Verifying distributed systems: The operational approach

ACM SIGPLAN Notices

Volumn 44, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 429-440

  Ridge, Thomas ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Distributed; Ground and symbolic evaluation; Hoarestyle assertions; HOL; Inductive reasoning; Infrastructure; Invariants; Linearizability; Local reasoning; Network protocol; OCaml; Operational semantics; Persistent queue; Refinement; Rely guarantee; Separation

Indexed keywords

DISTRIBUTED; GROUND AND SYMBOLIC EVALUATION; HOARESTYLE ASSERTIONS; HOL; INDUCTIVE REASONING; INFRASTRUCTURE; INVARIANTS; LINEARIZABILITY; LOCAL REASONING; OCAML; OPERATIONAL SEMANTICS; PERSISTENT QUEUE; REFINEMENT; RELY/GUARANTEE;

INTERNET; SEMANTICS; SEPARATION; THEOREM PROVING;

NETWORK PROTOCOLS;

EID: 70350335989     PISSN: 15232867     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (29)

1. IEEE standards association, POSIX. Available online at http://standards.ieee.org/regauth/posix/.
2. S. Bishop, M. Fairbairn, M. Norrish, P. Sewell, M. Smith, and K. Wansbrough. Rigorous specification and conformance testing techniques for network protocols, as applied to TCP, UDP, and Sockets. In Proc. SIGCOMM 2005 (Philadelphia), Aug. 2005.
3. S. Bishop, M. Fairbairn, M. Norrish, P. Sewell, M. Smith, and K. Wansbrough. Engineering with logic: HOL specification and symbolic-evaluation testing for TCP implementations. In POPL'06: Conference Record of the 33rd ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages, pages 55-66, New York, NY, USA, 2006. ACM Press.
4. M. Compton. Stenning's protocol implemented in UDP and verified in Isabelle. In M. D. Atkinson and F. K. H. A. Dehne, editors, CATS, volume 41 of CRPIT, pages 21-30. Australian Computer Society, 2005.
5. M. Felleisen and M. Flatt. Programming languages and lambda calculi. Available online at http://www.cs.utah.edu/plt/publications/pllc.pdf.
6. M. Herlihy and J. M. Wing. Linearizability: A correctness condition for concurrent objects. ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems, 12(3):463-492, July 1990.
7. C. Hoare. An axiomatic basis for computer programming. CACM: Communications of the ACM, 12, 1969.
8. R. Johnson. J2EE development frameworks. IEEE Computer, 38(1):107-110, 2005.
9. C. B. Jones. Development Methods for Computer Programmes Including a Notion of Interference. PhD thesis, Prgr.Res.Grp. 25, Oxford Univ., Comp. Lab., UK, June 1981.
10. S. S. Lam and A. U. Shankar. Protocol verification via projections. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 10(4):325-342, July 1984.
11. L. Lamport. Specifying concurrent program modules. ACM TOPLAS, 5(2):190-222, Apr. 1983.
12. H. Liu and J. S. Moore. Java program verification via a JVM deep embedding in ACL2. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 3223:184-200, 2004.
13. N. A. Lynch. Distributed Algorithms. Morgan Kaufmann, 1996.
14. N. A. Lynch and M. R. Tuttle. Hierarchical correctness proofs for distributed algorithms. Technical Report MIT/LCS/TR-387, MIT, 1987.
15. M. Abadi and L. Lamport. The Existence of Refinement Mappings. In Proc. of the 3rd Symposium on Logic in Computer Science, pages 165-175, Edinburgh, July 1988. IEEE.
16. T. Nipkow. Hoare logics for recursive procedures and unbounded nondeterminism. In J. Bradfield, editor, Computer Science Logic (CSL 2002), volume 2471, pages 103-119, 2002.
17. D. v. Oheimb and T. Nipkow. Hoare logic for NanoJava: Auxiliary variables, side effects and virtual methods revisited. In L.-H. Eriksson and P. Lindsay, editors, Formal Methods Europe (FME 2002), volume 2391, pages 89-105, 2002.
18. S. Owens. A sound semantics for OCaml light. In S. Drossopoulou, editor, ESOP, volume 4960 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 1-15. Springer, 2008.
19. S. Owicki and D. Gries. Verifying properties of parallel programs: An axiomatic approach. Communications of the ACM, 19(5):279-285, May 1976.
20. L. C. Paulson. The inductive approach to verifying cryptographic protocols. Journal of Computer Security, 6:85-128, 1998.
21. A. M. Pitts. Operational semantics and program equivalence. In G. Barthe, P. Dybjer, and J. Saraiva, editors, Applied Semantics, Advanced Lectures, volume 2395 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Tutorial, pages 378-412. Springer-Verlag, 2002.
22. A. M. Pitts and I. D. B. Stark. Operational reasoning for functions with local state. In A. D. Gordon and A. M. Pitts, editors, Higher Order Operational Techniques in Semantics, Publications of the Newton Institute, pages 227-273. Cambridge University Press, 1998.
23. G. D. Plotkin. The origins of structural operational semantics. Journal of Logic and Algebraic Programming (JLAP), 60:3-15, 2004.
24. G. D. Plotkin. A structural approach to operational semantics. Journal of Logic and Algebraic Progamming (JLAP), 60:17-139, 2004.
25. J. Reynolds. Separation logic: a logic for shared mutable data structures, 2002.
26. T. Ridge. Operational reasoning for concurrent Caml programs and weak memory models. In K. Schneider and J. Brandt, editors, Theorem Proving in Higher Order Logics, 20th International Conference, TPHOLs 2007, Kaiserslautern, Germany, September 10-13, 2007, Proceedings, volume 4732 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 278-293. Springer, 2007.
27. T. Ridge, M. Norrish, and P. Sewell. A rigorous approach to networking: TCP, from implementation to protocol to service. In J. Cuéllar, T. S. E. Maibaum, and K. Sere, editors, FM, volume 5014 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 294-309. Springer, 2008.
28. V. Vafeiadis and M. J. Parkinson. A marriage of rely/guarantee and separation logic. In CONCUR'07: Conference on Concurrency Theory, volume 4703 of LNCS, pages 256-271. Springer, 2007.
29. G. Weikum and G. Vossen. Transactional Information Systems. Morgan Kaufmann, 2002.