Article

Separation logic adapted for proofs by rewriting

Author:

Magnus O. MyreenAuthors Info & Claims

ITP'10: Proceedings of the First international conference on Interactive Theorem Proving

Pages 485 - 489

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-14052-5_34

Published: 11 July 2010 Publication History

Publisher Site

Abstract

We present a formalisation of separation logic which, by avoiding the use of existential quantifiers, allows proofs that only use standard equational rewriting methods as found in off-the-shelf theorem provers. This proof automation is sufficiently strong to free the user from dealing with low-level details in proofs of functional correctness. The work presented here has been implemented in HOL4 and ACL2. It is illustrated on a standard example (reversal of a linked-list).

References

[1]

Appel, A.W., Blazy, S.: Separation logic for small-step Cminor. In: Schneider, K., Brandt, J. (eds.) TPHOLs 2007. LNCS, vol. 4732, pp. 5-21. Springer, Heidelberg (2007).

Crossref

Google Scholar

[2]

Gast, H.: Lightweight separation. In: Mohamed, O.A., Muñoz, C., Tahar, S. (eds.) TPHOLs 2008. LNCS, vol. 5170, pp. 199-214. Springer, Heidelberg (2008).

Crossref

Google Scholar

[3]

Kaufmann, M., Moore, J.S.: An ACL2 tutorial. In: Mohamed, O.A., Muñoz, C., Tahar, S. (eds.) TPHOLs 2008. LNCS, vol. 5170, pp. 17-21. Springer, Heidelberg (2008).

Crossref

Google Scholar

[4]

Marti, N., Aeldt, R., Yonezawa, A.: Towards formal verification of memory properties using separation logic. In: Workshop of the Japan Society for Software Science and Technology, Japan Society for Software Science and Technology, Japan (2005).

Google Scholar

[5]

McCreight, A.: Practical tactics for separation logic. In: Urban, C. (ed.) TPHOLs 2009. LNCS, vol. 5674, pp. 343-358. Springer, Heidelberg (2009).

Crossref

Google Scholar

[6]

Myreen, M.O., Kaufmann, M.: HOL4 and ACL2 implementations, HOL4 (Myreen): ACL2 (Kaufmann), http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~mom22/sep-rewrite/

Google Scholar

[7]

Reynolds, J.: Separation logic: A logic for shared mutable data structures. In: Proceedings of Logic in Computer Science (LICS). IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2002).

Crossref

Google Scholar

[8]

Slind, K., Norrish, M.: A brief overview of HOL4. In: Mohamed, O.A., Muñoz, C., Tahar, S. (eds.) TPHOLs 2008. LNCS, vol. 5170, pp. 28-32. Springer, Heidelberg (2008).

Crossref

Google Scholar

[9]

Tuch, H., Klein, G., Norrish, M.: Types, bytes, and separation logic. In: Principles of Programming Languages (POPL), pp. 97-108. ACM, New York (2007).

Crossref

Google Scholar

[10]

Tuerk, T.: A formalisation of smallfoot in HOL. In: Urban, C. (ed.) TPHOLs 2009. LNCS, vol. 5674, pp. 469-484. Springer, Heidelberg (2009).

Crossref

Google Scholar

[11]

Weber, T.: Towards mechanized program verification with separation logic. In: Marcinkowski, J., Tarlecki, A. (eds.) CSL 2004. LNCS, vol. 3210, pp. 250-264. Springer, Heidelberg (2004).

Google Scholar

Cited By

View all

Mehta MCook W(2020)Separation Logic-Based Verification Atop a Binary-Compatible Filesystem ModelFormal Methods: Foundations and Applications10.1007/978-3-030-63882-5_10(155-170)Online publication date: 25-Nov-2020
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/978-3-030-63882-5_10
Hóu ZSanán DTiu ALiu Y(2017)Proof Tactics for Assertions in Separation LogicInteractive Theorem Proving10.1007/978-3-319-66107-0_19(285-303)Online publication date: 26-Sep-2017
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/978-3-319-66107-0_19
Crespo JKunz C(2011)A machine-checked framework for relational separation logicProceedings of the 9th international conference on Software engineering and formal methods10.5555/2075679.2075691(122-137)Online publication date: 14-Nov-2011
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/2075679.2075691
Show More Cited By

Separation logic adapted for proofs by rewriting
1. Mathematics of computing
  1. Continuous mathematics
    1. Calculus
2. Theory of computation
  1. Logic
  2. Semantics and reasoning
    1. Program reasoning

Recommendations

Interactive proofs in higher-order concurrent separation logic
POPL '17

When using a proof assistant to reason in an embedded logic -- like separation logic -- one cannot benefit from the proof contexts and basic tactics of the proof assistant. This results in proofs that are at a too low level of abstraction because they ...
Interactive proofs in higher-order concurrent separation logic
POPL '17: Proceedings of the 44th ACM SIGPLAN Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages

When using a proof assistant to reason in an embedded logic -- like separation logic -- one cannot benefit from the proof contexts and basic tactics of the proof assistant. This results in proofs that are at a too low level of abstraction because they ...
Referential logic of proofs
Clifford lectures and the mathematical foundations of programming semantics

We introduce an extension of the propositional logic of single-conclusion proofs by the second-order variables denoting the reference constructors of the type "the formula which is proved by x." The resulting Logic of Proofs with References, FLP_ref, is ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

ITP'10: Proceedings of the First international conference on Interactive Theorem Proving

July 2010

494 pages

ISBN:3642140513

Editors:
Matt Kaufmann
Department of Computer Sciences, University of Texas, Austin, Talyor Hall 2.124, Austin, TX,
,
Lawrence C. Paulson
Computer Laboratory, University of Cambridge, Talyor Hall 2.124, Cambridge,, TX, UK

Publisher

Springer-Verlag

Berlin, Heidelberg

Publication History

Published: 11 July 2010

Qualifiers

Article

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

5
Total Citations
View Citations
0
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)0
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0

Reflects downloads up to 26 Jan 2025

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all

Mehta MCook W(2020)Separation Logic-Based Verification Atop a Binary-Compatible Filesystem ModelFormal Methods: Foundations and Applications10.1007/978-3-030-63882-5_10(155-170)Online publication date: 25-Nov-2020
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/978-3-030-63882-5_10
Hóu ZSanán DTiu ALiu Y(2017)Proof Tactics for Assertions in Separation LogicInteractive Theorem Proving10.1007/978-3-319-66107-0_19(285-303)Online publication date: 26-Sep-2017
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/978-3-319-66107-0_19
Crespo JKunz C(2011)A machine-checked framework for relational separation logicProceedings of the 9th international conference on Software engineering and formal methods10.5555/2075679.2075691(122-137)Online publication date: 14-Nov-2011
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/2075679.2075691
Charguéraud AChakravarty MHu ZDanvy O(2011)Characteristic formulae for the verification of imperative programsProceedings of the 16th ACM SIGPLAN international conference on Functional programming10.1145/2034773.2034828(418-430)Online publication date: 19-Sep-2011
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/2034773.2034828
Charguéraud A(2011)Characteristic formulae for the verification of imperative programsACM SIGPLAN Notices10.1145/2034574.203482846:9(418-430)Online publication date: 19-Sep-2011
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/2034574.2034828

Abstract

References

Cited By

Recommendations

Interactive proofs in higher-order concurrent separation logic

Interactive proofs in higher-order concurrent separation logic

Referential logic of proofs

Comments

Information

Published In

Sponsors

Publisher

Publication History

Qualifiers

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View options

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media

Affiliations