Types and higher-order recursion schemes for verification of higher-order programs

ACM SIGPLAN Notices

Volumn 44, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 416-428

  Kobayashi, Naoki ^a  

^a TOHOKU UNIVERSITY   (Japan)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CALCULATIONS; SEMANTICS; TEMPORAL LOGIC;

ABSTRACT MODEL-CHECKING; CORRECTNESS PROOFS; FUNCTIONAL PROGRAMS; HIGHER-ORDER PROGRAMS; MODEL CHECKING PROBLEM; VERIFICATION ALGORITHMS; VERIFICATION FRAMEWORK; VERIFICATION METHOD;

MODEL CHECKING;

EID: 70350345572     PISSN: 15232867     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1145/1594834.1480933     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (34)

1. K. Aehlig. A finite semantics of simply-typed lambda terms for infinite runs of automata. Logical Methods in Computer Science, 3(3), 2007.
2. K. Aehlig, J. G. de Miranda, and C.-H. L. Ong. The monadic second order theory of trees given by arbitrary level-two recursion schemes is decidable. In TLCA 2005, volume 3461 of LNCS, pages 39-54. Springer-Verlag, 2005.
3. T. Ball, R. Majumdar, T. D. Millstein, and S. K. Rajamani. Automatic predicate abstraction of C programs. In PLDI 2001, pages 203-213, 2001.
4. T. Ball and S. K. Rajamani. The SLAM project: debugging system software via static analysis. In POPL, pages 1-3, 2002.
5. D. Beyer, T. A. Henzinger, R. Jhala, and R. Majumdar. The software model checker blast. International Journal on Software Tools for Technology Transfer, 9(5-6):505-525, 2007.
6. S. Chaki, S. Rajamani, and J. Rehof. Types as models: Model checking message-passing programs. In Proc. of POPL, pages 45-57, 2002.
7. B. Cook, A. Gotsman, A. Podelski, A. Rybalchenko, and M. Y. Vardi. Proving that programs eventually do something good. In Proc. of POPL, pages 265-276, 2007.
8. R. DeLine and M. Fähndrich. Adoption and focus: Practical linear types for imperative programming. In Proc. of PLDI, 2002.
9. E. A. Emerson and C. S. Jutla. Tree automata, mu-calculus and determinacy (extended abstract). In FOCS 1991, pages 368-377, 1991.
10. J. Field, D. Goyal, G. Ramalingam, and E. Yahav. Typestate verification: Abstraction techniques and complexity results. Sci. Comput. Program., 58(1-2):57-82, 2005.
11. S. J. Fink, E. Yahav, N. Dor, G. Ramalingam, and E. Geay. Effective typestate verification in the presence of aliasing. ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol., 17(2), 2008.
12. J. S. Foster, T. Terauchi, and A. Aiken. Flow-sensitive type qualifiers. In Proc. of PLDI, pages 1-12, 2002.
13. C. Haack and J. B. Wells. Type error slicing in implicitly typed higher-order languages. Science of Computer Programming, 50(1-3):189-224, 2004.
14. M. Hague and C.-H. L. Ong. Symbolic backwards-reachability analysis for higher-order pushdown systems. In FoSSaCS 2007, volume 4423 of LNCS, pages 213-227. Springer-Verlag, 2007.
15. N. Heintze and D. A. McAllester. Linear-time subtransitive control flow analysis. In Proc. of PLDI, pages 261-272, 1997.
16. T. A. Henzinger, R. Jhala, R. Majumdar, and G. Sutre. Lazy abstraction. In Proc. of POPL, pages 58-70, 2002.
17. H. Hosoya, J. Vouillon, and B. C. Pierce. Regular expression types for xml. ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst., 27(1):46-90, 2005.
18. A. Igarashi and N. Kobayashi. A generic type system for the picalculus. Theor. Comput. Sci., 311(1-3):121-163, 2004.
19. A. Igarashi and N. Kobayashi. Resource usage analysis. ACM Trans. Prog. Lang. Syst., 27(2):264-313, 2005. Preliminary summary appeared in Proceedings of POPL 2002.
20. F. Iwama, A. Igarashi, and N. Kobayashi. Resource usage analysis for a functional language with exceptions. In Proceedings of ACM SIGPLAN 2006 Workshop on Partial Evaluation and Program Manipulation (PEPM 2006), pages 38-47. ACM Press, 2006. (Pubitemid 46946395)
21. D. Kikuchi and N. Kobayashi. Type-based verification of correspondence assertions for communication protocols. In Proceedings of APLAS 2007, volume 4807 of LNCS, pages 191-205. Springer-Verlag, 2007.
22. T. Knapik, D. Niwinski, and P. Urzyczyn. Deciding monadic theories of hyperalgebraic trees. In TLCA 2001, volume 2044 of LNCS, pages 253-267. Springer-Verlag, 2001.
23. T. Knapik, D. Niwinski, and P. Urzyczyn. Higher-order pushdown trees are easy. In FoSSaCS 2002, volume 2303 of LNCS, pages 205-222. Springer-Verlag, 2002.
24. T. Knapik, D. Niwinski, P. Urzyczyn, and I. Walukiewicz. Unsafe grammars and panic automata. In ICALP 2005, volume 3580 of LNCS, pages 1450-1461. Springer-Verlag, 2005.
25. N. Kobayashi. Types and higher-order recursion schemes for verification of higher-order programs. An extended version, available from http://www.kb.ecei.tohoku.ac.jp/̃koba/papers/hors.pdf, 2008.
26. P. Lam, V. Kuncak, and M. C. Rinard. Generalized typestate checking for data structure consistency. In VMCAI 2005, volume 3385 of LNCS, pages 430-447. Springer-Verlag, 2005. (Pubitemid 41231376)
27. M. Naik. A type system equivalent to a model checker. Master Thesis, Purdue University.
28. M. Naik and J. Palsberg. A type system equivalent to a model checker. In ESOP 2005, volume 3444 of LNCS, pages 374-388. Springer-Verlag, 2005.
29. C.-H. L. Ong. On model-checking trees generated by higher-order recursion schemes. In LICS 2006, pages 81-90. IEEE Computer Society Press, 2006.
30. J. Rehof and T. Mogensen. Tractable constraints in finite semilattices. Science of Computer Programming, 35(2):191-221, 1999.
31. P. M. Rondon, M. Kawaguchi, and R. Jhala. Liquid types. In PLDI 2008, pages 159-169, 2008.
32. R. E. Strom and S. Yemini. Typestate: A programming language concept for enhancing software reliability. Transactions on Software Engineering, 12(1):157-171, 1986.
33. W. Thomas. Languages, automata, and logic. In Handbook of formal languages, vol.3, pages 389-455, 1997.
34. H. Unno and N. Kobayashi. On-demand refinement of dependent types. In Proceedings of FLOPS 2008, volume 4989 of LNCS, pages 81-96. Springer-Verlag, 2008. 428