Abstract
We present a technique for checking assertions in code that combines model checking and dynamic analysis. Our technique first constructs an abstraction by summarizing code fragments in the form of pre and post conditions. Spurious counterexamples are then analyzed by Daikon, a dynamic analysis engine, to infer invariants over the fragments. These invariants, representing a set of traces, are used to partition the summary with one partition consisting of the observed spurious behaviour. Partitioning summaries in this manner increases precision of the abstraction and accelerates the refinement loop. Our technique is sound and compositional, allowing us to scale model checking engines to larger code size, as seen from the experiments.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Beyer, D.: Competition on software verification. In: Flanagan, C., König, B. (eds.) TACAS 2012. LNCS, vol. 7214, pp. 504–524. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)
D’Silva, V., Kroening, D., Weissenbacher, G.: A survey of automated techniques for formal software verification. IEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems 27, 1165–1178 (2008)
Yeolekar, A., Unadkat, D., Agarwal, V., Kumar, S., Venkatesh, R.: Scaling model checking for test generation using dynamic inference. In: International Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation (ICST 2013). IEEE (2013)
Ernst, M.D., Perkins, J.H., Guo, P.J., McCamant, S., Pacheco, C., Tschantz, M.S., Xiao, C.: The daikon system for dynamic detection of likely invariants. Sci. Comput. Program. 69, 35–45 (2007)
Graf, S., Saïdi, H.: Construction of abstract state graphs with pvs. In: Grumberg, O. (ed.) CAV 1997. LNCS, vol. 1254, pp. 72–83. Springer, Heidelberg (1997)
Clarke, E.M., Grumberg, O., Jha, S., Lu, Y., Veith, H.: Counterexample-guided abstraction refinement. In: Emerson, E.A., Sistla, A.P. (eds.) CAV 2000. LNCS, vol. 1855, pp. 154–169. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)
Taghdiri, M.: Inferring specifications to detect errors in code. In: ASE, pp. 144–153 (2004)
Nimmer, J.W., Ernst, M.D.: Invariant inference for static checking. In: SIGSOFT FSE, pp. 11–20 (2002)
Polikarpova, N., Ciupa, I., Meyer, B.: A comparative study of programmer-written and automatically inferred contracts. In: ISSTA, pp. 93–104 (2009)
Ernst, M., et al.: The daikon invariant detector, http://pag.lcs.mit.edu/daikon
Clarke, E., Kroning, D., Lerda, F.: A tool for checking ANSI-C programs. In: Jensen, K., Podelski, A. (eds.) TACAS 2004. LNCS, vol. 2988, pp. 168–176. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)
Dillig, I., Dillig, T., Aiken, A.: Automated error diagnosis using abductive inference. In: Proceedings of the 33rd ACM SIGPLAN Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation, PLDI 2012, pp. 181–192. ACM (2012)
Cimatti, A., Griggio, A., Micheli, A., Narasamdya, I., Roveri, M.: Kratos benchmarks, https://es.fbk.eu/tools/kratos/index.php?n=Main.Benchmarks
Clarke, E., Kroening, D., Sharygina, N., Yorav, K.: Predicate abstraction of ANSI–C programs using SAT. Formal Methods in System Design (FMSD) 25, 105–127 (2004)
Yuan, J., Shen, J., Abraham, J.A., Aziz, A.: On combining formal and informal verification. In: Grumberg, O. (ed.) CAV 1997. LNCS, vol. 1254, pp. 376–387. Springer, Heidelberg (1997)
Shacham, O., Sagiv, M., Schuster, A.: Scaling model checking of dataraces using dynamic information. J. Parallel Distrib. Comput. 67, 536–550 (2007)
Kroening, D., Groce, A., Clarke, E.: Counterexample guided abstraction refinement via program execution. In: Davies, J., Schulte, W., Barnett, M. (eds.) ICFEM 2004. LNCS, vol. 3308, pp. 224–238. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)
Gunter, E.L., Peled, D.: Model checking, testing and verification working together. Formal Aspects of Computing 17, 201–221 (2005)
Yorsh, G., Ball, T., Sagiv, M.: Testing, abstraction, theorem proving: better together! In: Proceedings of the 2006 International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis, pp. 145–156. ACM (2006)
Păsăreanu, C.S., Pelánek, R., Visser, W.: Concrete model checking with abstract matching and refinement. In: Etessami, K., Rajamani, S.K. (eds.) CAV 2005. LNCS, vol. 3576, pp. 52–66. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)
Win, T., Ernst, M.: Verifying distributed algorithms via dynamic analysis and theorem proving (2002)
Gulavani, B.S., Henzinger, T.A., Kannan, Y., Nori, A.V., Rajamani, S.K.: Synergy: a new algorithm for property checking. In: Proceedings of the 14th ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Foundations of Software Engineering, SIGSOFT 2006/FSE-14, pp. 117–127. ACM, New York (2006)
Kroening, D., Sharygina, N., Tonetta, S., Tsitovich, A., Wintersteiger, C.M.: Loop summarization using abstract transformers. In: Cha, S(S.), Choi, J.-Y., Kim, M., Lee, I., Viswanathan, M. (eds.) ATVA 2008. LNCS, vol. 5311, pp. 111–125. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this paper
Cite this paper
Yeolekar, A., Unadkat, D. (2013). Assertion Checking Using Dynamic Inference. In: Bertacco, V., Legay, A. (eds) Hardware and Software: Verification and Testing. HVC 2013. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 8244. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-03077-7_14
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-03077-7_14
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-03076-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-03077-7
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)