Publications of year 2016
Articles in journal or book chapters
-
Modular, crash-safe refinement for ASMs with submachines.
Science of Computer Programming (SCP), 131:3-21,
2016.
Elsevier.
PDF
BibTeX Entry
@article{ernst:scp2016, author = {Gidon Ernst and Jörg Pfähler and Gerhard Schellhorn and Wolfgang Reif}, title = {{Modular, crash-safe refinement for ASMs with submachines}}, journal = {Science of Computer Programming (SCP)}, volume = {131}, pages = {3--21}, year = {2016}, publisher = {Elsevier}, pdf = {https://www.sosy-lab.org/research/pub/2016-SCP.Modular_Crash-Safe_Refinement_for_ASMs_with_Submachines.pdf}, }
Articles in conference or workshop proceedings
-
Correctness Witnesses: Exchanging Verification Results Between Verifiers.
In T. Zimmermann,
J. Cleland-Huang, and
Z. Su, editors,
Proceedings of the 24th ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on
Foundations of Software Engineering (FSE 2016, Seattle, WA, USA, November 13-18),
pages 326-337,
2016.
ACM.
doi:10.1145/2950290.2950351
Keyword(s):
CPAchecker,
Ultimate,
Software Model Checking,
Witness-Based Validation,
Witness-Based Validation (main)
Publisher's Version
PDF
BibTeX Entry
@inproceedings{FSE16b, author = {Dirk Beyer and Matthias Dangl and Daniel Dietsch and Matthias Heizmann}, title = {Correctness Witnesses: {E}xchanging Verification Results Between Verifiers}, booktitle = {Proceedings of the 24th ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Foundations of Software Engineering (FSE~2016, Seattle, WA, USA, November 13-18)}, editor = {T.~Zimmermann and J.~Cleland-Huang and Z.~Su}, pages = {326-337}, year = {2016}, publisher = {ACM}, doi = {10.1145/2950290.2950351}, sha256 = {}, url = {}, pdf = {https://www.sosy-lab.org/research/pub/2016-FSE.Correctness_Witnesses_Exchanging_Verification_Results_between_Verifiers.pdf}, keyword = {CPAchecker,Ultimate,Software Model Checking,Witness-Based Validation,Witness-Based Validation (main)}, } -
On-the-Fly Decomposition of Specifications in Software Model Checking.
In T. Zimmermann,
J. Cleland-Huang, and
Z. Su, editors,
Proceedings of the 24th ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on
Foundations of Software Engineering (FSE 2016, Seattle, WA, USA, November 13-18),
pages 349-361,
2016.
ACM.
doi:10.1145/2950290.2950349
Publisher's Version
PDF
BibTeX Entry
@inproceedings{FSE16a, author = {Sven Apel and Dirk Beyer and Vitaly Mordan and Vadim Mutilin and Andreas Stahlbauer}, title = {On-the-Fly Decomposition of Specifications in Software Model Checking}, booktitle = {Proceedings of the 24th ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Foundations of Software Engineering (FSE~2016, Seattle, WA, USA, November 13-18)}, editor = {T.~Zimmermann and J.~Cleland-Huang and Z.~Su}, pages = {349-361}, year = {2016}, publisher = {ACM}, isbn = {978-3-319-47165-5}, doi = {10.1145/2950290.2950349}, sha256 = {}, pdf = {https://www.sosy-lab.org/research/pub/2016-FSE.On-the-Fly_Decomposition_of_Specifications_in_Software_Model_Checking.pdf}, } -
Partial Verification and Intermediate Results as a Solution to
Combine Automatic and Interactive Verification Techniques.
In T. Margaria and
B. Steffen, editors,
7th International Symposium on
Leveraging Applications of Formal Methods, Verification, and Validation
(ISoLA 2016, Part 1, Imperial, Corfu, Greece, October 10-14),
LNCS 9952,
pages 874-880,
2016.
Springer.
doi:10.1007/978-3-319-47166-2
Keyword(s):
Software Model Checking
Publisher's Version
PDF
Abstract
Many of the current verification approaches can be classified into automatic and interactive techniques, each having different strengths and weaknesses. Thus, one of the current open problems is to design solutions to combine the two approaches and accelerate technology transfer. We outline four existing techniques that might be able to contribute to combination solutions: (1) Conditional model checking is a technique that gives detailed information (in form of a condition) about the verified state space, i.e., informs the user (or tools later in a tool chain) of the outcome. Also, it accepts as input detailed information (again as condition) about what the conditional model checker has to do. (2) Correctness witnesses, stored in a machine-readable exchange format, contain (partial) invariants that can be used to prove the correctness of a system. For example, tools that usually expect invariants from the user can read the invariants from such correctness witnesses and ask the user only for the remaining invariants. (3) Abstraction-refinement based approaches that use a dynamically adjustable precision (such as in lazy CEGAR approaches) can be provided with invariants from the user or from other tools, e.g., from deductive methods. This way, the approach can succeed in constructing a proof even if it was not able to come up with the required invariant. (4) The technique of path invariants extracts (in a CEGAR method) a path program that represents an interesting part of the program for which an invariant is needed. Such a path program can be given to an expensive (or interactive) method for computing invariants that can then be fed back to a CEGAR method to continue verifying the large program. While the existing techniques originate from software verification, we believe that the new combination ideas are useful for verifying general systems.BibTeX Entry
@inproceedings{ISOLA16b, author = {Dirk Beyer}, title = {Partial Verification and Intermediate Results as a Solution to Combine Automatic and Interactive Verification Techniques}, booktitle = {7th International Symposium on Leveraging Applications of Formal Methods, Verification, and Validation (ISoLA~2016, Part~1, Imperial, Corfu, Greece, October 10-14)}, editor = {T.~Margaria and B.~Steffen}, pages = {874-880}, year = {2016}, series = {LNCS~9952}, publisher = {Springer}, isbn = {978-3-319-47165-5}, doi = {10.1007/978-3-319-47166-2}, sha256 = {}, pdf = {https://www.sosy-lab.org/research/pub/2016-ISoLA.Partial_Verification_and_Intermediate_Results_as_a_Solution_to_Combine_Automatic_and_Interactive_Verification_Techniques.pdf}, abstract = {Many of the current verification approaches can be classified into automatic and interactive techniques, each having different strengths and weaknesses. Thus, one of the current open problems is to design solutions to combine the two approaches and accelerate technology transfer. We outline four existing techniques that might be able to contribute to combination solutions: (1) Conditional model checking is a technique that gives detailed information (in form of a condition) about the verified state space, i.e., informs the user (or tools later in a tool chain) of the outcome. Also, it accepts as input detailed information (again as condition) about what the conditional model checker has to do. (2) Correctness witnesses, stored in a machine-readable exchange format, contain (partial) invariants that can be used to prove the correctness of a system. For example, tools that usually expect invariants from the user can read the invariants from such correctness witnesses and ask the user only for the remaining invariants. (3) Abstraction-refinement based approaches that use a dynamically adjustable precision (such as in lazy CEGAR approaches) can be provided with invariants from the user or from other tools, e.g., from deductive methods. This way, the approach can succeed in constructing a proof even if it was not able to come up with the required invariant. (4) The technique of path invariants extracts (in a CEGAR method) a path program that represents an interesting part of the program for which an invariant is needed. Such a path program can be given to an expensive (or interactive) method for computing invariants that can then be fed back to a CEGAR method to continue verifying the large program. While the existing techniques originate from software verification, we believe that the new combination ideas are useful for verifying general systems.}, keyword = {Software Model Checking}, } -
Symbolic Execution with CEGAR.
In T. Margaria and
B. Steffen, editors,
7th International Symposium on
Leveraging Applications of Formal Methods, Verification, and Validation
(ISoLA 2016, Part 1, Imperial, Corfu, Greece, October 10-14),
LNCS 9952,
pages 195-211,
2016.
Springer.
doi:10.1007/978-3-319-47166-2_14
Keyword(s):
CPAchecker,
Software Model Checking
Publisher's Version
PDF
Presentation
Supplement
Abstract
Symbolic execution, a standard technique in program analysis, is a particularly successful and popular component in systems for test-case generation. One of the open research problems is that the approach suffers from the path-explosion problem. We apply abstraction to symbolic execution, and refine the abstract model using counterexampleguided abstraction refinement (CEGAR), a standard technique from model checking. We also use refinement selection with existing and new heuristics to influence the behavior and further improve the performance of our refinement procedure. We implemented our new technique in the open-source software-verification framework CPAchecker. Our experimental results show that the implementation is highly competitive.BibTeX Entry
@inproceedings{ISOLA16a, author = {Dirk Beyer and Thomas Lemberger}, title = {Symbolic Execution with {CEGAR}}, booktitle = {7th International Symposium on Leveraging Applications of Formal Methods, Verification, and Validation (ISoLA~2016, Part~1, Imperial, Corfu, Greece, October 10-14)}, editor = {T.~Margaria and B.~Steffen}, pages = {195-211}, year = {2016}, series = {LNCS~9952}, publisher = {Springer}, doi = {10.1007/978-3-319-47166-2_14}, sha256 = {}, url = {https://www.sosy-lab.org/research/cpa-symexec/}, pdf = {https://www.sosy-lab.org/research/pub/2016-ISoLA.Symbolic_Execution_with_CEGAR.pdf}, presentation = {https://www.sosy-lab.org/research/prs/2016-10-10_ISoLA16_SymbolicExecutionWithCegar_Dirk.pdf}, abstract = {Symbolic execution, a standard technique in program analysis, is a particularly successful and popular component in systems for test-case generation. One of the open research problems is that the approach suffers from the path-explosion problem. We apply abstraction to symbolic execution, and refine the abstract model using counterexampleguided abstraction refinement (CEGAR), a standard technique from model checking. We also use refinement selection with existing and new heuristics to influence the behavior and further improve the performance of our refinement procedure. We implemented our new technique in the open-source software-verification framework CPAchecker. Our experimental results show that the implementation is highly competitive.}, keyword = {CPAchecker,Software Model Checking}, annote = {<a href="https://www.sosy-lab.org/research/pub/2016-ISoLA.Symbolic_Execution_with_CEGAR.Errata.txt"> Errata</a> available.}, }Additional Infos
Errata available. -
Verification-Aided Debugging: An Interactive Web-Service for Exploring Error Witnesses.
In S. Chaudhuri and
A. Farzan, editors,
28th International Conference on
Computer Aided Verification (CAV 2016, Part 2, Toronto, ON, Canada, July 17-23),
LNCS 9780,
pages 502-509,
2016.
Springer.
doi:10.1007/978-3-319-41540-6_28
Keyword(s):
Cloud-Based Software Verification,
Witness-Based Validation,
Witness-Based Validation (main)
Publisher's Version
PDF
BibTeX Entry
@inproceedings{CAV16, author = {Dirk Beyer and Matthias Dangl}, title = {Verification-Aided Debugging: {A}n Interactive Web-Service for Exploring Error Witnesses}, booktitle = {28th International Conference on Computer Aided Verification (CAV~2016, Part~2, Toronto, ON, Canada, July 17-23)}, editor = {S.~Chaudhuri and A.~Farzan}, pages = {502-509}, year = {2016}, series = {LNCS~9780}, publisher = {Springer}, doi = {10.1007/978-3-319-41540-6_28}, sha256 = {89a353eace6233e10cd85e64b0c197209367d617b94c2d02766e922ea88c9e4c}, pdf = {https://www.sosy-lab.org/research/pub/2016-CAV.Verification-Aided_Debugging_An_Interactive_Web-Service_for_Exploring_Error_Witnesses.pdf}, keyword = {Cloud-Based Software Verification,Witness-Based Validation,Witness-Based Validation (main)}, } -
Reliable and Reproducible Competition Results with BenchExec and Witnesses (Report on SV-COMP 2016).
In M. Chechik and
J.-F. Raskin, editors,
Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on
Tools and Algorithms for the Construction and Analysis of Systems (TACAS 2016, Eindhoven, The Netherlands, April 2-8),
LNCS 9636,
pages 887-904,
2016.
Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg.
doi:10.1007/978-3-662-49674-9_55
Keyword(s):
Competition on Software Verification (SV-COMP),
Competition on Software Verification (SV-COMP Report),
Software Model Checking,
Witness-Based Validation
Publisher's Version
PDF
Supplement
BibTeX Entry
@inproceedings{TACAS16, author = {Dirk Beyer}, title = {Reliable and Reproducible Competition Results with {{\sc BenchExec}} and Witnesses ({R}eport on {SV-COMP} 2016)}, booktitle = {Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on Tools and Algorithms for the Construction and Analysis of Systems (TACAS~2016, Eindhoven, The Netherlands, April 2-8)}, editor = {M.~Chechik and J.-F.~Raskin}, pages = {887-904}, year = {2016}, series = {LNCS~9636}, publisher = {Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg}, isbn = {978-3-662-49674-9}, doi = {10.1007/978-3-662-49674-9_55}, sha256 = {bc8f02d7c0651c1197977f13e77c1fcb22a5f85aadd96dc4aa59b454b199ed0e}, url = {https://sv-comp.sosy-lab.org/2016/}, keyword = {Competition on Software Verification (SV-COMP),Competition on Software Verification (SV-COMP Report),Software Model Checking,Witness-Based Validation}, } -
A Light-Weight Approach for Verifying Multi-Threaded Programs with CPAchecker.
In J. Bouda,
L. Holík,
J. Kofroň,
J. Strejček, and
A. Rambousek, editors,
Proceedings of the 11th Doctoral Workshop on
Mathematical and Engineering Methods in Computer Science (MEMICS 2016, Telč, Czechia, October 21-23),
EPTCS 233,
pages 61-71,
2016.
ArXiV.
doi:10.4204/EPTCS.233.6
Keyword(s):
CPAchecker,
Software Model Checking
Publisher's Version
PDF
BibTeX Entry
@inproceedings{MEMICS16-Multi-Threaded, author = {Dirk Beyer and Karlheinz Friedberger}, title = {A Light-Weight Approach for Verifying Multi-Threaded Programs with CPAchecker}, booktitle = {Proceedings of the 11th Doctoral Workshop on Mathematical and Engineering Methods in Computer Science (MEMICS~2016, Tel\v{c}, Czechia, October 21-23)}, editor = {J.~Bouda and L.~Hol\'ik and J.~Kofro\v{n} and J.~Strej\v{c}ek and A.~Rambousek}, pages = {61-71}, year = {2016}, series = {EPTCS~233}, publisher = {ArXiV}, doi = {10.4204/EPTCS.233.6}, sha256 = {}, pdf = {https://www.sosy-lab.org/research/pub/2016-MEMICS.A_Light-Weight_Approach_for_Verifying_Multi-Threaded_Programs_with_CPAchecker.pdf}, keyword = {CPAchecker,Software Model Checking}, } -
Evaluation and Reproducibility of Program Analysis and Verification (Track Introduction).
In T. Margaria and
B. Steffen, editors,
Proceedings of the 7th International Symposium on
Leveraging Applications of Formal Methods, Verification, and Validation
(ISoLA 2016, Corfu, Greece, October 10-14),
LNCS 9952,
pages 191-194,
2016.
Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg.
doi:10.1007/978-3-319-47166-2_13
Publisher's Version
PDF
BibTeX Entry
@inproceedings{ISOLA16-TrackIntro, author = {Markus Schordan and Dirk Beyer and Jonas Lundberg}, title = {Evaluation and Reproducibility of Program Analysis and Verification (Track Introduction)}, booktitle = {Proceedings of the 7th International Symposium on Leveraging Applications of Formal Methods, Verification, and Validation (ISoLA~2016, Corfu, Greece, October 10--14)}, editor = {T.~Margaria and B.~Steffen}, pages = {191-194}, year = {2016}, series = {LNCS~9952}, publisher = {Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg}, isbn = {978-3-319-47165-5}, doi = {10.1007/978-3-319-47166-2_13}, sha256 = {}, url = {}, } -
SMT-based Software Model Checking: An Experimental Comparison of Four Algorithms.
In Proc. VSTTE,
LNCS 9971,
pages 181-198,
2016.
Springer.
doi:10.1007/978-3-319-48869-1_14
Keyword(s):
CPAchecker,
Software Model Checking
Publisher's Version
PDF
Supplement
BibTeX Entry
@inproceedings{VSTTE16b-AlgorithmComparison, author = {Dirk Beyer and Matthias Dangl}, title = {{SMT}-based Software Model Checking: {A}n Experimental Comparison of Four Algorithms}, booktitle = {Proc.\ VSTTE}, pages = {181--198}, year = {2016}, series = {LNCS~9971}, publisher = {Springer}, doi = {10.1007/978-3-319-48869-1_14}, sha256 = {}, url = {https://www.sosy-lab.org/research/k-ind-compare/index-vstte.html}, pdf = {https://www.sosy-lab.org/research/pub/2016-VSTTE.SMT-based_Software_Model_Checking_An_Experimental_Comparison_of_Four_Algorithms.pdf}, keyword = {CPAchecker,Software Model Checking}, annote = {An <a href="https://www.sosy-lab.org/research/bib/Year/2018.complete.html#AlgorithmComparison-JAR">extended version</a> of this article appeared in JAR.}, }Additional Infos
An extended version of this article appeared in JAR. -
JavaSMT: A Unified Interface for SMT Solvers in Java.
In Proc. VSTTE,
LNCS 9971,
pages 139-148,
2016.
Springer.
doi:10.1007/978-3-319-48869-1_11
Publisher's Version
PDF
Supplement
BibTeX Entry
@inproceedings{VSTTE16a-JavaSMT, author = {Egor George Karpenkov and Karlheinz Friedberger and Dirk Beyer}, title = {{{\sc JavaSMT}}: {A} Unified Interface for {SMT} Solvers in {Java}}, booktitle = {Proc.\ VSTTE}, pages = {139--148}, year = {2016}, series = {LNCS~9971}, publisher = {Springer}, doi = {10.1007/978-3-319-48869-1_11}, sha256 = {}, url = {https://github.com/sosy-lab/java-smt/}, pdf = {https://www.sosy-lab.org/research/pub/2016-VSTTE.JavaSMT_A_Unified_Interface_For_SMT_Solvers_in_Java.pdf}, } -
Verification Witnesses.
In J. Knoop and
U. Zdun, editors,
Tagungsband Software Engineering 2016, Fachtagung des GI-Fachbereichs Softwaretechnik
(23.-26. Februar 2016, Wien, Österreich),
LNI 252,
pages 105-106,
2016.
Gesellschaft für Informatik (GI).
Keyword(s):
CPAchecker,
Software Model Checking,
Witness-Based Validation
Publisher's Version
BibTeX Entry
@inproceedings{SE16b-VerificationWitnesses, author = {Dirk Beyer and Matthias Dangl and Daniel Dietsch and Matthias Heizmann and Andreas Stahlbauer}, title = {Verification Witnesses}, booktitle = {Tagungsband Software Engineering 2016, Fachtagung des GI-Fachbereichs Softwaretechnik (23.-26. Februar 2016, Wien, {\"O}sterreich)}, editor = {J.~Knoop and U.~Zdun}, pages = {105-106}, year = {2016}, series = {{LNI}~252}, publisher = {Gesellschaft f{\"{u}}r Informatik ({GI})}, url = {}, keyword = {CPAchecker,Software Model Checking,Witness-Based Validation}, annote = {This is a summary of a <a href="https://www.sosy-lab.org/research/bib/Year/2015.html#FSE15">full article on this topic</a> that appeared in Proc. ESEC/FSE 2015.}, doinone = {DOI not available}, urlpub = {https://dl.gi.de/handle/20.500.12116/746}, }Additional Infos
This is a summary of a full article on this topic that appeared in Proc. ESEC/FSE 2015. -
On Facilitating Reuse in Multi-goal Test-Suite Generation for Software Product Lines.
In J. Knoop and
U. Zdun, editors,
Tagungsband Software Engineering 2016, Fachtagung des GI-Fachbereichs Softwaretechnik
(23.-26. Februar 2016, Wien, Österreich),
LNI 252,
pages 81-82,
2016.
Gesellschaft für Informatik (GI).
Keyword(s):
CPAchecker,
Software Model Checking
Publisher's Version
BibTeX Entry
@inproceedings{SE16a-Test-SPL, author = {Malte Lochau and Johannes B{\"u}rdek and Stefan Bauregger and Andreas Holzer and Alexander von Rhein and Sven Apel and Dirk Beyer}, title = {On Facilitating Reuse in Multi-goal Test-Suite Generation for Software Product Lines}, booktitle = {Tagungsband Software Engineering 2016, Fachtagung des GI-Fachbereichs Softwaretechnik (23.-26. Februar 2016, Wien, {\"O}sterreich)}, editor = {J.~Knoop and U.~Zdun}, pages = {81-82}, year = {2016}, series = {{LNI}~252}, publisher = {Gesellschaft f{\"{u}}r Informatik ({GI})}, url = {}, keyword = {CPAchecker,Software Model Checking}, annote = {This is a summary of a <a href="https://www.sosy-lab.org/research/bib/Year/2015.html#FASE15">full article on this topic</a> that appeared in Proc. FASE 2015.}, doinone = {DOI not available}, urlpub = {https://dl.gi.de/handle/20.500.12116/733}, }Additional Infos
This is a summary of a full article on this topic that appeared in Proc. FASE 2015. -
A relational encoding for a clash-free subset of ASMs.
In Proc. of Alloy, ASM, B, TLA, VDM, and Z (ABZ),
LNCS,
pages 237-243,
2016.
Springer.
PDF
BibTeX Entry
@inproceedings{ernst:abz2016, author = {Gerhard Schellhorn and Gidon Ernst and Jörg Pfähler and Wolfgang Reif}, title = {{A relational encoding for a clash-free subset of ASMs}}, booktitle = {Proc. of Alloy, ASM, B, TLA, VDM, and Z (ABZ)}, volume = {9675}, pages = {237--243}, year = {2016}, series = {LNCS}, publisher = {Springer}, pdf = {https://www.sosy-lab.org/research/pub/2016-ABZ.A_Relational_Encoding_for_a_Clash-Free_Subset_of_ASMs.pdf}, } -
Program Analysis with Local Policy Iteration.
In Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Verification, Model Checking, and Abstract Interpretation (VMCAI 2016, St. Petersburg, FL, USA, January 17-19),
LNCS 9583,
pages 127-146,
2016.
Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg.
doi:10.1007/978-3-662-49122-5_6
Keyword(s):
CPAchecker,
Software Model Checking
Publisher's Version
PDF
Supplement
Abstract
We present local policy iteration (LPI), a new algorithm for deriving numerical invariants that combines the precision of max-policy iteration with the flexibility and scalability of conventional Kleene iterations. It is defined in the Configurable Program Analysis (CPA) framework, thus allowing inter-analysis communication. LPI uses adjustable-block encoding in order to traverse loop-free program sections, possibly containing branching, without introducing extra abstraction. Our technique operates over any template linear constraint domain, including the interval and octagon domains; templates can also be derived from the program source. The implementation is evaluated on a set of benchmarks from the International Competition on Software Verification (SV-COMP). It competes favorably with state-of-the-art analyzers.BibTeX Entry
@inproceedings{LPI, author = {Egor George Karpenkov and David Monniaux and Philipp Wendler}, title = {Program Analysis with Local Policy Iteration}, booktitle = {Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Verification, Model Checking, and Abstract Interpretation (VMCAI~2016, St.~Petersburg, FL, USA, January 17-19)}, pages = {127--146}, year = {2016}, series = {LNCS~9583}, publisher = {Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg}, doi = {10.1007/978-3-662-49122-5_6}, sha256 = {}, url = {http://lpi.metaworld.me}, pdf = {https://arxiv.org/pdf/1509.03424}, abstract = {We present local policy iteration (LPI), a new algorithm for deriving numerical invariants that combines the precision of max-policy iteration with the flexibility and scalability of conventional Kleene iterations. It is defined in the Configurable Program Analysis (CPA) framework, thus allowing inter-analysis communication. LPI uses adjustable-block encoding in order to traverse loop-free program sections, possibly containing branching, without introducing extra abstraction. Our technique operates over any template linear constraint domain, including the interval and octagon domains; templates can also be derived from the program source. The implementation is evaluated on a set of benchmarks from the International Competition on Software Verification (SV-COMP). It competes favorably with state-of-the-art analyzers.}, keyword = {CPAchecker,Software Model Checking}, } -
CPA-BAM: Block-Abstraction Memoization with Value Analysis and Predicate Analysis (Competition Contribution).
In Marsha Chechik and
Jean-François Raskin, editors,
Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on
Tools and Algorithms for the Construction and Analysis of Systems (TACAS 2016, Eindhoven, The Netherlands, April 2-8),
LNCS 9636,
pages 912-915,
2016.
Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg.
doi:10.1007/978-3-662-49674-9_58
Keyword(s):
CPAchecker,
Competition on Software Verification (SV-COMP),
Software Model Checking
Publisher's Version
PDF
Supplement
BibTeX Entry
@inproceedings{CPABAM-COMP16, author = {Karlheinz Friedberger}, title = {{CPA-BAM}: Block-Abstraction Memoization with Value Analysis and Predicate Analysis (Competition Contribution)}, booktitle = {Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on Tools and Algorithms for the Construction and Analysis of Systems (TACAS~2016, Eindhoven, The Netherlands, April 2-8)}, editor = {Marsha Chechik and Jean{-}Fran{\c{c}}ois Raskin}, pages = {912--915}, year = {2016}, series = {LNCS~9636}, publisher = {Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg}, isbn = {978-3-662-49673-2}, doi = {10.1007/978-3-662-49674-9_58}, sha256 = {}, url = {https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-49674-9_58}, keyword = {CPAchecker,Competition on Software Verification (SV-COMP),Software Model Checking}, } -
CPA-RefSel: CPAchecker with Refinement Selection (Competition Contribution).
In Marsha Chechik and
Jean-François Raskin, editors,
Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on
Tools and Algorithms for the Construction and Analysis of Systems (TACAS 2016, Eindhoven, The Netherlands, April 2-8),
LNCS 9636,
pages 916-919,
2016.
Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg.
doi:10.1007/978-3-662-49674-9_59
Keyword(s):
CPAchecker,
Competition on Software Verification (SV-COMP),
Software Model Checking
Publisher's Version
PDF
Supplement
BibTeX Entry
@inproceedings{CPAREFSEL-COMP16, author = {Stefan L{\"{o}}we}, title = {{CPA-RefSel}: {{\sc CPAchecker}} with Refinement Selection (Competition Contribution)}, booktitle = {Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on Tools and Algorithms for the Construction and Analysis of Systems (TACAS~2016, Eindhoven, The Netherlands, April 2-8)}, editor = {Marsha Chechik and Jean{-}Fran{\c{c}}ois Raskin}, pages = {916--919}, year = {2016}, series = {LNCS~9636}, publisher = {Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg}, isbn = {978-3-662-49673-2}, doi = {10.1007/978-3-662-49674-9_59}, sha256 = {}, url = {https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-49674-9_59}, keyword = {CPAchecker,Competition on Software Verification (SV-COMP),Software Model Checking}, annote = {Won category DeviceDriversLinux64 in <span style="white-space: nowrap"><a href="https://sv-comp.sosy-lab.org/2016/">SV-COMP'16</a></span>}, }Additional Infos
Won category DeviceDriversLinux64 in SV-COMP'16
Theses and projects (PhD, MSc, BSc, Project)
-
A Verified POSIX-Compliant Flash File System-Modular Verification Technology & Crash Tolerance.
PhD Thesis, Augsburg University,
2016.
PDF
Supplement
BibTeX Entry
@misc{ernst:phd2016, author = {Gidon Ernst}, title = {A Verified {POSIX}-Compliant Flash File System---Modular Verification Technology \& Crash Tolerance}, year = {2016}, url = {https://isse.de/flashix}, pdf = {https://opus.bibliothek.uni-augsburg.de/opus4/files/3887/thesis_ernst.pdf}, howpublished = {PhD Thesis, Augsburg University}, } -
Augmenting Predicate Analysis with Auxiliary Invariants.
Master's Thesis, University of Passau, Software Systems Lab,
2016.
Keyword(s):
CPAchecker,
Software Model Checking
PDF
Supplement
BibTeX Entry
@misc{ThomasInvariants, author = {Thomas Stieglmaier}, title = {Augmenting Predicate Analysis with Auxiliary Invariants}, year = {2016}, url = {https://www.sosy-lab.org/research/msc/stieglmaier}, pdf = {https://www.sosy-lab.org/research/msc/2016.Stieglmaier.Augmenting_Predicate_Analysis_with_Auxiliary_Invariants.pdf}, keyword = {CPAchecker,Software Model Checking}, howpublished = {Master's Thesis, University of Passau, Software Systems Lab}, } -
Implementing a Termination Analysis using Configurable Software Analysis.
Master's Thesis, University of Passau, Software Systems Lab,
2016.
Keyword(s):
CPAchecker,
Software Model Checking
PDF
BibTeX Entry
@misc{SebastianTermination, author = {Sebastian Ott}, title = {Implementing a Termination Analysis using Configurable Software Analysis}, year = {2016}, pdf = {https://www.sosy-lab.org/research/msc/2016.Ott.Implementing_a_Termination_Analysis_using_Configurable_Program_Analysis.pdf}, keyword = {CPAchecker,Software Model Checking}, howpublished = {Master's Thesis, University of Passau, Software Systems Lab}, } -
Configurable Pointer-Alias Analysis in CPAchecker.
Bachelor's Thesis, University of Passau, Software Systems Lab,
2016.
Keyword(s):
CPAchecker,
Software Model Checking
PDF
BibTeX Entry
@misc{WeinzierlPointerAliasing, author = {Stefan Weinzierl}, title = {Configurable Pointer-Alias Analysis in {{\sc CPAchecker}}}, year = {2016}, pdf = {https://www.sosy-lab.org/research/bsc/2016.Weinzierl.Configurable_Pointer-Alias_Analysis_for_CPAchecker.pdf}, keyword = {CPAchecker,Software Model Checking}, field = {Computer Science}, howpublished = {Bachelor's Thesis, University of Passau, Software Systems Lab}, } -
Verification of Concurrent Programs by CFA Sequentialization.
Bachelor's Thesis, University of Passau, Software Systems Lab,
2016.
Keyword(s):
CPAchecker,
Software Model Checking
BibTeX Entry
@misc{SyriConcurrency, author = {Maximilian Syri}, title = {Verification of Concurrent Programs by {CFA} Sequentialization}, year = {2016}, keyword = {CPAchecker,Software Model Checking}, field = {Computer Science}, howpublished = {Bachelor's Thesis, University of Passau, Software Systems Lab}, } -
Unbounded Heap Support for CPAchecker's Predicate Analysis Using SMT Arrays.
Bachelor's Thesis, University of Passau, Software Systems Lab,
2016.
Keyword(s):
CPAchecker,
Software Model Checking
Supplement
BibTeX Entry
@misc{LukasczykPredicateHeap, author = {Stephan Lukasczyk}, title = {Unbounded Heap Support for {{\sc CPAchecker}}'s Predicate Analysis Using {SMT} Arrays}, year = {2016}, url = {https://research.lukasczyk.me/heaparray/}, keyword = {CPAchecker,Software Model Checking}, field = {Computer Science}, howpublished = {Bachelor's Thesis, University of Passau, Software Systems Lab}, } -
Towards Understandable CPAchecker Counterexamples.
Bachelor's Thesis, University of Passau, Software Systems Lab,
2016.
Keyword(s):
CPAchecker,
Software Model Checking
PDF
BibTeX Entry
@misc{MurrCounterexampleReport, author = {Magdalena Murr}, title = {Towards Understandable {{\sc CPAchecker}} Counterexamples}, year = {2016}, pdf = {https://www.sosy-lab.org/research/bsc/2016.Murr.Towards_Understandable_CPAchecker_Counterexamples.pdf}, keyword = {CPAchecker,Software Model Checking}, howpublished = {Bachelor's Thesis, University of Passau, Software Systems Lab}, subject = {Mobile and Embedded Systems}, }
Disclaimer:
This material is presented to ensure timely dissemination of scholarly and technical work. Copyright and all rights therein are retained by authors or by other copyright holders. All person copying this information are expected to adhere to the terms and constraints invoked by each author's copyright. In most cases, these works may not be reposted without the explicit permission of the copyright holder.