University of Rome Tor Vergata, Rome, Italy

    Alberto Pettorossi

  3. IASI-CNR, Rome, Italy

    Maurizio Proietti

Authors
  1. Emanuele De Angelis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Fabio Fioravanti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Alberto Pettorossi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Maurizio Proietti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. One Microsoft Way, Microsoft Research, 98052, Redmond, WA, USA

    Kenneth L. McMillan

  2. DI - Ecole Normale Supérieure, 45, rue d’Ulm, 75230, Paris Cedex 05, France

    Xavier Rival

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

De Angelis, E., Fioravanti, F., Pettorossi, A., Proietti, M. (2014). Verifying Array Programs by Transforming Verification Conditions. In: McMillan, K.L., Rival, X. (eds) Verification, Model Checking, and Abstract Interpretation. VMCAI 2014. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 8318. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-54013-4_11

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-54013-4_11

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-54012-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-54013-4

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation