Citations: Logic in Computer Science: Modelling and Reasoning about Systems

36 citations found. Retrieving documents...

M. Huth and M. Ryan. Logic in Computer Science: Modelling and Reasoning about Systems. Cambridge UP, 2000.

Home/Search Document Details and Download Summary Related Articles Check

This paper is cited in the following contexts:

Evolving an OS Kernel using Temporal Logic and.. - Åberg, Lawall.. (2003) (1 citation) (Correct)

....driver body. We thus argue for a flow sensitive method to express crosscuts. 3 Describing Crosscuts using Temporal Logic Temporal logic is a logic that is commonly used to express properties of sequences of events. This logic is often used to define properties verifiable using model checking [8], and has been found to be useful for de scribing paths in control flow graphs in order to guide compiler optimizations [10] Following the latter work, we implement an aspect for Bossa integration as a collection of rewrite rules that use temporal logic to describe conditions under which Bossa ....

M. Huth and M. Ryan. Logic in Computer Science: Modelling and reasoning about systems. Cambridge University Press, 2000.

A Stratified Semantics of General References Embeddable in.. - Ahmed, Appel, Virga (2002) (5 citations) (Correct)

....of all types at levels 0 through i for this we use rep(i) By stratifying types we have eliminated the circularity. 5 Possible worlds The semantics we are presenting is a possible worlds semantics. Possible worlds models (or Kripke models )are specified by defining (see Huth and Ryan [13]) AsetW , whose elements are called worlds. In our model, a world corresponds to a state so we have, W = allocset memory . A relation R W W called the accessibility relation. In our model, this corresponds to the extend state relation on states (a, m) and (a # ,m # ) which ....

M. R. A. Huth and M. D. Ryan. Logic in Computer Science: Modelling and reasoning about systems. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England, 2000.

Semantic Correctness of Transactions and Workflows - Lu (2002) (Correct)

....ordered domains, in this chapter, we assume each variable has an integer domain and only the above ve comparisons are considered. An atomic formula is a predicate or a condition. To describe the expected outcome of a work ow, we use the well formed formulas of rst order logic de ned as follows [40]: De nition 4.3.1 (Well formed formula (w ) A well formed formula (w ) is de ned recursively as follows: 1. An atomic formula is a w . 2. If and are w s, then : and are w s. 3. If is a w , and x is a variable, then 8 x and 9 x are w s. 4. w s are generated only by a ....

....4.6.7 Putting it together In this chapter, in addition to the skip work ow and single task work ows, we have de ned six work ow constructs that allow us to build work ows from existing subwork ows. These constructs are inspired by conventional programming constructs [57] and the rst order logic [40]. We have found that these constructs are sucient to describe work ows in the negotiation trading area. While other constructs are possible, we limit ourselves to addressing the question of how this particular set can be used in analyzing and synthesizing work ows. Our hope is that the techniques ....

M. R. A. Huth and M. D. Ryan, editors. Logic in Computer Science: Modelling and reasoning about systems. Cambridge University Press, 2000.

Sequential and Distributed Model Checking of Petri Net.. - Bell, Haverkort (2002) (Correct)

....fast and e#cient way. Furthermore, our distributed algorithms scale very well, as they show e#ciencies in the range of 80 to 100 . 1 Introduction Over the last decade, model checking has established itself as a very powerful technique to verify automatically formally specified system properties [14,9,13]. In this paper we focus on the use of computational tree logic (CTL) 8] to formally specify system properties; furthermore, we assume that the system of interest is described as a Petri net. The latter choice is not fundamental to our approach, although it does have its impact on the way we ....

Huth, M. R. A. and M. D. Ryan, "Logic in Computer Science: Modelling and Reasoning About Systems," Cambridge University Press, 2000.

Correctness of Classical Compiler Optimizations using CTL - Frederiksen (2002) (Correct)

....complicated by the gap between the semantics of the language and the properties needed to be proven; semantic frameworks such as denotational semantics do not lend themselves easily to reasoning about data dependencies over computational futures and pasts. To this end, the use of temporal logics [2,3] has proven to be useful for reasoning about such data dependencies. In particular by using temporal logics to support proofs of universal correctness of program transformations used in optimizing compilers, the proofs have become more tractable and have 1 Based on joint work with David Lacey, ....

Huth, M.R.A, and M.D. Ryan, \Logic in Computer Science: Modelling and reasoning about systems", Cambridge University Press, 1999.

Logical for Social Software - Pauly (2001) (Correct)

....out to be too complicated to make automatic verification feasible, since such a verification entails theorem proving in a very complex logical formalism. Because of these drawbacks, another approach to software verification has been investigated more recently which makes use of temporal logics [43, 70]. Here, programs are not part of the logical language but rather the semantic models over which expressions of temporal logic are evaluated. More specifically, process algebras [8, 49] and other tools can be used to describe and generate a process graph which serves as the semantic model of the ....

....their uses is analogous to the di#erence between PDL and temporal logic (TL) as summarized by the following equation: GL PDL As logics for reasoning about software, temporal logics such as CTL, CTL # , etc. di#er in a number of ways from program logics such as PDL and its extensions (see e.g. [70] for a more detailed comparison) In the terminology of [77] PDL is an exogenous logic since programs are an explicit part of the logical language. In contrast, temporal logic is endogenous: The model itself is the fixed program over which expressions are interpreted. The di#erence between ....

M. Huth and M. Ryan. Logic in Computer Science: Modelling and Reasoning about Systems. Cambridge University Press, 2000.

Checking Object Systems Via Multiple Observers - Ehrich, Pinger (2000) (Correct)

....stays forever in the critical region: if, say, P i leaves it, P i 1 mod n has the chance to enter. This way, each process will enter the critical region some time after it expressed its desire to do so by entering its try state. We note in passing that also other correctness criteria (cf. HR00] are satisfied by our solution: non blocking (a process can always request to enter the critical region) and no strict sequencing (processes need not enter the critical region in strict sequence) It remains to prove that communication indeed works correctly. What must be shown is the ....

....H i 1 E[H i 1 U H i 1 ] A F H i 1 EX H i 1 CC i 1 CC i 1 : D j 1 . j # I, j #= i) H i 1 is the home logic of observer i # I . It consists of CTL, presented by a minimal adequate set from which the other CTL formulae can be derived (cf. HR00] and enriched by communication subformulae CC i 1 which are home logic formulae of some other observer. Communication subformulae may be nested to any depth. A given D 1 formula i. j. with a communication subformula j. # D j 1 , j #= i, means that i communicates or ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Michael R. A. Huth and Mark D. Ryan. Logic in Computer Science - Modelling and reasoning about systems. Cambridge University Press, 2000.

Model Checking Probabilistic Systems - Notes to accompany.. - Kwiatkowska (2000) (Correct)

....particularly for the veri cation of hardware designs. This has largely been made feasible through symbolic model checking, an ecient method based on representing sets of states as Binary Decision Diagrams (BDDs) 14] and implemented in smv [40] For more information on symbolic model checking see [17, 15, 33]. Alternative techniques for improving the eciency of model checking and the corresponding tools also exist (to mention SPIN and FDR) There have also been encouraging developments in model checking of real time and hybrid systems [10, 13] One area that is lagging behind as far as experimental ....

M. R. Huth and M. D. Ryan. Logic in Computer Science: Modelling and Reasoning about Systems. Cambridge University Press, 2000.

Model Checking of Probabilistic Systems Against Temporal Logic.. - Kwiatkowska (1999) (Correct)

....for the verification of hardware designs. This has largely been made feasible through symbolic model checking, an efficient method based on representing sets of states as Binary Decision Diagrams (BDDs) 13] and implemented in smv [28] For more information on symbolic model checking see [16, 14, 25]. Alternative techniques for improving efficiency of model checking and the corresponding tools also exist (to mention SPIN and fdr2) There have also been encouraging developments in model checking of real time and hybrid systems [9, 12] One area that is lagging behind as far as experimental ....

M. Huth and M. Ryan. Logic in Computer Science: Modelling and Reasoning about Systems. Cambridge University Press, 1999. To appear.

Slicing Software for Model Construction - Hatcliff, Dwyer, Zheng (1999) (4 citations) (Correct)

....temporal operator 2 requires that its argument be true from the current state onward, the 3 operator requires that its argument become true at some point in the future, and the U operator requires that its first argument is true up to the point where the second argument becomes true. 3 Formally [33], let Pi = s 1 ; s k . Then, Pi j= n] iff [ n] s 1 = true Pi j= x rop c] iff [ x rop c] s 1 = true Pi j= iff Pi 6j= Pi j= 1 2 iff Pi j= 1 and Pi j= 2 Pi j= 1 2 iff Pi j= 1 or Pi j= 2 Pi j= 1 ) 2 iff Pi j= 1 implies Pi j= 2 Pi j= 2 ....

M. Huth and M. Ryan. Logic in Computer Science: Modelling and Reasoning about Systems. Cambridge University Press, 1999. To appear.

Slicing Software for Model Construction - Dwyer, Hatcliff (1999) (17 citations) (Correct)

....The temporal operator 2 requires that its argument be true from the current state onward, the 3 operator requires that its argument become true at some point in the future, and the U operator requires that its first argument is true up to the point where the second argument becomes true. Formally [24], let = s1 ; sk . Then, j= l:i] iff [ l:i] s 1 = true j= x rop c] iff [ x rop c] s 1 = true j= 1 2 iff j= 1 and j= 2 j= 1 2 iff j= 1 or j= 2 j= 1 ) 2 iff j= 1 implies j= 2 j= 2 iff i j= for all i j= 3 iff i j= for some i j= ....

M. Huth and M. Ryan. Logic in Computer Science: Modelling and Reasoning about Systems. Cambridge University Press, 1999. To appear.

Symbolic Hierarchical Interface-based Supervisory Control - Symbolic Synthesis And Self-citation (Ryan) (Correct)

No context found.

M. Huth and M. Ryan. Logic in Computer Science: Modelling and Reasoning about Systems. Cambridge University Press, Nov. 1999.

Implementation of Symbolic Model Checking for Probabilistic.. - Parker (1999) (5 citations) Self-citation (Ryan) (Correct)

No context found.

M. Huth and M. Ryan. Logic in Computer Science: Modelling and Reasoning About Systems. Cambridge University Press, 1999. To appear.

Semantically Guided Proof Planning - Choi Self-citation (Ryan) (Correct)

....we briefly review Logic, which automated reasoning is based on. First order logic is the domain of most of traditional machine oriented theorem provers. Mathematical induction is the first application for proof planning. The fundamentals of logic are well described in many textbooks including [HR00] BA93] CL73] Fit96] Lu98] and [Kow79] which I have partly read. 2.1 Propositional Logic Propositional logic (or propositional calculus) is the simplest form of symbolic logic. We summarise the basic aspects of syntax and semantics of the propositional logic. 2.1.1 Syntax Propositional ....

Michael R. A. Huth and Mark D. Ryan. Logic in Computer Science: Modelling and reasoning about systems. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2000.

Implementation of belief change operators using BDDs - Gorogiannis, Ryan (2001) (1 citation) Self-citation (Ryan) (Correct)

....tree or partly reduced BDD into its fully reduced form. Once reduced, BDDs are canonical : that means that there is a unique reduced BDD for a given formula with respect to a xed variable ordering. More detailed information about BDDs and their algorithms can be found in [1, 6] or the book [12]. 2.2. Algorithms on Binary Decision Diagrams After converting a formula to a BDD, that BDD can be manipulated using several algorithms that implement logical operations. Some of these algorithms are presented below along with their complexity characteristics. Note that most of the algorithms ....

Huth, M. R. and M. D. Ryan: 2000, Logic in Computer Science: Modelling and Reasoning about Systems. Cambridge University Press.

Feature Integration Using a Feature Construct - Plath, Ryan (1999) (1 citation) Self-citation (Ryan) (Correct)

.... some Future state , all future states (Globally) and Until respectively. Notice that U is binary. The pair of operators in E[OE 1 UOE 2 ] for example, is EU. Further details of CTL are widely available in the papers by E. Clarke and others [6,19] and also in the forthcoming introductory text [14]. Two useful derived connectives are AW and EW , which use the weak until connective W, which is similar to U, but OE 1 WOE 2 does not require that OE 2 eventually becomes true if OE 1 is indefinitely true. One defines A[OE 1 WOE 2 ] as :E[ OE 2 U: OE 1 OE 2 ) and E[OE 1 WOE 2 ] as E[OE 1 ....

M. R. Huth and M. D. Ryan. Logic in Computer Science: Modelling and Reasoning about Systems. Cambridge University Press, 1999.

Logic in Computer Science: tool-based modeling and reasoning about .. - Huth Self-citation (Huth) (Correct)

....desired postconditions, based on a simple heuristics for finding and validating useful invariants for whilestatements. The tool SMV exposes them to a domain specific programming language for describing finite state systems. The natural deduction system for propositional logic, as presented in [16], encourages students to think of conditional judgments and the stating and discharging of temporary assumptions as a statically scoped language with local declarations, whether they know such terminology, or not. Although freshmen and sophomores may only have an intuitive understanding of type ....

....courses as a powerful means of testing and verifying (concurrent) programs. III. WHY TOOLS ARE NEEDED A. The hype The applied component of our course introduces, at an accessible level, the model checking framework SMV that finally has made its way from research papers to a suitable textbook [16]; see also [7] for a more comprehensive and ambitious graduate textbook on the model checking methodology. Reasoning about the security and reliability of reactive systems represents a major technological challenge that can no longer be adequately met by ordinary scenario driven testing ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

M. Huth and M. Ryan. Logic in Computer Science: Modelling and reasoning about systems. Cambridge University Press, January 2000. URL: http://www.cis.ksu.edu/~huth/lics/.

CDM: Teaching Discrete Mathematics - To Computer Science (Correct)

No context found.

M. Huth and M. Ryan. Logic in Computer Science: Modelling and Reasoning about Systems. Cambridge UP, 2000.

Formal Verification of Time-Triggered Systems - Pike (2006) (Correct)

No context found.

Michael R. Huth and Mark D. Ryan. Logic in Computer Science: Modelling and Reasoning about Systems. Cambridge University Press, 2000.

Verification of Multiagent Systems via Ordered Binary.. - Raimondi, Lomuscio (2004) (Correct)