L. Robinson and K.N. Levitt. Proof techniques for hierarchically structured programs. Communications of the ACM, 20(4):271--283, April 1977. Home/Search Document Not in Database Summary Related Articles Check |
This paper is cited in the following contexts:
Design Choices in Specification Languages and Verification Systems - Rushby (1991) (2 citations) (Correct)
....has been involved in formal speci cation and mechanically assisted formal veri cation almost since the very beginnings of those elds. The 1970 s saw the development of the Jovial Veri cation System [11] the Hierarchical Development Methodology (HDM) and its speci cation language Special [20, 21, 32], and Shostak s decision procedures for arithmetic [28 30] In addition, Boyer and Moore were at SRI through most of the 1970 s and much of the early version of their prover [5] was developed here. 1 During the 1980 s our activity in formal veri cation was centered around Ehdm [25] 1 ....
Lawrence Robinson and Karl N. Levitt. Proof techniques for hierarchically structured programs. Communications of the ACM, 20(4):271-283, April 1976.
Toward Dependable Safety-Critical Software - Farokh Bastani (1996) (Correct)
....one can have more confidence in the correctness of their specification so that verification is more acceptable. However, this approach requires the verification of complete program paths which is difficult to perform in practice. Other proof techniques, such as hierarchical proof methods [23] and proof of general properties (such as showing the absence of deadlocks, absence of violation of mutual exclusion, satisfaction of real time constraints , etc. do not reduce the amount of testing that is needed to attain a certain level of confidence in the reliability of the program This is ....
Robinson, L., Levitt, K.N., "Proof techniques for hierarchically structured programs," Comm. of the ACM, Vol. 20, No. 4, April 1977, pp. 271-283.
Kit: A Study in Operating System Verification - Bevier (1989) (23 citations) (Correct)
....place of Kit in this stack [Bevier, et al. 89] There are many formal specification languages other than the Boyer Moore logic some of which are supported by mechanical tools. A list of approaches to specification and verification must include Affirm [Gerhart 80] Gypsy [Good, et al. 78] HDM [Robinson Levitt 77] HOL [HOL 87] VDM [Jones 86] and Z [Spivey 88] The purpose of the Kit project was to specify an operating system kernel with a particular process isolation property, and mechanically check the proof of a correct implementation of that specification at the machine code level. We chose the ....
L. Robinson and K. Levitt. Proof Techniques for Hierarchically Structured Programs. Comm. ACM 20(4), April, 1977.
A Tutorial on Using PVS for Hardware Verification - Owre, Rushby, Shankar, Srivas (1995) (10 citations) (Correct)
....for us than for the original developers) PVS is the most recent in a line of specification languages, theorem provers, and verification systems developed at SRI, dating back over 20 years. That line includes the Jovial Verification System [13] the Hierarchical Development Methodology (HDM) [25, 26], STP [30] and EHDM [22, 27] We call PVS a Prototype Verification System, because it was built partly as a lightweight prototype to explore next generation technology for EHDM, our main, heavyweight, verification system. Another goal for PVS was that it should be freely available, require no ....
Lawrence Robinson and Karl N. Levitt. Proof techniques for hierarchically structured programs. Communications of the ACM, 20(4):271--283, April 1976.
Impact of Program Transformation on Software Reliability.. - Farokh Bastani (1996) (Correct)
....can have more confidence in the correctness of their specification so that verification is more acceptable. However, this partitioning approach requires the verification of complete program paths which is difficult to perform in practice. Other proof techniques, such as hierarchical proof methods [26] and proofs of general properties (such as showing the absence of deadlock, absence of violation of mutual exclusion, satisfaction of real time constraints, etc. do not reduce the amount of testing needed to attain a certain level of confidence in the reliability of the program This is an ....
Robinson, L., Levitt, K.N., "Proof techniques for hierarchically structured programs," Comm. of the ACM, Vol. 20, No. 4, April 1977, pp. 271-283.
A Mechanically Verified Language Implementation - Strother Moore (1989) (26 citations) (Correct)
....and a new programming language on top of a much lower level machine. Much has been written about this classic problem but the previous attempts to deal with it formally and mechanically have been incomplete. We have in mind specifically the work related to the SRI Hierarchical Design Methodology [16] and its use in the Provably Secure Operating System (PSOS) 14] and the Software Implemented Fault Tolerant (SIFT) operating system [11, 18] While virtually all of the issues are correctly intuited, we personally find great joy in seeing their formalization and mechanization. Piton was ....
L. Robinson and K. Levitt. "Proof Techniques for Hierarchically Structured Programs". Comm. ACM 20, 4 (April 1977).
A Transformational Approach for Measuring Software Reliability - Bastani, Cukic (1995) (Correct)
....one can have more confidence in the correctness of their specification so that verification is more acceptable. However, this approach requires the verification of complete program paths which is difficult to perform in practice. Other proof techniques, such as hierarchical proof methods [30] and proof of general properties (such as showing the absence of deadlock, absence of violation of mutual exclusion, satisfaction of real time constraints, etc. do not reduce the amount of testing that is needed to attain a certain level of confidence in the reliability of the program This is ....
Robinson, L., Levitt, K.N., "Proof techniques for hierarchically structured programs," Comm. of the ACM, Vol. 20, No. 4, April 1977, pp. 271-283.
PVS Bibliography - Rushby (1998) (2 citations) (Correct)
....verification systems developed at SRI that goes back over 20 years. Early systems included the Jovial Verification System [1] Jovial was a language based on Algol 58, a precursor to the more famous Algol 60, that was used by the US Air Force) and the Hierarchical Development Methodology (HDM) [2 4]. HDM had a security analyzer [5] based on information flow [6] that was used in the verification of the Honeywell SCOMP [7,8] the first computer to gain the NSA s A1 [9] rating) and several other secure systems [10,11] The HDM security flow analyzer used the Boyer Moore theorem prover, much ....
Lawrence Robinson and Karl N. Levitt. Proof techniques for hierarchically structured programs. Communications of the ACM, 20(4):271--283, April 1976.
Achieving Principled Assuredly Trustworthy - Composable Systems And (Correct)
No context found.
L. Robinson and K.N. Levitt. Proof techniques for hierarchically structured programs. Communications of the ACM, 20(4):271--283, April 1977.
PSOS Revisited - Neumann, Feiertag (2003) (1 citation) (Correct)
No context found.
L. Robinson and K.N. Levitt. Proof techniques for hierarchically structured programs. Communications of the ACM, 20(4):271--283, April 1977.
Formal Methods and the Certification of Critical Systems - Rushby (1993) (50 citations) (Correct)
No context found.
Lawrence Robinson and Karl N. Levitt. Proof techniques for hierarchically structured programs. Communications of the ACM, 20(4):271-- 283, April 1976.
Principled Assuredly Trustworthy Composable Architectures - Neumann (2004) (2 citations) (Correct)
No context found.
L. Robinson and K.N. Levitt. Proof techniques for hierarchically structured programs. Communications of the ACM, 20(4):271-283, April 1977.
The foundations of a provably secure operating system (PSOS) - Richard Feiertag Peter (1979) (1 citation) (Correct)
No context found.
Robinson, L., and K. N. Levitt, "Proof Techniques for Hierarchically Structured Programs," Communications of the ACM, Vol. 20 No. 4, April 1977.
Online articles have much greater impact More about CiteSeer.IST Add search form to your site Submit documents Feedback
CiteSeer.IST - Copyright Penn State and NEC