arXiv subjects

Gianfranco Rossi

Publications and source records attributed to Gianfranco Rossi.

17 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

Encoding and Reasoning about Arrays in Constraint Logic Programming with Sets

We encode arrays as functions which, in turn, are encoded as sets of ordered pairs. The set cardinality of each of these functions coincides with the length of the array it is representing. Then we define a fragment of set theory that is used to give the specifications of a non-trivial class of programs with arrays. In this way, array reasoning becomes set reasoning. Furthermore, a decision procedure for this fragment is also provided and implemented as part of the {log} (read 'setlog') tool. {log} is a constraint logic programming language and satisfiability solver where sets and binary relations are first-class citizens. The tool already implements a few decision procedures for different fragments of set theory. In this way, arrays are seamlessly integrated into {log} thus allowing users to reason about sets, functions and arrays all in the same language and with the same solver. The decision procedure presented in this paper is an extension of decision procedures defined in earlier works not supporting arrays.

cs.LO↗

arXiv2026

A Decision Procedure for a Theory of Finite Sets with Finite Integer Intervals

In this paper we extend a decision procedure for the Boolean algebra of finite sets with cardinality constraints ($\mathcal{L}_{\lvert\cdot\rvert}$) to a decision procedure for $\mathcal{L}_{\lvert\cdot\rvert}$ extended with set terms denoting finite integer intervals ($\mathcal{L}_{[\,]}$). In $\mathcal{L}_{[\,]}$ interval limits can be integer linear terms including \emph{unbounded variables}. These intervals are a useful extension because they allow to express non-trivial set operators such as the minimum and maximum of a set, still in a quantifier-free logic. Hence, by providing a decision procedure for $\mathcal{L}_{[\,]}$ it is possible to automatically reason about a new class of quantifier-free formulas. The decision procedure is implemented as part of the $\{log\}$ tool. The paper includes a case study based on the elevator algorithm showing that $\{log\}$ can automatically discharge all its invariance lemmas some of which involve intervals.

cs.LO↗

arXiv2026

{log}: From a Constraint Logic Programming Language to a Formal Verification Tool

{log} (read 'setlog') was born as a Constraint Logic Programming (CLP) language where sets and binary relations are first-class citizens, thus fostering set programming. Internally, {log} is a constraint satisfiability solver implementing decision procedures for several fragments of set theory. Hence, {log} can be used as a declarative, set, logic programming language and as an automated theorem prover for set theory. Over time {log} has been extended with some components integrated to the satisfiability solver thus providing a formal verification environment. In this paper we make a comprehensive presentation of this environment which includes a language for the description of state machines based on set theory, an interactive environment for the execution of functional scenarios over state machines, a generator of verification conditions for state machines, automated verification of state machines, and test case generation. State machines are both, programs and specifications; exactly the same code works as a program and as its specification. In this way, with a few additions, a CLP language turned into a seamlessly integrated programming and automated proof system.

cs.LO↗

arXiv2024

Combining Type Checking and Set Constraint Solving to Improve Automated Software Verification

In this paper we show how prescritive type checking and constraint solving can be combined to increase automation during software verification. We do so by defining a type system and implementing a typechecker for {log} (read `setlog'), a Constraint Logic Programming (CLP) language and satisfiability solver based on set theory. Hence, we proceed as follows: a) a type system for {log} is defined; b) the constraint solver is proved to be safe w.r.t. the type system; c) the implementation of a concrete typechecker is presented; d) the integration of type checking and set constraint solving to increase automation during software verification is discussed; and f) two industrial-strength case studies are presented where this combination is used with very good results. Under consideration in Theory and Practice of Logic Programming (TPLP)

cs.LO↗

arXiv2022

A Set-Theoretic Decision Procedure for Quantifier-Free, Decidable Languages Extended with Restricted Quantifiers

Let $\mathcal{L}_{\mathcal{X}}$ be the language of first-order, decidable theory $\mathcal{X}$. Consider the language, $\mathcal{L}_{\mathcal{RQ}}(\mathcal{X})$, that extends $\mathcal{L}_{\mathcal{X}}$ with formulas of the form $\forall x \in A: ϕ$ (restricted universal quantifier, RUQ) and $\exists x \in A: ϕ$ (restricted existential quantifier, REQ), where $A$ is a finite set and $ϕ$ is a formula made of $\mathcal{X}$-formulas, RUQ and REQ. That is, $\mathcal{L}_{\mathcal{RQ}}(\mathcal{X})$ admits nested restricted quantifiers. In this paper we present a decision procedure for $\mathcal{L}_{\mathcal{RQ}}(\mathcal{X})$ based on the decision procedure already defined for the Boolean algebra of finite sets extended with restricted intensional sets ($\mathcal{L}_\mathcal{RIS}$). The implementation of the decision procedure as part of the $\{log\}$ (`setlog') tool is also introduced. The usefulness of the approach is shown through a number of examples drawn from several real-world case studies.

cs.LO↗

arXiv2021

An Automatically Verified Prototype of a Landing Gear System

In this paper we show how $\{log\}$ (read `setlog'), a Constraint Logic Programming (CLP) language based on set theory, can be used as an automated verifier for B specifications. In particular we encode in $\{log\}$ an Event-B specification, developed by Mammar and Laleau, of the case study known as the Landing Gear System (LGS). Next we use $\{log\}$ to discharge all the proof obligations proposed in the Event-B specification by the Rodin platform. In this way, the $\{log\}$ program can be regarded as an automatically verified prototype of the LGS. We believe this case study provides empirical evidence on how CLP and set theory can be used in tandem as a vehicle for program verification.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2021

Integrating Cardinality Constraints into Constraint Logic Programming with Sets

Formal reasoning about finite sets and cardinality is an important tool for many applications, including software verification, where very often one needs to reason about the size of a given data structure and not only about what its elements are. The Constraint Logic Programming tool {log} provides a decision procedure for deciding the satisfiability of formulas involving very general forms of finite sets, without cardinality. In this paper we adapt and integrate a decision procedure for a theory of finite sets with cardinality into {log}. The proposed solver is proved to be a decision procedure for its formulas. Besides, the new CLP instance is implemented as part of the {log} tool. In turn, the implementation uses Howe and King's Prolog SAT solver and Prolog's CLP(Q) library, as an integer linear programming solver. The empirical evaluation of this implementation based on +250 real verification conditions shows that it can be useful in practice.

cs.LO↗

arXiv2021

$\{log\}$: Set Formulas as Programs

$\{log\}$ is a programming language at the intersection of Constraint Logic Programming, set programming and declarative programming. But $\{log\}$ is also a satisfiability solver for a theory of finite sets and finite binary relations. With $\{log\}$ programmers can write abstract programs using all the power of set theory and binary relations. These programs are not very efficient but they are very close to specifications. Then, their correctness is more evident. Furthermore, $\{log\}$ programs are also set formulas. Hence, programmers can use $\{log\}$ again to automatically prove their programs verify non trivial properties. In this paper we show this development methodology by means of several examples.

cs.LO↗

arXiv2021

$\{log\}$: Applications to Software Specification, Prototyping and Verification

This document shows how Z specifications can be translated into $\{log\}$ and, later, on how $\{log\}$ can be used to run simulations and automated proofs. This can help users of other specification languages such as B and VDM to use $\{log\}$ along the same lines. The presentation is rather informal and user-oriented. More technical and formal presentations can be found in the papers published by the authors. We also assume the reader has at least a basic knowledge of the Z notation.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2021

Proof Automation in the Theory of Finite Sets and Finite Set Relation Algebra

{log} ('setlog') is a satisfiability solver for formulas of the theory of finite sets and finite set relation algebra (FSTRA). As such, it can be used as an automated theorem prover (ATP) for this theory. {log} is able to automatically prove a number of FSTRA theorems, but not all of them. Nevertheless, we have observed that many theorems that {log} cannot automatically prove can be divided into a few subgoals automatically dischargeable by {log}. The purpose of this work is to present a prototype interactive theorem prover (ITP), called {log}-ITP, providing evidence that a proper integration of {log} into world-class ITP's can deliver a great deal of proof automation concerning FSTRA. An empirical evaluation based on 210 theorems from the TPTP and Coq's SSReflect libraries shows a noticeable reduction in the size and complexity of the proofs with respect to Coq.

cs.LO↗

arXiv2020

An Automatically Verified Prototype of the Tokeneer ID Station Specification

The Tokeneer project was an initiative set forth by the National Security Agency (NSA, USA) to be used as a demonstration that developing highly secure systems can be made by applying rigorous methods in a cost effective manner. Altran Praxis (UK) was selected by NSA to carry out the development of the Tokeneer ID Station. The company wrote a Z specification later implemented in the SPARK Ada programming language, which was verified using the SPARK Examiner toolset. In this paper, we show that the Z specification can be easily and naturally encoded in the {log} set constraint language, thus generating a functional prototype. Furthermore, we show that {log}'s automated proving capabilities can discharge all the proof obligations concerning state invariants as well as important security properties. As a consequence, the prototype can be regarded as correct with respect to the verified properties. This provides empirical evidence that Z users can use {log} to generate correct prototypes from their Z specifications. In turn, these prototypes enable or simplify some verificatio activities discussed in the paper.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2020

Declarative Programming with Intensional Sets in Java Using JSetL

Intensional sets are sets given by a property rather than by enumerating their elements. In previous work, we have proposed a decision procedure for a first-order logic language which provides Restricted Intensional Sets (RIS), i.e., a sub-class of intensional sets that are guaranteed to denote finite---though unbounded---sets. In this paper we show how RIS can be exploited as a convenient programming tool also in a conventional setting, namely, the imperative O-O language Java. We do this by considering a Java library, called JSetL, that integrates the notions of logical variable, (set) unification and constraints that are typical of constraint logic programming languages into the Java language. We show how JSetL is naturally extended to accommodate for RIS and RIS constraints, and how this extension can be exploited, on the one hand, to support a more declarative style of programming and, on the other hand, to effectively enhance the expressive power of the constraint language provided by the library.

cs.PL↗

arXiv2020

Automated Proof of Bell-LaPadula Security Properties

Almost fifty years ago, D.E. Bell and L. LaPadula published the first formal model of a secure system, known today as the Bell-LaPadula (BLP) model. BLP is described as a state machine by means of first-order logic and set theory. The authors also formalize two state invariants known as security condition and *-property. Bell and LaPadula prove that all the state transitions preserve these invariants. In this paper we present a fully automated proof of the security condition and the *-property for all the model operations. The model and the proofs are coded in the {log} tool. As far as we know this is the first time such proofs are automated. Besides, we show that the {log} model is also an executable prototype. Therefore we are providing an automatically verified executable prototype of BLP.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2019

Automated Reasoning with Restricted Intensional Sets

Intensional sets, i.e., sets given by a property rather than by enumerating elements, are widely recognized as a key feature to describe complex problems (see, e.g., specification languages such as B and Z). Notwithstanding, very few tools exist supporting high-level automated reasoning on general formulas involving intensional sets. In this paper we present a decision procedure for a first-order logic language offering both extensional and (a restricted form of) intensional sets (RIS). RIS are introduced as first-class citizens of the language and set-theoretical operators on RIS are dealt with as constraints. Syntactic restrictions on RIS guarantee that the denoted sets are finite, though unbounded. The language of RIS, called L_RIS , is parametric with respect to any first-order theory X providing at least equality and a decision procedure for X-formulas. In particular, we consider the instance of L_RIS when X is the theory of hereditarily finite sets and binary relations. We also present a working implementation of this instance as part of the {log} tool and we show through a number of examples and two case studies that, although RIS are a subclass of general intensional sets, they are still sufficiently expressive as to encode and solve many interesting problems. Finally, an extensive empirical evaluation provides evidence that the tool can be used in practice.

cs.LO↗

arXiv2015

Adding Partial Functions to Constraint Logic Programming with Sets

Partial functions are common abstractions in formal specification notations such as Z, B and Alloy. Conversely, executable programming languages usually provide little or no support for them. In this paper we propose to add partial functions as a primitive feature to a Constraint Logic Programming (CLP) language, namely {log}. Although partial functions could be programmed on top of {log}, providing them as first-class citizens adds valuable flexibility and generality to the form of set-theoretic formulas that the language can safely deal with. In particular, the paper shows how the {log} constraint solver is naturally extended in order to accommodate for the new primitive constraints dealing with partial functions. Efficiency of the new version is empirically assessed by running a number of non-trivial set-theoretical goals involving partial functions, obtained from specifications written in Z.

cs.PL↗

arXiv2005

Set Unification

The unification problem in algebras capable of describing sets has been tackled, directly or indirectly, by many researchers and it finds important applications in various research areas--e.g., deductive databases, theorem proving, static analysis, rapid software prototyping. The various solutions proposed are spread across a large literature. In this paper we provide a uniform presentation of unification of sets, formalizing it at the level of set theory. We address the problem of deciding existence of solutions at an abstract level. This provides also the ability to classify different types of set unification problems. Unification algorithms are uniformly proposed to solve the unification problem in each of such classes. The algorithms presented are partly drawn from the literature--and properly revisited and analyzed--and partly novel proposals. In particular, we present a new goal-driven algorithm for general ACI1 unification and a new simpler algorithm for general (Ab)(Cl) unification.

cs.LO↗

arXiv2003

A uniform approach to constraint-solving for lists, multisets, compact lists, and sets

Lists, multisets, and sets are well-known data structures whose usefulness is widely recognized in various areas of Computer Science. These data structures have been analyzed from an axiomatic point of view with a parametric approach in (*) where the relevant unification algorithms have been developed. In this paper we extend these results considering more general constraints including not only equality but also membership constraints as well as their negative counterparts. (*) A. Dovier, A. Policriti, and G. Rossi. A uniform axiomatic view of lists, multisets, and sets, and the relevant unification algorithms. Fundamenta Informaticae, 36(2/3):201--234, 1998.

cs.PL↗