Formal verification of Pentium®4 components with symbolic simulation and inductive invariants

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

Volumn 3576, Issue , 2005, Pages 170-184

  Kaivola, Roope ^a  

^a INTEL CORPORATION   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER SIMULATION; CONTROL SYSTEMS; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; NETWORKS (CIRCUITS);

INDUSTRIAL CIRCUITS; SYMBOLIC SIMULATION;

MICROPROCESSOR CHIPS;

EID: 26444526578     PISSN: 03029743     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1007/11513988_19     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (22)

1. S. Bensalem and Y. Lakhnech. Automatic generation of invariants. Form. Methods Syst. Des., 15(1):75-92, 1999.
2. S. Bensalem, Y. Lakhnech, and S. Owre. InVeST: A tool for the verification of invariants. In CAV '98, Proceedings, pages 505-510. Springer-Verlag, 1998.
3. P. Bjesse, T. Leonard, and A. Mokkedem. Finding bugs in an alpha microprocessor using satisfiability solvers. In CAV '01, Proceedings, pages 454-464. Springer-Verlag, 2001.
4. N. Bjørner, A. Browne, and Z. Manna. Automatic generation of invariants and intermediate assertions. Theor. Comput. Sci., 173(1):49-87, 1997.
5. R. E. Bryant. Graph-based algorithms for boolean function manipulation. IEEE Trans. on Comp., C-35(8):677-691, Aug. 1986.
6. R. Burstall. Program proving as hand simulation with a little induction. In Information Processing, pages 308 - 312. North Holland Publishing Company, aug 1974.
7. F. Copty, L. Fix, R. Fraer, E. Giunchiglia, G. Kamhi, A. Tacchella, and M. Y. Vardi. Benefits of bounded model checking at an industrial setting. In CAV '01, pages 436-453. Springer.
8. J. Edmund M. Clarke, O. Grumberg, and D. A. Peled. Model checking. MIT Press, 1999.
9. R. W. Floyd. Assigning meaning to programs. In Proceedings of Symposium in Applied Mathematics, volume 19, pages 19-32. American Mathematical Society, 1967.
10. S. Hazelhurst and C.-J. H. Seger. Symbolic trajectory evaluation. In T. Kropf, editor, Formal Hardware Verification, chapter 1, pages 3-78. Springer Verlag; New York, 1997.
11. Hinton, G., Sager, D., Upton, M., Boggs, D., Carmean, D, Kyker, A. and Roussel, P. The microarchitecture of the Pentium 4 processor. Intel Technology Journal, Q1, Feb. 2001.
12. R. Jeffords and C. Heitmeyer. Automatic generation of state invariants from requirements specifications. In SIGSOFT '98/FSE-6, Proceedings, pages 56-69. ACM Press, 1998.
13. R.B. Jones. Symbolic Simulation Methods for Industrial Formal Verification. Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2002.
14. R. Kaivola and K. Kohatsu. Proof engineering in the large: formal verification of Pentium 4 floating-point divider. Int'l J. on Software Tools for Technology Transfer, 4:323-334, 2003.
15. Z. Khasidashvili, J. Moondanos, D. Kaiss, and Z. Hanna. An enhanced cut-points algorithm in formal equivalence verification. In HLDVT '01, page 171. IEEE, 2001.
16. H. H. Kwak, I.-H. Moon, J. H. Kukula, and T. R. Shiple. Combinational equivalence checking through function transformation. In ICCAD '02, pages 526-533. ACM, 2002.
17. Z. Manna and A. Pnueli. Temporal verification of reactive systems: safety. Springer-Verlag New York, Inc., 1995.
18. L. Paulson. ML for the Working Programmer, Cambridge University Press, 1996.
19. T. Schubert. High level formal verification of next-generation microprocessors. In DAC '03: Proceedings of the 40th conference on Design automation, pages 1-6. ACM Press, 2003.
20. C.-J. H. Seger and R. E. Bryant. Formal verification by symbolic evaluation of partially-ordered trajectories. Formal Methods in System Design, 6(2): 147-189, Mar. 1995.
21. M. Sheeran, S. Singh, and G. Stålmarck. Checking safety properties using induction and a sat-solver. In FMCAD '00, pages 108-125. Springer-Verlag, 2000.
22. A. Tiwari, H. Rueß, H. Saïdi, and N. Shankar. A technique for invariant generation. In TACAS 2001, pages 113-127. Springer-Verlag, 2001.