Abstract
Unique Fixpoint Induction, UFI, is a chief inference rule to prove the equivalence of recursive processes in CCS [7]. It plays a major role in the equational approach to verification. This approach is of special interest as it offers theoretical advantages in the analysis of systems that communicate values, have infinite state space or show parameterised behaviour.
The use of UFI, however, has been neglected, because automating theorem proving in this context is an extremely difficult task. The key problem with guiding the use of this rule is that we need to know fully the state space of the processes under consideration. Unfortunately, this is not always possible, because these processes may contain recursive symbols, parameters, and so on.
We introduce a method to automate the use of UFI. The method uses middle-out reasoning and, so, is able to apply the rule even without elaborating the details of the application. The method introduces variables to represent those bits of the processes’ state space that, at application time, were not known, hence, changing from equation verification to equation solving.
Adding this method to the equation plan developed by Monroy, Bundy and Green [8], we have implemented an automated verification planner. This planner increases the number of verification problems that can be dealt with fully automatically, thus improving upon the current degree of automation in the field.
The authors are supported in part by grants CONACyT-REDII w/n and EPSRC GR/L/11724.
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
Bundy, A.: The use of explicit plans to guide inductive proofs. In: Lusk, R., Overbeek, R. (eds.) 9th Conference on Automated Deduction, pp. 111–120. Springer, Heidelberg (1988)
Bundy, A., Stevens, A., van Harmelen, F., Ireland, A., Smaill, A.: Rippling: A heuristic for guiding inductive proofs. Artificial Intelligence 62, 185–253 (1993)
Bundy, A., van Harmelen, F., Hesketh, J., Smaill, A.: Experiments with proof plans for induction. Journal of Automated Reasoning 7, 303–324 (1991)
Cleaveland, R., Panangaden, P.: Type Theory and Concurrency. International Journal of Parallel Programming 17(2), 153–206 (1988)
ISO. Information processing systems - Open Systems Interconnection - LOTOS - A formal description technique based on the temporal ordering of observational behaviour. ISO 8807 (1989)
Lin, H.: A Verification Tool for Value-Passing Processes. In: Proceedings of 13thInternational Symposium on Protocol Specification, Testing and Verification, IFIP Transactions. North-Holland, Amsterdam (1993)
Milner, R.: Communication and Concurrency. Prentice Hall, London (1989)
Monroy, R., Bundy, A., Green, I.: Planning Equational Verifiation in CCS. In: Redmiles, D., Nuseibeh, B. (eds.) 13th Conference on Automated Software Engineering, ASE 1998, Hawaii, USA, pp. 43–52. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos (1998); Candidate to best paper award
Nesi, M.: Mechanizing a proof by induction of process algebra specifications in higher-order logic. In: Larsen, K.G., Skou, A. (eds.) CAV 1991. LNCS, vol. 575. Springer, Heidelberg (1992)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2000 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Monroy, R., Bundy, A., Green, I. (2000). Searching for a Solution to Program Verification=Equation Solving in CCS. In: Cairó, O., Sucar, L.E., Cantu, F.J. (eds) MICAI 2000: Advances in Artificial Intelligence. MICAI 2000. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 1793. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/10720076_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/10720076_1
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-67354-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-45562-2
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive