CS 510/13. Predicate Abstraction

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "CS 510/13. Predicate Abstraction"

Transcription

1 CS 50/3 Predicate Abstraction

2 Predicate Abstraction Extract a finite state model from an infinite state system Used to prove assertions or safety properties Successfully applied for verification of C programs SLAM (used in windows device driver verification) MAGIC, BLAST, F-Soft

3 Example for Predicate Abstraction int main() { int i; i=0; while(even(i)) i++; + p i=0 = p 2 even(i) void main() { bool p, p2; p=true; p2=true; while(p2) { p=p?false:nondet(); p2=!p2; C program Predicates Boolean program [Graf, Saidi 97] [Ball, Rajamani 0]

4 Computing Predicate Abstraction How to get predicates for checking a given property? How do we compute the abstraction? Predicate Abstraction is an overapproximation How to refine coarse abstractions

5 Counterexample Guided Abstraction Refinement loop C Program Initial Abstraction Abstraction refinement Abstract model Refinement Verification Model Checker Simulator No error or bug found Property holds Simulation sucessful Bug found Spurious counterexample

6 Example Example ( ) { : do{ lock(); old = new; q = q->next; 2: if (q!= NULL){ 3: q->data = new; unlock(); new ++; 4: while(new!= old); 5: unlock (); return; unlock lock unlock lock

7 What a program really is pc lock old new q State a 3 a a 5 a 5 a 0x33a Transition 3: 3: unlock(); new++; 4: Example Example ( ) { : : do{ do{ lock(); lock(); old old = new; new; q = q->next; 2: 2: if if (q (q!=!= NULL){ NULL){ 3: 3: q->data q->data = new; new; unlock(); new new ++; ++; 4: 4: while(new!=!= old); old); 5: 5: unlock unlock (); (); return; pc lock old new q a 4 a a 5 a 6 a 0x33a

8 The Safety Verification Problem Error Initial Safe Is there a path from an initial to an error state? Problem: Infinite state graph Solution : Set of states ' logical formula

9 Idea : Predicate Abstraction Predicates on program state: lock old = new States satisfying same predicates are equivalent Merged into one abstract state #abstract states is finite

10 Abstract States and Transitions State pc lock old new q a 3 a a 5 a 5 a 0x33a 3: 3: unlock(); new++; 4: pc lock old new q a 4 a a 5 a 6 a 0x33a lock old=new! lock! old=new

11 Abstraction State pc lock old new q a 3 a a 5 a 5 a 0x33a 3: 3: unlock(); new++; 4: pc lock old new q a 4 a a 5 a 6 a 0x33a Existential Approximation lock old=new! lock! old=new

12 Abstraction State pc lock old new q a 3 a a 5 a 5 a 0x33a 3: 3: unlock(); new++; 4: pc lock old new q a 4 a a 5 a 6 a 0x33a lock old=new! lock! old=new

13 Analyze Abstraction Analyze finite graph Over Approximate: Safe => System Safe Problem Spurious counterexamples

14 Idea 2: Counterex.-Guided Refinement Solution Use spurious counterexamples to refine abstraction!

15 Idea 2: Counterex.-Guided Refinement Solution Use spurious counterexamples to refine abstraction. Add predicates to distinguish states across cut 2. Build refined abstraction

16 Iterative Abstraction-Refinement [Kurshan et al 93] [Clarke et al 00] [Ball-Rajamani 0] Solution Use spurious counterexamples to refine abstraction. Add predicates to distinguish states across cut 2. Build refined abstraction -eliminates counterexample 3. Repeat search Till real counterexample or system proved safe

17 Build-and-Search Example ( ) { : : do{ do{ lock(); old old = new; q = q->next; 2: 2: if if (q (q!=!= NULL){ 3: 3: q->data = new; unlock(); new new ++; ++; 4:while(new!=!= old); 5: 5: unlock (); ();! LOCK Predicates: LOCK

18 Build-and-Search Example ( ) { : : do{ do{ lock(); old old = new; q = q->next; 2: 2: if if (q (q!=!= NULL){ 3: 3: q->data = new; unlock(); new new ++; ++; 4:while(new!=!= old); 5: 5: unlock (); (); lock() old = new q=q->next 2! LOCK LOCK 2 Predicates: LOCK

19 Build-and-Search Example ( ) { : : do{ do{ lock(); old old = new; q = q->next; 2: 2: if if (q (q!=!= NULL){ 3: 3: q->data = new; unlock(); new new ++; ++; 4:while(new!=!= old); 5: 5: unlock (); (); [q!=null] 3 2 LOCK! LOCK LOCK 2 3 Predicates: LOCK

20 Build-and-Search Example ( ) { : : do{ do{ lock(); old old = new; q = q->next; 2: 2: if if (q (q!=!= NULL){ 3: 3: q->data = new; unlock(); new new ++; ++; 4:while(new!=!= old); 5: 5: unlock (); (); q->data = new unlock() new LOCK! LOCK! LOCK LOCK Predicates: LOCK

21 Build-and-Search Example ( ) { : : do{ do{ lock(); old old = new; q = q->next; 2: 2: if if (q (q!=!= NULL){ 3: 3: q->data = new; unlock(); new new ++; ++; 4:while(new!=!= old); 5: 5: unlock (); (); 5 [new==old] LOCK! LOCK! LOCK! LOCK LOCK Predicates: LOCK

22 Build-and-Search Example ( ) { : : do{ do{ lock(); old old = new; q = q->next; 2: 2: if if (q (q!=!= NULL){ 3: 3: q->data = new; unlock(); new new ++; ++; 4:while(new!=!= old); 5: 5: unlock (); (); 5 4 unlock() LOCK! LOCK! LOCK! LOCK! LOCK LOCK 2 3 Predicates: LOCK

23 Analyze Counterexample Example ( ) { : : do{ do{ lock(); old old = new; q = q->next; 2: 2: if if (q (q!=!= NULL){ 3: 3: q->data = new; unlock(); new new ++; ++; 4:while(new!=!= old); 5: 5: unlock (); (); LOCK! LOCK! LOCK! LOCK LOCK lock() old = new q=q->next [q!=null] q->data = new unlock() new++ [new==old] unlock() 4! LOCK 2 3 Predicates: LOCK

24 Analyze Counterexample Example ( ) { : : do{ do{ lock(); old old = new; q = q->next; 2: 2: if if (q (q!=!= NULL){ 3: 3: q->data = new; unlock(); new new ++; ++; 4:while(new!=!= old); 5: 5: unlock (); (); LOCK : LOCK : LOCK : LOCK : LOCK LOCK old = new new++ [new==old] Inconsistent new == old Predicates: LOCK

25 Repeat Build-and-Search Example ( ) { : : do{ do{ lock(); old old = new; q = q->next; 2: 2: if if (q (q!=!= NULL){ 3: 3: q->data = new; unlock(); new new ++; ++; 4:while(new!=!= old); 5: 5: unlock (); (); : LOCK Predicates: LOCK, new==old

26 Repeat Build-and-Search Example ( ) { : : do{ do{ lock(); old old = new; q = q->next; 2: 2: if if (q (q!=!= NULL){ 3: 3: q->data = new; unlock(); new new ++; ++; 4:while(new!=!= old); 5: 5: unlock (); (); LOCK, new==old 2! LOCK lock() old = new q=q->next 2 Predicates: LOCK, new==old

27 Repeat Build-and-Search Example ( ) { : : do{ do{ lock(); old old = new; q = q->next; 2: 2: if if (q (q!=!= NULL){ 3: 3: q->data = new; unlock(); new new ++; ++; 4:while(new!=!= old); 5: 5: unlock (); ();! LOCK LOCK, new==old 2 LOCK, new==old 3 q->data = new unlock()! LOCK,! new = old 4 new Predicates: LOCK, new==old

28 Repeat Build-and-Search Example ( ) { : : do{ do{ lock(); old old = new; q = q->next; 2: 2: if if (q (q!=!= NULL){ 3: 3: q->data = new; unlock(); new new ++; ++; 4:while(new!=!= old); 5: 5: unlock (); (); LOCK, new==old 2 LOCK, new==old 3! LOCK,! new = old 4 [new==old]! LOCK Predicates: LOCK, new==old

29 Repeat Build-and-Search Example ( ) { : : do{ do{ lock(); old old = new; q = q->next; 2: 2: if if (q (q!=!= NULL){ 3: 3: q->data = new; unlock(); new new ++; ++; 4:while(new!=!= old); 5: 5: unlock (); (); LOCK, new==old 2 LOCK, new==old 3! LOCK,! new = old 4 [new!=old]! LOCK 2 4 3! LOCK,! new == old Predicates: LOCK, new==old

30 Repeat Build-and-Search Example ( ) { : : do{ do{ lock(); old old = new; q = q->next; 2: 2: if if (q (q!=!= NULL){ 3: 3: q->data = new; unlock(); new new ++; ++; 4:while(new!=!= old); 5: 5: unlock (); (); LOCK, new==old LOCK, new==old! LOCK,! new = old 3 4! LOCK,! new == old 2 4 5! LOCK! LOCK, new==old LOCK, new=old SAFE Predicates: LOCK, new==old

31 Another Example : x = ctr; 2: y = ctr + ; 3: if (x = i-){ 4: if (y!= i){ ERROR: Abstract : skip; 2: skip; 3: if (*){ 4: if (*){ ERROR: C program No predicates available currently

32 Checking the abstract model Is ERROR reachable? : skip; 2: skip; 3: if (*){ 4: if (*){ ERROR: yes Abstract model has a path leading to error state

33 Does this Simulation correspond to a real bug? : skip; 2: skip; 3: if (*){ 4: if (*){ ERROR: : x = ctr; 2: y = ctr + ; 3: assume(x == i-) 4: assume (y!= i) Check using a Not SAT solver possible Concrete trace

34 Refinement : x = ctr; 2: y = ctr + ; 3: assume(x == i-) 4: assume (y!= i) : skip; 2: skip; 3: if (*){ 4: if (*){ ERROR: Spurious Counterexample Initial abstraction

35 Refinement : x = ctr; 2: y = ctr + ; 3: assume(x == i-) 4: assume (y!= i) : skip; 2: skip; 3: if (*){ 4: if (b0){ ERROR: boolean b0 : y!= i

36 Refinement : x = ctr; 2: y = ctr + ; 3: assume(x == i-) 4: assume (y!= i) : skip; 2: skip; 3: if (b){ 4: if (b0){ ERROR: boolean b0 : y!= i boolean b : x== i-

37 Weakest Preconditions WP(P,OP) Weakest formula P s.t. if P is true before OP then P is true after OP OP [WP(P, OP)] [P]

38 Weakest Preconditions WP(P,OP) Weakest formula P s.t. if P is true before OP then P is true after OP Assign x=e P[e/x] P OP new+ = old new = old new = new+ [WP(P, OP)] [P]

39 Refinement boolean b2 : ctr +! = i Weakest precondition of y!= i : x = ctr; 2: y = ctr + ; 3: assume(x == i-) 4: assume (y!= i) : skip; 2: b0 = b2; 3: if (b){ 4: if (b0){ ERROR: boolean b0 : y!= i boolean b : x== i-

40 Refinement boolean b2 : ctr +! = i boolean b3: ctr == i - : x = ctr; 2: y = ctr + ; 3: assume(x == i-) 4: assume (y!= i) : b = b3; 2: b0 = b2; 3: if (b){ 4: if (b0){ ERROR: boolean b0 : y!= i boolean b : x== i-

41 Refinement What about initial values of b2 and b3? b2 and b3 are mutually exclusive. b2 =, b3 = 0 b2 =0, b3 = So system is safe! boolean b2 : ctr +! = i boolean b3: ctr == i - : b = b3; 2: b0 = b2; 3: if (b){ 4: if (b0){ ERROR: boolean b0 : y!= i boolean b : x== i-

42 Tools for Predicate Abstraction of C SLAM at Microsoft Used for verifying correct sequencing of function calls in windows device drivers MAGIC at CMU Allows verification of concurrent C programs Found bugs in MicroC OS BLAST at Berkeley Lazy abstraction, interpolation SATABS at CMU Computes predicate abstraction using SAT Can handle pointer arithmetic, bit-vectors F-Soft at NEC Labs Localization, register sharing

Software Model Checking. Xiangyu Zhang

Software Model Checking. Xiangyu Zhang Software Model Checking Xiangyu Zhang Symbolic Software Model Checking CS510 S o f t w a r e E n g i n e e r i n g Symbolic analysis explicitly explores individual paths, encodes and resolves path conditions

More information

Having a BLAST with SLAM

Having a BLAST with SLAM Having a BLAST with SLAM Meeting, CSCI 555, Fall 20 Announcements Homework 0 due Sat Questions? Move Tue office hours to -5pm 2 Software Model Checking via Counterexample Guided Abstraction Refinement

More information

Having a BLAST with SLAM

Having a BLAST with SLAM Having a BLAST with SLAM # #2 Topic: Software Model Checking via Counter-Example Guided Abstraction Refinement There are easily two dozen SLAM/BLAST/MAGIC papers; I will skim. #3 SLAM Overview INPUT: Program

More information

Software Model Checking with Abstraction Refinement

Software Model Checking with Abstraction Refinement Software Model Checking with Abstraction Refinement Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory MIT Armando Solar-Lezama With slides from Thomas Henzinger, Ranjit Jhala and Rupak Majumdar.

More information

Having a BLAST with SLAM

Having a BLAST with SLAM Having a BLAST with SLAM # #2 Topic: Software Model Checking via Counter-Example Guided Abstraction Refinement There are easily two dozen SLAM/BLAST/MAGIC papers; I will skim. #3 SLAM Overview INPUT: Program

More information

Having a BLAST with SLAM

Having a BLAST with SLAM Announcements Having a BLAST with SLAM Meetings -, CSCI 7, Fall 00 Moodle problems? Blog problems? Looked at the syllabus on the website? in program analysis Microsoft uses and distributes the Static Driver

More information

Scalable Program Verification by Lazy Abstraction

Scalable Program Verification by Lazy Abstraction Scalable Program Verification by Lazy Abstraction Ranjit Jhala U.C. Berkeley ars, July, 997 Lost contact due to real-time priority inversion bug ars, December, 999 Crashed due to uninitialized variable

More information

Predicate Abstraction Daniel Kroening 1

Predicate Abstraction Daniel Kroening 1 Predicate Abstraction 20.1.2005 Daniel Kroening 1 Motivation Software has too many state variables State Space Explosion Graf/Saïdi 97: Predicate Abstraction Idea: Only keep track of predicates on data

More information

Counterexample Guided Abstraction Refinement in Blast

Counterexample Guided Abstraction Refinement in Blast Counterexample Guided Abstraction Refinement in Blast Reading: Checking Memory Safety with Blast 17-654/17-754 Analysis of Software Artifacts Jonathan Aldrich 1 How would you analyze this? * means something

More information

More on Verification and Model Checking

More on Verification and Model Checking More on Verification and Model Checking Wednesday Oct 07, 2015 Philipp Rümmer Uppsala University Philipp.Ruemmer@it.uu.se 1/60 Course fair! 2/60 Exam st October 21, 8:00 13:00 If you want to participate,

More information

Double Header. Two Lectures. Flying Boxes. Some Key Players: Model Checking Software Model Checking SLAM and BLAST

Double Header. Two Lectures. Flying Boxes. Some Key Players: Model Checking Software Model Checking SLAM and BLAST Model Checking #1 Double Header Two Lectures Model Checking Software Model Checking SLAM and BLAST Flying Boxes It is traditional to describe this stuff (especially SLAM and BLAST) with high-gloss animation

More information

Static Program Analysis

Static Program Analysis Static Program Analysis Thomas Noll Software Modeling and Verification Group RWTH Aachen University https://moves.rwth-aachen.de/teaching/ws-1617/spa/ Schedule of Lectures Jan 17/19: Interprocedural DFA

More information

Ufo: A Framework for Abstraction- and Interpolation-Based Software Verification

Ufo: A Framework for Abstraction- and Interpolation-Based Software Verification Ufo: A Framework for Abstraction- and Interpolation-Based Software Verification Aws Albarghouthi 1, Yi Li 1, Arie Gurfinkel 2, and Marsha Chechik 1 1 Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto,

More information

Software Model Checking. From Programs to Kripke Structures

Software Model Checking. From Programs to Kripke Structures Software Model Checking (in (in C or or Java) Java) Model Model Extraction 1: int x = 2; int y = 2; 2: while (y

More information

On Reasoning about Finite Sets in Software Checking

On Reasoning about Finite Sets in Software Checking On Reasoning about Finite Sets in Software Model Checking Pavel Shved Institute for System Programming, RAS SYRCoSE 2 June 2010 Static Program Verification Static Verification checking programs against

More information

F-Soft: Software Verification Platform

F-Soft: Software Verification Platform F-Soft: Software Verification Platform F. Ivančić, Z. Yang, M.K. Ganai, A. Gupta, I. Shlyakhter, and P. Ashar NEC Laboratories America, 4 Independence Way, Suite 200, Princeton, NJ 08540 fsoft@nec-labs.com

More information

Verifying Multithreaded Software with Impact

Verifying Multithreaded Software with Impact Verifying Multithreaded Software with Impact Björn Wachter, Daniel Kroening and Joël Ouaknine University of Oxford Intro Multi-threading C/C++ with POSIX/WIN 32 threads event processing, device drivers,

More information

Interpolation-based Software Verification with Wolverine

Interpolation-based Software Verification with Wolverine Interpolation-based Software Verification with Wolverine Daniel Kroening 1 and Georg Weissenbacher 2 1 Computer Science Department, Oxford University 2 Department of Electrical Engineering, Princeton University

More information

No model may be available. Software Abstractions. Recap on Model Checking. Model Checking for SW Verif. More on the big picture. Abst -> MC -> Refine

No model may be available. Software Abstractions. Recap on Model Checking. Model Checking for SW Verif. More on the big picture. Abst -> MC -> Refine No model may be available Programmer Software Abstractions Tests Coverage Code Abhik Roychoudhury CS 5219 National University of Singapore Testing Debug Today s lecture Abstract model (Boolean pgm.) Desirable

More information

Predicate Abstraction of ANSI C Programs using SAT Λ

Predicate Abstraction of ANSI C Programs using SAT Λ Predicate Abstraction of ANSI C Programs using SAT Λ Edmund Clarke and Daniel Kroening and Natalia Sharygina and Karen Yorav School of Computer Science Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, USA Software

More information

Using Counterexample Analysis to Minimize the Number of Predicates for Predicate Abstraction

Using Counterexample Analysis to Minimize the Number of Predicates for Predicate Abstraction Using Counterexample Analysis to Minimize the Number of Predicates for Predicate Abstraction Thanyapat Sakunkonchak, Satoshi Komatsu, and Masahiro Fujita VLSI Design and Education Center, The University

More information

The ComFoRT Reasoning Framework

The ComFoRT Reasoning Framework Pittsburgh, PA 15213-3890 The ComFoRT Reasoning Framework Sagar Chaki James Ivers Natasha Sharygina Kurt Wallnau Predictable Assembly from Certifiable Components Enable the development of software systems

More information

Model Checking: Back and Forth Between Hardware and Software

Model Checking: Back and Forth Between Hardware and Software Model Checking: Back and Forth Between Hardware and Software Edmund Clarke 1, Anubhav Gupta 1, Himanshu Jain 1, and Helmut Veith 2 1 School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University {emc, anubhav,

More information

TRACER: A Symbolic Execution Tool for Verification

TRACER: A Symbolic Execution Tool for Verification TRACER: A Symbolic Execution Tool for Verification Joxan Jaffar, Vijayaraghavan Murali, Jorge A. Navas, and Andrew E. Santosa 3 National University of Singapore The University of Melbourne 3 University

More information

System Correctness. EEC 421/521: Software Engineering. System Correctness. The Problem at Hand. A system is correct when it meets its requirements

System Correctness. EEC 421/521: Software Engineering. System Correctness. The Problem at Hand. A system is correct when it meets its requirements System Correctness EEC 421/521: Software Engineering A Whirlwind Intro to Software Model Checking A system is correct when it meets its requirements a design without requirements cannot be right or wrong,

More information

Proofs from Tests. Nels E. Beckman, Aditya V. Nori, Sriram K. Rajamani, Robert J. Simmons, SaiDeep Tetali, Aditya V. Thakur

Proofs from Tests. Nels E. Beckman, Aditya V. Nori, Sriram K. Rajamani, Robert J. Simmons, SaiDeep Tetali, Aditya V. Thakur 1 Proofs from Tests Nels E. Beckman, Aditya V. Nori, Sriram K. Rajamani, Robert J. Simmons, SaiDeep Tetali, Aditya V. Thakur Abstract We present an algorithm DASH to check if a program P satisfies a safety

More information

A Survey of Automated Techniques for Formal Software Verification

A Survey of Automated Techniques for Formal Software Verification TRANSACTIONS ON CAD 1 A Survey of Automated Techniques for Formal Software Verification Vijay D Silva Daniel Kroening Georg Weissenbacher Abstract The quality and the correctness of software is often the

More information

Model Checking with Abstract State Matching

Model Checking with Abstract State Matching Model Checking with Abstract State Matching Corina Păsăreanu QSS, NASA Ames Research Center Joint work with Saswat Anand (Georgia Institute of Technology) Radek Pelánek (Masaryk University) Willem Visser

More information

4/6/2011. Model Checking. Encoding test specifications. Model Checking. Encoding test specifications. Model Checking CS 4271

4/6/2011. Model Checking. Encoding test specifications. Model Checking. Encoding test specifications. Model Checking CS 4271 Mel Checking LTL Property System Mel Mel Checking CS 4271 Mel Checking OR Abhik Roychoudhury http://www.comp.nus.edu.sg/~abhik Yes No, with Counter-example trace 2 Recap: Mel Checking for mel-based testing

More information

An Eclipse Plug-in for Model Checking

An Eclipse Plug-in for Model Checking An Eclipse Plug-in for Model Checking Dirk Beyer, Thomas A. Henzinger, Ranjit Jhala Electrical Engineering and Computer Sciences University of California, Berkeley, USA Rupak Majumdar Computer Science

More information

CS 267: Automated Verification. Lecture 13: Bounded Model Checking. Instructor: Tevfik Bultan

CS 267: Automated Verification. Lecture 13: Bounded Model Checking. Instructor: Tevfik Bultan CS 267: Automated Verification Lecture 13: Bounded Model Checking Instructor: Tevfik Bultan Remember Symbolic Model Checking Represent sets of states and the transition relation as Boolean logic formulas

More information

Abstraction Refinement for Quantified Array Assertions

Abstraction Refinement for Quantified Array Assertions Abstraction Refinement for Quantified Array Assertions Mohamed Nassim Seghir 1,, Andreas Podelski 1, and Thomas Wies 1,2 1 University of Freiburg, Germany 2 EPFL, Switzerland Abstract. We present an abstraction

More information

Scalable Program Analysis Using Boolean Satisfiability: The Saturn Project

Scalable Program Analysis Using Boolean Satisfiability: The Saturn Project Scalable Program Analysis Using Boolean Satisfiability: The Saturn Project Alex Aiken Stanford University Saturn 1 The Idea Verify properties of large systems! Doesn t {SLAM, BLAST, CQual, ESP} already

More information

Proofs from Tests. Sriram K. Rajamani. Nels E. Beckman. Aditya V. Nori. Robert J. Simmons.

Proofs from Tests. Sriram K. Rajamani. Nels E. Beckman. Aditya V. Nori. Robert J. Simmons. Proofs from Tests Nels E. Beckman Carnegie Mellon University nbeckman@cs.cmu.edu Aditya V. Nori Microsoft Research India adityan@microsoft.com Robert J. Simmons Carnegie Mellon University rjsimmon@cs.cmu.edu

More information

Predicate Abstraction of ANSI C Programs using SAT

Predicate Abstraction of ANSI C Programs using SAT Predicate Abstraction of ANSI C Programs using SAT Edmund Clarke Daniel Kroening Natasha Sharygina Karen Yorav September 23, 2003 CMU-CS-03-186 School of Computer Science Carnegie Mellon University Pittsburgh,

More information

STATIC PROGRAM TRANSFORMATIONS FOR EFFICIENT SOFTWARE MODEL CHECKING

STATIC PROGRAM TRANSFORMATIONS FOR EFFICIENT SOFTWARE MODEL CHECKING STATIC PROGRAM TRANSFORMATIONS FOR EFFICIENT SOFTWARE MODEL CHECKING Shobha Vasudevan Computer Engineering Research Center The University of Texas at Austin Austin, Texas, U.S.A. shobha@cerc.utexas.edu

More information

Formal Verification at Higher Levels of Abstraction

Formal Verification at Higher Levels of Abstraction Formal Verification at Higher Levels of Abstraction Daniel Kroening Oxford University Computing Laboratory kroening@kroening.com Sanjit A. Seshia UC Berkeley sseshia@eecs.berkeley.edu Abstract Most formal

More information

Verifying Concurrent Programs

Verifying Concurrent Programs Verifying Concurrent Programs Daniel Kroening 8 May 1 June 01 Outline Shared-Variable Concurrency Predicate Abstraction for Concurrent Programs Boolean Programs with Bounded Replication Boolean Programs

More information

Introduction. Preliminaries. Original IC3. Tree-IC3. IC3 on Control Flow Automata. Conclusion

Introduction. Preliminaries. Original IC3. Tree-IC3. IC3 on Control Flow Automata. Conclusion .. Introduction Preliminaries Original IC3 Tree-IC3 IC3 on Control Flow Automata Conclusion 2 of 22 Lifting IC3 to Control Flow Automata Tim Lange tim.lange@cs.rwth-aachen.de Introduction Preliminaries

More information

Embedded Software Verification Challenges and Solutions. Static Program Analysis

Embedded Software Verification Challenges and Solutions. Static Program Analysis Embedded Software Verification Challenges and Solutions Static Program Analysis Chao Wang chaowang@nec-labs.com NEC Labs America Princeton, NJ ICCAD Tutorial November 11, 2008 www.nec-labs.com 1 Outline

More information

Counterexamples with Loops for Predicate Abstraction

Counterexamples with Loops for Predicate Abstraction Counterexamples with Loops for Predicate Abstraction Daniel Kroening and Georg Weissenbacher Computer Systems Institute, ETH Zurich, 8092 Zurich, Switzerland {daniel.kroening, georg.weissenbacher}@inf.ethz.ch

More information

Program Verification. Aarti Gupta

Program Verification. Aarti Gupta Program Verification Aarti Gupta 1 Agenda Famous bugs Common bugs Testing (from lecture 6) Reasoning about programs Techniques for program verification 2 Famous Bugs The first bug: A moth in a relay (1945)

More information

Predicate Abstraction of ANSI C Programs using SAT

Predicate Abstraction of ANSI C Programs using SAT Predicate Abstraction of ANSI C Programs using SAT Edmund Clarke Daniel Kroening Natasha Sharygina Karen Yorav September 23, 2003 CMU-CS-03-186 School of Computer Science Carnegie Mellon University Pittsburgh,

More information

Automated Debugging with Error Invariants

Automated Debugging with Error Invariants Automated Debugging with Error Invariants Thomas Wies New York University joint work with Jürgen Christ, Evren Ermis (Freiburg University), Martin Schäf (SRI), Daniel Schwartz-Narbonne (NYU) Faulty Shell

More information

The software model checker BLAST

The software model checker BLAST Int J Softw Tools Technol Transfer (2007) 9:505 525 DOI 10.1007/s10009-007-0044-z SPECIAL SECTION FASE 04/ 05 The software model checker BLAST Applications to software engineering Dirk Beyer Thomas A.

More information

Seminar in Software Engineering Presented by Dima Pavlov, November 2010

Seminar in Software Engineering Presented by Dima Pavlov, November 2010 Seminar in Software Engineering-236800 Presented by Dima Pavlov, November 2010 1. Introduction 2. Overview CBMC and SAT 3. CBMC Loop Unwinding 4. Running CBMC 5. Lets Compare 6. How does it work? 7. Conclusions

More information

Topic: Software Model Checking via Counter-Example Guided Abstraction Refinement. Having a BLAST with SLAM. Combining Strengths. SLAM Overview SLAM

Topic: Software Model Checking via Counter-Example Guided Abstraction Refinement. Having a BLAST with SLAM. Combining Strengths. SLAM Overview SLAM Hving BLAST with SLAM Topic: Softwre Model Checking vi Counter-Exmple Guided Abstrction Refinement There re esily two dozen SLAM/BLAST/MAGIC ppers; I will skim. # # Theorem Proving Combining Strengths

More information

Edmund Clarke Computer Science Dept., Carnegie Mellon University Pittsburgh, PA, USA

Edmund Clarke Computer Science Dept., Carnegie Mellon University Pittsburgh, PA, USA Checking Consistency of C and Verilog using Predicate Abstraction and Induction Daniel Kroening Computer Systems Institute, ETH Zürich Zürich, Switzerland daniel.kroening@inf.ethz.ch Edmund Clarke Computer

More information

Abstraction techniques for Floating-Point Arithmetic

Abstraction techniques for Floating-Point Arithmetic Abstraction techniques for Floating-Point Arithmetic Angelo Brillout 1, Daniel Kroening 2 and Thomas Wahl 2 1 ETH Zurich, 2 Oxford University ETH Zürich Floating-Point Arithmetic (FPA) Used for embedded

More information

Model Checking with Automata An Overview

Model Checking with Automata An Overview Model Checking with Automata An Overview Vanessa D Carson Control and Dynamical Systems, Caltech Doyle Group Presentation, 05/02/2008 VC 1 Contents Motivation Overview Software Verification Techniques

More information

Counterexample Guided Abstraction Refinement via Program Execution

Counterexample Guided Abstraction Refinement via Program Execution Counterexample Guided Abstraction Refinement via Program Execution Daniel Kroening, Alex Groce and Edmund Clarke 1 Department of Computer Science Carnegie Mellon University Pittsburgh, PA, 15213 Abstract.

More information

Symbolic and Concolic Execution of Programs

Symbolic and Concolic Execution of Programs Symbolic and Concolic Execution of Programs Information Security, CS 526 Omar Chowdhury 10/7/2015 Information Security, CS 526 1 Reading for this lecture Symbolic execution and program testing - James

More information

Sliced Path Prefixes: An Effective Method to Enable Refinement Selection

Sliced Path Prefixes: An Effective Method to Enable Refinement Selection FORTE '15 Sliced Path Prefixes: An Effective Method to Enable Refinement Selection Dirk Beyer, Stefan Löwe, Philipp Wendler SoSy-Lab Software Systems We want Refinement Selection!!! Because straight-forward

More information

Finding and Fixing Bugs in Liquid Haskell. Anish Tondwalkar

Finding and Fixing Bugs in Liquid Haskell. Anish Tondwalkar Finding and Fixing Bugs in Liquid Haskell Anish Tondwalkar Overview Motivation Liquid Haskell Fault Localization Fault Localization Evaluation Predicate Discovery Predicate Discovery Evaluation Conclusion

More information

Over-Approximating Boolean Programs with Unbounded Thread Creation

Over-Approximating Boolean Programs with Unbounded Thread Creation Over-Approximating Boolean Programs with Unbounded Thread Creation Byron Cook Microsoft Research Cambridge Email: bycook@microsoft.com Daniel Kroening Computer Systems Institute ETH Zurich Email: daniel.kroening@inf.ethz.ch

More information

Sciduction: Combining Induction, Deduction and Structure for Verification and Synthesis

Sciduction: Combining Induction, Deduction and Structure for Verification and Synthesis Sciduction: Combining Induction, Deduction and Structure for Verification and Synthesis (abridged version of DAC slides) Sanjit A. Seshia Associate Professor EECS Department UC Berkeley Design Automation

More information

Tutorial on Model Checking Modelling and Verification in Computer Science

Tutorial on Model Checking Modelling and Verification in Computer Science Tutorial on Model Checking Modelling and Verification in Computer Science Armin Biere Institute for Formal Models and Verification Johannes Kepler University, Linz, Austria Abstract. This paper serves

More information

Using Counterexamples for Improving the Precision of Reachability Computation with Polyhedra

Using Counterexamples for Improving the Precision of Reachability Computation with Polyhedra Using Counterexamples for Improving the Precision of Reachability Computation with Polyhedra Chao Wang 1, Zijiang Yang 2, Aarti Gupta 1, and Franjo Ivančić 1 1 NEC Laboratories America, Princeton, NJ 08540,

More information

Predicate Abstraction with Adjustable-Block Encoding

Predicate Abstraction with Adjustable-Block Encoding Predicate Abstraction with Adjustable-Block Encoding Dirk Beyer Simon Fraser University / University of Passau M. Erkan Keremoglu Simon Fraser University, B.C., Canada Philipp Wendler University of Passau,

More information

Predicate Abstraction and Refinement Techniques for Verifying Verilog

Predicate Abstraction and Refinement Techniques for Verifying Verilog Predicate Abstraction and Refinement Techniques for Verifying Verilog Edmund Clarke Himanshu Jain Daniel Kroening June 25, 2004 CMU-CS-04-139 School of Computer Science Carnegie Mellon University Pittsburgh,

More information

Inductive Invariant Generation via Abductive Inference

Inductive Invariant Generation via Abductive Inference Inductive Invariant Generation via Abductive Inference Isil Dillig Department of Computer Science College of William & Mary idillig@cs.wm.edu Thomas Dillig Department of Computer Science College of William

More information

NOTICE WARNING CONCERNING COPYRIGHT RESTRICTIONS: The copyright law of the United States (title 17, U.S. Code) governs the making of photocopies or

NOTICE WARNING CONCERNING COPYRIGHT RESTRICTIONS: The copyright law of the United States (title 17, U.S. Code) governs the making of photocopies or NOTICE WARNING CONCERNING COPYRIGHT RESTRICTIONS: The copyright law of the United States (title 7, U.S. Code) governs the making of photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. Any copying

More information

Outline. Introduction SDV Motivation Model vs Real Implementation SLIC SDVRP SLAM-2 Comparisons Conclusions

Outline. Introduction SDV Motivation Model vs Real Implementation SLIC SDVRP SLAM-2 Comparisons Conclusions Outline Introduction SDV Motivation Model vs Real Implementation SIC SDVRP SAM-2 Comparisons Conclusions SDV Research Platform Academic release of SDV (Static Driver Verifier), based on the code that ships

More information

Software Model Checking with SLAM

Software Model Checking with SLAM Software Model Checking with SLAM Thomas Ball Software Reliability Research MSR Redmond Sriram K. Rajamani Reliable Software Engineering MSR Bangalore http://research.microsoft.com/slam/ People behind

More information

Checking Memory Safety with Blast

Checking Memory Safety with Blast Checking Memory Safety with Blast Dirk Beyer 1 Thomas A. Henzinger 12 Ranjit Jhala 3 Rupak Majumdar 4 1 EPFL, Switzerland 2 University of California, Berkeley 3 University of California, San Diego 4 University

More information

Program Verification (6EC version only)

Program Verification (6EC version only) Program Verification (6EC version only) Erik Poll Digital Security Radboud University Nijmegen Overview Program Verification using Verification Condition Generators JML a formal specification language

More information

Checking Consistency of C and Verilog using Predicate Abstraction and Induction

Checking Consistency of C and Verilog using Predicate Abstraction and Induction Checking Consistency of C and Verilog using Predicate Abstraction and Induction Edmund Clarke Daniel Kroening June 25, 2004 CMU-CS-04-131 School of Computer Science Carnegie Mellon University Pittsburgh,

More information

Lazy Abstraction with Interpolants

Lazy Abstraction with Interpolants Lazy Abstraction with Interpolants Kenneth L. McMillan Cadence Berkeley Labs Abstract. We describe a model checker for infinite-state sequential programs, based on Craig interpolation and the lazy abstraction

More information

Lecture 1: Model Checking. Edmund Clarke School of Computer Science Carnegie Mellon University

Lecture 1: Model Checking. Edmund Clarke School of Computer Science Carnegie Mellon University Lecture 1: Model Checking Edmund Clarke School of Computer Science Carnegie Mellon University 1 Cost of Software Errors June 2002 Software bugs, or errors, are so prevalent and so detrimental that they

More information

The Pointer Assertion Logic Engine

The Pointer Assertion Logic Engine The Pointer Assertion Logic Engine [PLDI 01] Anders Mφller Michael I. Schwartzbach Presented by K. Vikram Cornell University Introduction Pointer manipulation is hard Find bugs, optimize code General Approach

More information

Formal Systems Tutorial Hybrid System Modeling, Program Analysis

Formal Systems Tutorial Hybrid System Modeling, Program Analysis Formal Systems Tutorial Hybrid System Modeling, Program Analysis Department of Computer Science & Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur 1. There are three taps in the system, namely Tap-1

More information

Hyperkernel: Push-Button Verification of an OS Kernel

Hyperkernel: Push-Button Verification of an OS Kernel Hyperkernel: Push-Button Verification of an OS Kernel Luke Nelson, Helgi Sigurbjarnarson, Kaiyuan Zhang, Dylan Johnson, James Bornholt, Emina Torlak, and Xi Wang The OS Kernel is a critical component Essential

More information

SYNERGY : A New Algorithm for Property Checking

SYNERGY : A New Algorithm for Property Checking SYNERGY : A New Algorithm for Property Checking Bhargav S. Gulavani Thomas A. Henzinger Yamini Kannan Aditya V. Nori Sriram K. Rajamani bhargav@cse.iitb.ernet.in tah@epfl.ch yaminik@microsoft.com adityan@microsoft.com

More information

PROGRAM ANALYSIS & SYNTHESIS

PROGRAM ANALYSIS & SYNTHESIS Lecture 02 Structural Operational Semantics (SOS) PROGRAM ANALYSIS & SYNTHESIS EranYahav 1 Previously static analysis over-approximation of program behavior abstract interpretation abstraction, transformers,

More information

Bounded Model Checking Of C Programs: CBMC Tool Overview

Bounded Model Checking Of C Programs: CBMC Tool Overview Workshop on Formal Verification and Analysis Tools, CFDVS, IIT-Bombay - Feb 21,2017 Bounded Model Checking Of C Programs: CBMC Tool Overview Prateek Saxena CBMC Developed and Maintained by Dr Daniel Kröning

More information

Introduction to CBMC. Software Engineering Institute Carnegie Mellon University Pittsburgh, PA Arie Gurfinkel December 5, 2011

Introduction to CBMC. Software Engineering Institute Carnegie Mellon University Pittsburgh, PA Arie Gurfinkel December 5, 2011 Software Engineering Institute Carnegie Mellon University Pittsburgh, PA 15213 December 5, 2011 based on slides by Daniel Kroening Bug Catching with SAT-Solvers Main Idea: Given a program and a claim use

More information

Model Checking Revision: Model Checking for Infinite Systems Revision: Traffic Light Controller (TLC) Revision: 1.12

Model Checking Revision: Model Checking for Infinite Systems Revision: Traffic Light Controller (TLC) Revision: 1.12 Model Checking mc Revision:.2 Model Checking for Infinite Systems mc 2 Revision:.2 check algorithmically temporal / sequential properties fixpoint algorithms with symbolic representations: systems are

More information

Abstractions from Proofs

Abstractions from Proofs Abstractions from Proofs Thomas A. Henzinger Ranjit Jhala Rupak Majumdar EECS Department, University of California Berkeley, CA 94720-1770, U.S.A. {tah,jhala,rupak}@eecs.berkeley.edu Kenneth L. McMillan

More information

Regression Verification - a practical way to verify programs

Regression Verification - a practical way to verify programs Regression Verification - a practical way to verify programs Ofer Strichman Benny Godlin Technion, Haifa, Israel. Email: ofers@ie.technion.ac.il bgodlin@cs.technion.ac.il 1 Introduction When considering

More information

Introduction to Axiomatic Semantics (1/2)

Introduction to Axiomatic Semantics (1/2) #1 Introduction to Axiomatic Semantics (1/2) How s The Homework Going? Remember: just do the counterexample guided abstraction refinement part of DPLL(T). If you notice any other errors, those are good

More information

Proof Pearl: The Termination Analysis of Terminator

Proof Pearl: The Termination Analysis of Terminator Proof Pearl: The Termination Analysis of Terminator Joe Hurd Computing Laboratory Oxford University joe.hurd@comlab.ox.ac.uk Abstract. Terminator is a static analysis tool developed by Microsoft Research

More information

Introduction to CBMC: Part 1

Introduction to CBMC: Part 1 Software Engineering Institute Carnegie Mellon University Pittsburgh, PA 15213 Arie Gurfinkel, Sagar Chaki October 2, 2007 Many slides are courtesy of Daniel Kroening Bug Catching with SAT Solvers Main

More information

4/24/18. Overview. Program Static Analysis. Has anyone done static analysis? What is static analysis? Why static analysis?

4/24/18. Overview. Program Static Analysis. Has anyone done static analysis? What is static analysis? Why static analysis? Overview Program Static Analysis Program static analysis Abstract interpretation Static analysis techniques 2 What is static analysis? The analysis to understand computer software without executing programs

More information

Predicate Abstraction and CEGAR for Higher Order Model Checking

Predicate Abstraction and CEGAR for Higher Order Model Checking Predicate Abstraction and CEGAR for Higher Order Model Checking Naoki Kobayashi, Ryosuke Sato, and Hiroshi Unno Tohoku University (Presented at PLDI2011) 1 Our Goal Software model checker for functional

More information

Abstract Interpretation

Abstract Interpretation Abstract Interpretation Ranjit Jhala, UC San Diego April 22, 2013 Fundamental Challenge of Program Analysis How to infer (loop) invariants? Fundamental Challenge of Program Analysis Key issue for any analysis

More information

Formal Methods in Software Engineering. Lecture 07

Formal Methods in Software Engineering. Lecture 07 Formal Methods in Software Engineering Lecture 07 What is Temporal Logic? Objective: We describe temporal aspects of formal methods to model and specify concurrent systems and verify their correctness

More information

Formal Verification of Embedded Software in Medical Devices Considering Stringent Hardware Constraints

Formal Verification of Embedded Software in Medical Devices Considering Stringent Hardware Constraints Formal Verification of Embedded Software in Medical Devices Considering Stringent Hardware Constraints L. Cordeiro, B. Fischer, H. Chen, J. P. Marques-Silva Lucas Cordeiro lcc08r@ecs.soton.ac.uk Agenda

More information

Symmetry-Aware Predicate Abstraction for Shared-Variable Concurrent Programs

Symmetry-Aware Predicate Abstraction for Shared-Variable Concurrent Programs Symmetry-Aware Predicate Abstraction for Shared-Variable Concurrent Programs Alastair Donaldson, Alexander Kaiser, Daniel Kroening, and Thomas Wahl Computer Science Department, Oxford University, United

More information

Effectively-Propositional Modular Reasoning about Reachability in Linked Data Structures CAV 13, POPL 14 Shachar Itzhaky

Effectively-Propositional Modular Reasoning about Reachability in Linked Data Structures CAV 13, POPL 14 Shachar Itzhaky Effectively-Propositional Modular Reasoning about Reachability in Linked Data Structures CAV 13, POPL 14 Shachar Itzhaky Anindya Banerjee Neil Immerman Ori Lahav Aleks Nanevski Mooly Sagiv http://www.cs.tau.ac.il/~shachar/afwp.html

More information

Approximating Predicate Images for Bit-Vector Logic

Approximating Predicate Images for Bit-Vector Logic Approximating Predicate Images for Bit-Vector Logic Daniel Kroening 1 and Natasha Sharygina 2 1 Computer Systems Institute, ETH Zürich 2 University of Lugano, Switzerland Abstract. Predicate abstraction

More information

Race Analysis for SystemC using Model Checking

Race Analysis for SystemC using Model Checking Race Analysis for SystemC using Model Checking Nicolas Blanc ETH Zurich, Switzerland nicolas.blanc@inf.ethz.ch Daniel Kroening Oxford University, Computing Laboratory, UK Daniel.Kroening@comlab.ox.ac.uk

More information

Alternation for Termination

Alternation for Termination Alternation for Termination William R. Harris 1, Akash Lal 2, Aditya V. Nori 2, and Sriram K. Rajamani 2 1 University of Wisconsin; Madison, WI, USA 2 Microsoft Research India; Bangalore, India Abstract.

More information

Automatic Software Verification

Automatic Software Verification Automatic Software Verification Instructor: Mooly Sagiv TA: Oded Padon Slides from Eran Yahav and the Noun Project, Wikipedia Course Requirements Summarize one lecture 10% one lecture notes 45% homework

More information

Abstraction Learning

Abstraction Learning Abstraction Learning Joxan Jaffar National University of Singapore joxan@comp.nus.edu.sg Jorge Navas National University of Singapore navas@comp.nus.edu.sg Andrew E. Santosa National University of Singapore

More information

Generating Small Countermodels. Andrew Reynolds Intel August 30, 2012

Generating Small Countermodels. Andrew Reynolds Intel August 30, 2012 Generating Small Countermodels using SMT Andrew Reynolds Intel August 30, 2012 Acknowledgements Intel Corporation AmitGoel, Sava Krstic University of Iowa Cesare Tinelli, Francois Bobot New York University

More information

Formal Methods. CITS5501 Software Testing and Quality Assurance

Formal Methods. CITS5501 Software Testing and Quality Assurance Formal Methods CITS5501 Software Testing and Quality Assurance Pressman, R. Software Engineering: A Practitioner s Approach. Chapter 28. McGraw-Hill, 2005 The Science of Programming, David Gries, 1981

More information

Program Verification using Templates over Predicate Abstraction. Saurabh Srivastava and Sumit Gulwani

Program Verification using Templates over Predicate Abstraction. Saurabh Srivastava and Sumit Gulwani Program Verification using Templates over Predicate Abstraction Saurabh Srivastava and Sumit Gulwani ArrayInit(Array A, int n) i := 0; while (i < n) A[i] := 0; i := i + 1; Assert( j: 0 j

More information

Predicate Refinement Heuristics in Program Verification with CEGAR

Predicate Refinement Heuristics in Program Verification with CEGAR Predicate Refinement Heuristics in Program Verification with CEGAR Tachio Terauchi (JAIST) Part of this is joint work with Hiroshi Unno (U. Tsukuba) 1 Predicate Abstraction with CEGAR Iteratively generate

More information

Towards a Software Model Checker for ML. Naoki Kobayashi Tohoku University

Towards a Software Model Checker for ML. Naoki Kobayashi Tohoku University Towards a Software Model Checker for ML Naoki Kobayashi Tohoku University Joint work with: Ryosuke Sato and Hiroshi Unno (Tohoku University) in collaboration with Luke Ong (Oxford), Naoshi Tabuchi and

More information

Non-blocking Array-based Algorithms for Stacks and Queues!

Non-blocking Array-based Algorithms for Stacks and Queues! Non-blocking Array-based Algorithms for Stacks and Queues! Niloufar Shafiei! Department of Computer Science and Engineering York University ICDCN 09 Outline! Introduction! Stack algorithm! Queue algorithm!

More information