Necessity Specifications for Robustness

Necessity Specifications for Robustness

“…The mechanized proof of Theorem 4.4 in Coq can be found in the associated artifact [Mackay et al 2022]. The Coq formalism deviates slightly from the system as presented here, mostly in the formalization of the Assert language.…”

“…(1) A language to express Necessity specifications ( §3), including three novel Necessity operators ( §3.3) that combine implication and temporal operators. (2) A logic for proving a module's adherence to its Necessity specifications ( §4), and a proof of soundness of the logic, ( §4.5), both mechanised in Coq [Mackay et al 2022].…”

“…A more complex variant of this example can be found in Appendix G. It demonstrates dealing with modules consisting of several classes some of which are confined, and which use ghost fields defined through functions; it also demonstrates proofs of assertion encapsulation of assertions which involve reading the values of several fields. Mechanised versions of the proofs in both this Section, and Appendix G can be found in the associated Coq artifact [Mackay et al 2022] in simple_bank_account.v and bank_account.v respectively.…”