Using the Alloy Analyzer to Verify Data Refinement in Z

Bolton, Christie

doi:10.1016/j.entcs.2005.04.023

Cited by 21 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In most recent studies, there is ProZ [48] which was developed from ProB [55], data refinement verification [8] which uses Alloy SAT-solver based counter-example, and Z2SAL [20] which is a translator from a Z language specification into a SAL language specification [18].…”

Section: Fastestmentioning

confidence: 99%

Support for Model Checking Z Specifications

Siregar

2016

2016 IEEE 17th International Conference on Information Reuse and Integration (IRI)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

One of deficiencies in the Z tools is that there is limited support for model checking Z specifications. To build a model checker directly for a Z specification would take considerable effort and time due to the abstraction of the language. Translating inputs of a Z specification into a language that an existing model checker tool accepts is an alternative method. Researchers at the University of Sheffield implemented a translation tool which took a Z specification and translated it into the input for the Symbolic Analysis Laboratory (SAL) tool, a framework for combining different tools for abstraction, program analysis, theorem proving and model checking, which they called Z2SAL. In this paper, support for model checking Z specifications is discussed, in which the ability of the existing Z2SAL is extended. This support includes a translation for generic constant and schema calculus. Instead of translating these aspects of the Z language into the SAL language as Z2SAL does, a Z specification containing these two notations will be pre-processed, in which a generic constant definition will be redefined to its equivalent axiomatic definition, and schema calculus will be expanded to a new schema definition. This paper discusses the implementation of these types of support, and illustration of some working examples. The discussion also includes other several issues related to a new approach in translating Z functions and constants in SAL language, which originates from the type incompatibility obtained during execution by the SAL tool, an approach to a SAL translation of embedded theorems on Z specifications, and a manual experiment on applying an abstraction on Z specifications. Results have been gathered during our experiments with the implemented support. Several of these results could be translated by Z2SAL and be executed by the SAL tool.

show abstract

Section: Fastestmentioning

confidence: 99%

Support for Model Checking Z Specifications

Siregar

2016

2016 IEEE 17th International Conference on Information Reuse and Integration (IRI)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It has been recognised, however, that finding retrieve relations is often very hard [4,10,22,3]. Robinson [20,23] using animation techniques to check data refinements, for example, has found published refinement case studies where retrieve relations are incorrect.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…Bolton [3], for example, uses the Alloy Analyzer [14], a SAT-based verification tool, to automatically find retrieve relations for data refinements in Z and Object-Z [25]. This approach requires, however, that the relational semantics of the specification, rather than the specification itself, be encoded in the Alloy Analyzer.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Using Model Checking to Automatically Find Retrieve Relations

Derrick

Smith

2008

Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Downward and upward simulations form a sound and jointly complete methodology for verifying relational data refinement in state-based specification languages such as Z and B. In previous work, we showed how both downward and upward simulation conditions can be discharged using a CTL model checker. The approach was implemented in the SAL tool suite. Given the retrieve relation, each of the simulation conditions can be proven fully automatically. It has been recognised, however, that finding retrieve relations is often very hard. In this paper, we show how it is feasible to use the SAL model checkers to also generate retrieve relations.

show abstract

“…This includes explicit support for action systems [14], as well as the refinement calculus [7]. More recently, advances in automatic verification technologies, including decision procedures and model checking, has seen steps towards fully automatic approaches to verifying refinements [11,6,12]. In particular, Smith and Derrick [12] show how the simulation proof obligations for Z refinement can be encoded in a standard model checker.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Simulation Machines for Checking Action System Refinements

Smith

Winter

2007

Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Action systems provide a formal approach to modelling parallel and reactive systems. They have a well established theory of refinement supported by simulation-based proof rules. This paper introduces an automatic approach for verifying action system refinements utilising standard CTL model checking. To do this, we encode each of the simulation conditions as a simulation machine, a Kripke structure on which the proof obligation can be discharged by checking that an associated CTL property holds. This procedure transforms each simulation condition into a model checking problem. Each simulation condition can then be model checked in isolation, or, if desired, together with the other simulation conditions by combining the simulation machines and the CTL properties.

show abstract

Using the Alloy Analyzer to Verify Data Refinement in Z

Cited by 21 publications

References 7 publications

Support for Model Checking Z Specifications

Support for Model Checking Z Specifications

Using Model Checking to Automatically Find Retrieve Relations

Simulation Machines for Checking Action System Refinements

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About