Learning component interfaces with may and must abstractions

Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics)

Volumn 6174 LNCS, Issue , 2010, Pages 527-542

  Singh, Rishabh ^a   Giannakopoulou, Dimitra ^b   Pǎsǎreanu, Corina ^b  

^a MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

^b NASA AMES RESEARCH CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPONENT INTERFACES; CONCRETE COMPONENTS; DETERMINIZATION; INFINITE-STATE; MINIMALITY; MODULAR PROGRAMS; REACHABILITY; SOFTWARE COMPONENT;

ABSTRACTING; COMPUTER AIDED ANALYSIS; COMPUTER SOFTWARE; NASA;

LEARNING ALGORITHMS;

EID: 77954981825     PISSN: 03029743     EISSN: 16113349     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-14295-6_45     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (28)

1. Alur, R., Cerný, P., Madhusudan, P., Nam,W.: Synthesis of interface specifications for java classes. In: POPL, pp. 98-109 (2005)
2. Alur, R., Henzinger, T.A., Mang, F.Y.C., Qadeer, S., Rajamani, S.K., Tasiran, S.: Mocha: Modularity in model checking. In: Y. Vardi, M. (ed.) CAV 1998. LNCS, vol. 1427, pp. 521-525. Springer, Heidelberg (1998)
3. Ammons, G., Bodík, R., Larus, J.R.: Mining specifications. In: POPL, pp. 4-16 (2002)
4. Angluin, D.: Learning regular sets from queries and counterexamples. Inf. Comput. 75(2), 87-106 (1987)
5. Beyer, D., Henzinger, T.A., Singh, V.: Algorithms for interface synthesis. In: Damm, W., Hermanns, H. (eds.) CAV 2007. LNCS, vol. 4590, pp. 4-19. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)
6. Clarke, E., 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)
7. Cousot, P., Cousot, R.: Abstract interpretation: a unified lattice model for static analysis of programs by construction or approximation of fixpoints. In: POPL, pp. 238-252. ACM, New York (1977)
8. Das, M., Lerner, S., Seigle, M.: Esp: Path-sensitive program verification in polynomial time. In: PLDI, pp. 57-68 (2002)
9. de Alfaro, L., Godefroid, P., Jagadeesan, R.: Three-valued abstractions of games: Uncertainty, but with precision. In: LICS (2004)
10. Flanagan, C., Freund, S.N., Qadeer, S.: Thread-modular verification for shared-memory programs. In: Le Métayer, D. (ed.) ESOP 2002. LNCS, vol. 2305, pp. 262-277. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)
11. Foster, J.S., Terauchi, T., Aiken, A.: Flow-sensitive type qualifiers. In: PLDI, pp. 1-12 (2002)
12. Giannakopoulou, D., Pasareanu, C.S.: Interface generation and compositional verification in javapathfinder. In: Chechik, M., Wirsing, M. (eds.) FASE 2009. LNCS, vol. 5503, pp. 94-108. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)
13. Godefroid, P., Huth, M., Jagadeesan, R.: Abstraction-based model checking using modal transition systems. In: Larsen, K.G., Nielsen, M. (eds.) CONCUR 2001. LNCS, vol. 2154, p. 426. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)
14. Godefroid, P., Huth, M., Jagadeesan, R.: A game-based framework for ctl counterexamples and 3-valued abstraction-refinement. In: Hunt Jr., W.A., Somenzi, F. (eds.) CAV 2003. LNCS, vol. 2725, pp. 275-287. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)
15. Godefroid, P., Nori, A.V., Rajamani, S.K., Tetali, S.D.: Compositional may-must program analysis: Unleashing the power of alternation. In: POPL (2010)
16. Henzinger, T.A., Jhala, R., Majumdar, R.: Permissive interfaces. In: ESEC/SIGSOFT FSE, pp. 31-40 (2005)
17. Henzinger, T.A., Jhala, R., Majumdar, R., McMillan, K.L.: Abstractions from proofs. In: POPL, pp. 232-244 (2004)
18. Jones, C.B.: Specification and design of (parallel) programs. In: IFIP Congress, pp. 321-332 (1983)
19. Lee, D., Yannakakis, M.: Online minimization of transition systems. In: ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (1992)
20. Lee, D., Yannakakis, M.: Online minimization of transition systems (extended abstract). In: STOC, pp. 264-274. ACM, New York (1992)
21. Milner, R.: Communication and Concurrency. Prentice Hall, New York (1989)
22. Namjoshi, K.S., Kurshan, R.P.: Syntactic program transformations for automatic abstraction. In: Emerson, E.A., Sistla, A.P. (eds.) CAV 2000. LNCS, vol. 1855, pp. 435-449. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)
23. Pnueli, A.: In transition from global to modular temporal reasoning about programs. In: Logics and models of concurrent systems, pp. 123-144 (1985)
24. Podelski, A., Rybalchenko, A.: ARMC: The logical choice for software model checking with abstraction refinement. In: Hanus, M. (ed.) PADL 2007. LNCS, vol. 4354, pp. 245-259. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)
25. Rivest, R.L., Schapire, R.E.: Inference of finite automata using homing sequences. Inf. Comput. 103(2), 299-347 (1993)
26. Shoham, S., Grumberg, O.: Compositional verification and 3-valued abstractions join forces. In: Riis Nielson, H., Filé, G. (eds.) SAS 2007. LNCS, vol. 4634, pp. 69-86. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)
27. Tkachuk, O., Dwyer, M.B.: Adapting side effects analysis for modular program model checking. In: ESEC / SIGSOFT FSE, pp. 188-197 (2003)
28. Whaley, J., Martin, M.C., Lam, M.S.: Automatic extraction of object-oriented component interfaces. In: ISSTA, pp. 218-228 (2002)