Littérature scientifique sur le sujet « Refinement and proof »
Créez une référence correcte selon les styles APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard et plusieurs autres
Sommaire
Consultez les listes thématiques d’articles de revues, de livres, de thèses, de rapports de conférences et d’autres sources académiques sur le sujet « Refinement and proof ».
À côté de chaque source dans la liste de références il y a un bouton « Ajouter à la bibliographie ». Cliquez sur ce bouton, et nous générerons automatiquement la référence bibliographique pour la source choisie selon votre style de citation préféré : APA, MLA, Harvard, Vancouver, Chicago, etc.
Vous pouvez aussi télécharger le texte intégral de la publication scolaire au format pdf et consulter son résumé en ligne lorsque ces informations sont inclues dans les métadonnées.
Articles de revues sur le sujet "Refinement and proof"
Mulder, Ike, et Robbert Krebbers. « Proof Automation for Linearizability in Separation Logic ». Proceedings of the ACM on Programming Languages 7, OOPSLA1 (6 avril 2023) : 462–91. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/3586043.
Texte intégralSong, Youngju, et Dongjae Lee. « Refinement Composition Logic ». Proceedings of the ACM on Programming Languages 8, ICFP (15 août 2024) : 573–601. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/3674645.
Texte intégralDerrick, John, Simon Doherty, Brijesh Dongol, Gerhard Schellhorn et Heike Wehrheim. « Verifying correctness of persistent concurrent data structures : a sound and complete method ». Formal Aspects of Computing 33, no 4-5 (17 mai 2021) : 547–73. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00165-021-00541-8.
Texte intégralBohrer, Brandon, et André Platzer. « Structured Proofs for Adversarial Cyber-Physical Systems ». ACM Transactions on Embedded Computing Systems 20, no 5s (31 octobre 2021) : 1–26. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/3477024.
Texte intégralMylonakis, Nikos. « Proof Assistance for Refinement in Type Theory ». Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science 37 (2000) : 1–21. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s1571-0661(05)01134-5.
Texte intégralPeng, Jie, Tangliu Wen, Yiguo Yang et Guoming Huang. « An Event-B Approach to the Development of Fork/Join Parallel Programs ». EAI Endorsed Transactions on AI and Robotics 1 (18 février 2022) : 1–6. http://dx.doi.org/10.4108/airo.v1i.16.
Texte intégralFarissi, Abdallah El. « Simple proof and refinement of Hermite-Hadamard inequality ». Journal of Mathematical Inequalities, no 3 (2010) : 365–69. http://dx.doi.org/10.7153/jmi-04-33.
Texte intégralCansell, Dominique, Dominique Méry et Cyril Proch. « System-on-chip design by proof-based refinement ». International Journal on Software Tools for Technology Transfer 11, no 3 (24 mars 2009) : 217–38. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10009-009-0104-7.
Texte intégralGregersen, Simon Oddershede, Alejandro Aguirre, Philipp G. Haselwarter, Joseph Tassarotti et Lars Birkedal. « Almost-Sure Termination by Guarded Refinement ». Proceedings of the ACM on Programming Languages 8, ICFP (15 août 2024) : 203–33. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/3674632.
Texte intégralMimouni, Sanae, et Mohamed Bouhdadi. « A Mechanized Formal Refinement Proof of Modbus Communication Using Event-B Proof System ». International Journal of Intelligent Engineering and Systems 11, no 4 (31 août 2018) : 97–106. http://dx.doi.org/10.22266/ijies2018.0831.10.
Texte intégralThèses sur le sujet "Refinement and proof"
Pratten, Chris H. « Refinement in a language with procedures and modules ». Thesis, University of Southampton, 1996. http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.243120.
Texte intégralRiviere, Peter. « Génération automatique d’obligations de preuves paramétrée par des théories de domaine dans Event-B : Le cadre de travail EB4EB ». Electronic Thesis or Diss., Université de Toulouse (2023-....), 2024. http://www.theses.fr/2024TLSEP052.
Texte intégralNowadays, we are surrounded by complex critical systems such as microprocessors, railways, home appliances, robots, aeroplanes, and so on. These systems are extremely complex and are safety-critical, and they must be verified and validated. The use of state-based formal methods has proven to be effective in designing complex systems. Event-B has played a key role in the development of such systems. Event-B is a formal system design method that is state-based and correct-by-construction, with a focus on proof and refinement. Event-B facilitates verification of properties such as invariant preservation, convergence, and refinement by generating and discharging proof obligations.Additional properties for system verification, such as deadlock-freeness, reachability, and liveness, must be explicitly defined and verified by the designer or formalised using another formal method. Such an approach reduces re-usability and may introduce errors, particularly in complex systems.To tackle these challenges, we introduced the reflexive EB4EB framework in Event-B. In this framework, each Event-B concept is formalised as a first-class object using First Order Logic (FOL) and set theory. This framework allows for the manipulation and analysis of Event-B models, with extensions for additional, non-intrusive analyses such as temporal properties, weak invariants, deadlock freeness, and so on. This is accomplished through Event-B Theories, which extend the Event-B language with the theory's defined elements, and also by formalising and articulating new proof obligations that are not present in traditional Event-B. Furthermore, Event-B's operational semantics (based on traces) have been formalised, along with a framework for guaranteeing the soundness of the defined theorems, including operators and proof obligations. Finally, the proposed framework and its extensions have been validated across multiple case studies, including Lamport's clock case study, read/write processes, the Peterson algorithm, Automated Teller Machine (ATM), autonomous vehicles, and so on
Ratiu, Diana. « Refinement of Classical Proofs for Program Extraction ». Diss., lmu, 2011. http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:19-135054.
Texte intégralGiorgino, Mathieu. « Inductive representation, proofs and refinement of pointer structures ». Toulouse 3, 2013. http://thesesups.ups-tlse.fr/2076/.
Texte intégralThis thesis stands in the general domain of formal methods that gives semantics to programs to formally prove properties about them. It originally draws its motivation from the need for certification of systems in an industrial context where Model Driven Engineering (MDE) and object-oriented (OO) languages are common. In order to obtain efficient transformations on models (graphs), we can represent them as pointer structures, allowing space and time savings through the sharing of nodes. However verification of properties on programs manipulating pointer structures is still hard. To ease this task, we propose to start the development with a high-level implementation embodied by functional programs manipulating inductive data-structures, that are easily verified in proof assistants such as Isabelle/HOL. Pointer structures are represented by a spanning tree adorned with additional references. These functional programs are then refined - if necessary - to imperative programs thanks to the library Imperative_HOL. These programs are finally extracted to Scala code (OO). This thesis describes this kind of representation and refinement and provides tools to manipulate and prove OO programs in Isabelle/HOL. This approach is put in practice with several examples, and especially with the Schorr-Waite algorithm and the construction of Binary Decision Diagrams (BDDs)
Graja, Zaineb. « Vérification formelle des systèmes multi-agents auto-adaptatifs ». Thesis, Toulouse 3, 2015. http://www.theses.fr/2015TOU30105/document.
Texte intégralA major challenge for the development of self-organizing MAS is to guarantee the convergence of the system to the overall function expected by an external observer and to ensure that agents are able to adapt to changes. In the literature, several works were based on simulation and model-checking to study self-organizing MAS. The simulation allows designers to experiment various settings and create some heuristics to facilitate the system design. Model checking provides support to discover deadlocks and properties violations. However, to cope with the complexity of self-organizing MAS, the designer also needs techniques that support not only verification, but also the development process itself. Moreover, such techniques should support disciplined development and facilitate reasoning about various aspects of the system behavior at different levels of abstraction. In this thesis, three essential contributions were made in the field of formal development and verification of self-organizing MAS: a formalization with the Event-B language of self-organizing MAS key concepts into three levels of abstraction, an experimentation of a top-down refinement strategy for the development of self-organizing MAS and the definition of a bottom-up refinement process based on refinement patterns
Kherroubi, Souad. « Un cadre formel pour l'intégration de connaissances du domaine dans la conception des systèmes : application au formalisme Event-B ». Thesis, Université de Lorraine, 2018. http://www.theses.fr/2018LORR0230/document.
Texte intégralThis thesis aims at defining techniques to better exploit the knowledge provided from the domain in order to account for the reality of systems described as complex and critical. Modeling is an essential step in performing verifications and expressing properties that a system must satisfy according to the needs and requirements established in the specifications. Modeling is a representation that simplifies the reality of a system. However, a complex system can not be reduced to a model. A model that represents a system must always fit into its observational theory to account for any anomalies that it may contain. Our study clearly shows that the context is the first issue to deal with as the main source of conflict in the design process of a system. The approach adopted in this thesis is that of integrating knowledge of the domain by associating the system to design with declarative formalisms qualified of descriptive ones that we call ontologies. We pay a particular attention to the Event-B formalism, whose correct-by-construction approach called refinement is the main mechanism at the heart of this formalism, which makes it possible to make proofs on abstract representations of systems for expressing and verifying properties of safety and invariance. The first problem treated is the representation and modeling of contextual knowledge in V&V of models. Following to the study looked at the different sources of conflict, we established new definitions and rules for a refinement context knowledge extraction for Event-B V&V. A study of logical formalisms that represent and interpret the context allowed us to define a new mechanism for better structuring Event-B models. A second study concerns the contribution that domain knowledge can make to the V&V of models. We define a logic for the Event-B formalism with domain constraints based on the description logic, and we define rules to integrate domain knowledge for model V&V. The evaluation of the proposals made deal with very complex case studies such as voting systems whose design patterns are also developed in this thesis. We raise fundamental issues about the complementarity that the integration of domain knowledge can bring to Event-B models by refinement using ontological reasoning, and we propose to define a new structures for a partially automated extraction on both levels, namely the V&V
Ratiu, Diana [Verfasser], et Helmut [Akademischer Betreuer] Schwichtenberg. « Refinement of Classical Proofs for Program Extraction / Diana Ratiu. Betreuer : Helmut Schwichtenberg ». München : Universitätsbibliothek der Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität, 2011. http://d-nb.info/1015734464/34.
Texte intégralKherroubi, Souad. « Un cadre formel pour l'intégration de connaissances du domaine dans la conception des systèmes : application au formalisme Event-B ». Electronic Thesis or Diss., Université de Lorraine, 2018. http://www.theses.fr/2018LORR0230.
Texte intégralThis thesis aims at defining techniques to better exploit the knowledge provided from the domain in order to account for the reality of systems described as complex and critical. Modeling is an essential step in performing verifications and expressing properties that a system must satisfy according to the needs and requirements established in the specifications. Modeling is a representation that simplifies the reality of a system. However, a complex system can not be reduced to a model. A model that represents a system must always fit into its observational theory to account for any anomalies that it may contain. Our study clearly shows that the context is the first issue to deal with as the main source of conflict in the design process of a system. The approach adopted in this thesis is that of integrating knowledge of the domain by associating the system to design with declarative formalisms qualified of descriptive ones that we call ontologies. We pay a particular attention to the Event-B formalism, whose correct-by-construction approach called refinement is the main mechanism at the heart of this formalism, which makes it possible to make proofs on abstract representations of systems for expressing and verifying properties of safety and invariance. The first problem treated is the representation and modeling of contextual knowledge in V&V of models. Following to the study looked at the different sources of conflict, we established new definitions and rules for a refinement context knowledge extraction for Event-B V&V. A study of logical formalisms that represent and interpret the context allowed us to define a new mechanism for better structuring Event-B models. A second study concerns the contribution that domain knowledge can make to the V&V of models. We define a logic for the Event-B formalism with domain constraints based on the description logic, and we define rules to integrate domain knowledge for model V&V. The evaluation of the proposals made deal with very complex case studies such as voting systems whose design patterns are also developed in this thesis. We raise fundamental issues about the complementarity that the integration of domain knowledge can bring to Event-B models by refinement using ontological reasoning, and we propose to define a new structures for a partially automated extraction on both levels, namely the V&V
Ledang, Hung. « Traduction systématique de spécifications ». Nancy 2, 2002. http://www.theses.fr/2002NAN22004.
Texte intégralThe diversion of the specifications UML towards B is considered as an approach suited to use jointly UML and B in a unified, practical, rigorous development of software. On one hand, this diversion allows to use the specifications UML as starting point to develop the specifications B. On the other hand, it is possible to use tools powerful supports(media) of B as AtelierB to analyze the specifications B diverted to identify the defects within specifications UML. This thesis(theory) concentrated on the diversion towards B for the diagrams of interaction (collaboration, sequence), the diagrams of state-transition and the diagrams of case of use, which was not previously considered. Three procedures of diversion for three types of behavioral diagrams were proposed. Furthermore, the plans of diversion of the constraints OCL towards B were defined. Which allows to divert systematically towards B not only the invariants of classes in OCL, the conditins of guards (always in OCL) within the diagrams of state-transition but also the specifications OCL of the pre-form and postcondition from concepts UML behavioral as operations UML, cases of use and from the events. We also developed a tool of support for the diversion of UML / OCL towards B. Besides the plans of diversion of UML / OCL towards B, we proposed certain analyses of coherence, thanks to B and its tools, within the specification UML have. This thesis can be pursuit
Carvalho, Luís. « Three essays on game theory and bargaining ». Doctoral thesis, NSBE - UNL, 2014. http://hdl.handle.net/10362/11851.
Texte intégralEquilibrium Outcomes of Repeated Two-Person Zero-Sum Games - We consider discounted repeated two-person zero-sum games. We show that even when players have different discount factors (in which case the repeated game is not a zero-sum game), an outcome is subgame perfect if and only if all of its components are Nash equilibria of the stage game. This implies that in all subgame perfect equilibria, each player's payoff is equal to his minmax payoff. In conclusion, the competitive nature of two-player zero-sum games is not altered when the game is repeated.
A Constructive Proof of the Nash Bargaining Solution - We consider the classical axiomatic Nash bargaining framework and propose a constructive proof of its solution. On the first part of this paper we prove Nash’s solution is the result of a maximization problem; on the second part, through the properties of maximand’s indifference curves we derive that it must be equal to xy.
Equilibria and Outcomes in Multiplayer Bargaining - Multiplayer bargaining is a game in which all possible divisions are equilibrium outcomes. This paper presents the classical subgame perfect equilibria strategies and analyses their weak robustness, namely the use of weakly dominated strategies. The paper then develops a refined equilibrium concept, based on trembling hand perfection, in order to overcome such weakness. Concluding that none of the classical equilibrium strategies survives the imposition of the extra robustness and, albeit using more complex strategies, the equilibrium outcomes don't change.
Livres sur le sujet "Refinement and proof"
1966-, Engelhardt Kai, et Buth Karl-Heinz, dir. Data refinement : Model-oriented proof methods and their comparison. Cambridge, UK : Cambridge University Press, 1998.
Trouver le texte intégralRoever, W. P. de. Data refinement : Model-oriented proof methods and their comparison. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press, 2009.
Trouver le texte intégralAbstraction, Refinement and Proof for Probabilistic Systems. New York : Springer-Verlag, 2005. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/b138392.
Texte intégralMcIver, Annabelle, et Charles Carroll Morgan. Abstraction, Refinement and Proof for Probabilistic Systems. Springer London, Limited, 2005.
Trouver le texte intégralMcIver, Annabelle, et Charles Carroll Morgan. Abstraction, Refinement and Proof for Probabilistic Systems. Springer, 2010.
Trouver le texte intégralRoever, Willem-Paul de, et Kai Engelhardt. Data Refinement : Model-Oriented Proof Methods and Their Comparison. Cambridge University Press, 2010.
Trouver le texte intégralRoever, Willem-Paul de, et Kai Engelhardt. Data Refinement : Model-Oriented Proof Methods and Their Comparison. Cambridge University Press, 2011.
Trouver le texte intégralAbstraction, Refinement and Proof for Probabilistic Systems (Monographs in Computer Science). Springer, 2004.
Trouver le texte intégralWoodcock, Jim, et Jim Davies. Using Z : Specification, Refinement, and Proof (Prentice-Hall International Series in Computer Science). Prentice Hall, 1996.
Trouver le texte intégralUsing Z : Specification, Refinement, and Proof (Prentice-Hall International Series in Computer Science). Prentice Hall, 1996.
Trouver le texte intégralChapitres de livres sur le sujet "Refinement and proof"
Fidge, Colin. « Proof Obligations for Real-Time Refinement ». Dans 6th Refinement Workshop, 279–305. London : Springer London, 1994. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-3240-0_15.
Texte intégralLovas, William, et Frank Pfenning. « Refinement Types as Proof Irrelevance ». Dans Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 157–71. Berlin, Heidelberg : Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2009. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-02273-9_13.
Texte intégralPrebet, Enguerrand, et André Platzer. « Uniform Substitution for Differential Refinement Logic ». Dans Automated Reasoning, 196–215. Cham : Springer Nature Switzerland, 2024. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-63501-4_11.
Texte intégralHavelund, Klaus, et Natarajan Shankar. « A Refinement Proof for a Garbage Collector ». Dans From Reactive Systems to Cyber-Physical Systems, 73–103. Cham : Springer International Publishing, 2019. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-31514-6_6.
Texte intégralAgerholm, Sten, Juan Bicarregui et Savi Maharaj. « On the Verification of VDM Specification and Refinement with PVS ». Dans Proof in VDM : Case Studies, 157–89. London : Springer London, 1998. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-1532-8_6.
Texte intégralDross, Claire, et Yannick Moy. « Abstract Software Specifications and Automatic Proof of Refinement ». Dans Reliability, Safety, and Security of Railway Systems. Modelling, Analysis, Verification, and Certification, 215–30. Cham : Springer International Publishing, 2016. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-33951-1_16.
Texte intégralArcaini, Paolo, Angelo Gargantini et Elvinia Riccobene. « SMT-Based Automatic Proof of ASM Model Refinement ». Dans Software Engineering and Formal Methods, 253–69. Cham : Springer International Publishing, 2016. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-41591-8_17.
Texte intégralNigam, Vivek, Giselle Reis, Samar Rahmouni et Harald Ruess. « Proof Search and Certificates for Evidential Transactions ». Dans Automated Deduction – CADE 28, 234–51. Cham : Springer International Publishing, 2021. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-79876-5_14.
Texte intégralIshikawa, Fuyuki, Tsutomu Kobayashi et Shinichi Honiden. « Explicit Exploration of Refinement Design in Proof-Based Approach : Refinement Engineering in Event-B ». Dans Implicit and Explicit Semantics Integration in Proof-Based Developments of Discrete Systems, 309–30. Singapore : Springer Singapore, 2020. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-5054-6_14.
Texte intégralMutluergil, Suha Orhun, et Serdar Tasiran. « A Mechanized Refinement Proof of the Chase-Lev Deque Using a Proof System ». Dans Networked Systems, 280–94. Cham : Springer International Publishing, 2016. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-46140-3_23.
Texte intégralActes de conférences sur le sujet "Refinement and proof"
Morgan, Carroll. « Proof rules for probabilistic loops ». Dans Proceedings of the BCS-FACS 7th Refinement Workshop. BCS Learning & Development, 1996. http://dx.doi.org/10.14236/ewic/rw1996.10.
Texte intégralBossard, Antoine, et Keiichi Kaneko. « UCEJ Database Refinement and Applicability Proof ». Dans 2019 IEEE International Symposium on Multimedia (ISM). IEEE, 2019. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ism46123.2019.00018.
Texte intégralBezza, Asma, Elkamel Merah, Rabea Ameur-Boulifa, Rohallah Benaboud et Toufik Messaoud Maarouk. « Formalization and Refinement Proof for Embedded Systems ». Dans 2020 4th International Symposium on Informatics and its Applications (ISIA). IEEE, 2020. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/isia51297.2020.9416544.
Texte intégralHart, Thomas E., Kelvin Ku, Arie Gurfinkel, Marsha Chechik et David Lie. « Augmenting Counterexample-Guided Abstraction Refinement with Proof Templates ». Dans 2008 23rd IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering. IEEE, 2008. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ase.2008.55.
Texte intégralClark, Tony. « Object-Oriented Refinement and Proof using Behaviour Functions ». Dans Rigorous Object-Oriented Methods 2000. BCS Learning & Development, 2000. http://dx.doi.org/10.14236/ewic/room2000.2.
Texte intégralStankaitis, Paulius, Guillaume Dupont, Neeraj Kumar Singh, Yamine Ait-Ameur, Alexei Iliasov et Alexander Romanovsky. « Modelling Hybrid Train Speed Controller using Proof and Refinement ». Dans 2019 24th International Conference on Engineering of Complex Computer Systems (ICECCS). IEEE, 2019. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/iceccs.2019.00019.
Texte intégralVindum, Simon Friis, et Lars Birkedal. « Contextual refinement of the Michael-Scott queue (proof pearl) ». Dans CPP '21 : 10th ACM SIGPLAN International Conference on Certified Programs and Proofs. New York, NY, USA : ACM, 2021. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/3437992.3439930.
Texte intégralKhalafinejad, Saeed, et Seyed-Hassan Mirian-Hosseinabadi. « Derivation of Z functional input/output refinement proof rules ». Dans 2010 International Conference on Electronics and Information Engineering (ICEIE 2010). IEEE, 2010. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/iceie.2010.5559891.
Texte intégralPleasant, James C. « Systematic program development and proof : Dromey's method versus top-down refinement ». Dans the 28th annual Southeast regional conference. New York, New York, USA : ACM Press, 1990. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/98949.99056.
Texte intégralDupont, G., Y. Ait-Ameur, M. Pantel et N. K. Singh. « Handling Refinement of Continuous Behaviors : A Proof Based Approach with Event-B ». Dans 2019 International Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Software Engineering (TASE). IEEE, 2019. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/tase.2019.00-25.
Texte intégralRapports d'organisations sur le sujet "Refinement and proof"
Lehotay, Steven J., et Aviv Amirav. Ultra-Fast Methods and Instrumentation for the Analysis of Hazardous Chemicals in the Food Supply. United States Department of Agriculture, décembre 2012. http://dx.doi.org/10.32747/2012.7699852.bard.
Texte intégral