PostHat and All That: Attaining Most-Precise Inductive Invariants
| dc.contributor.author | Reps, Thomas | |
| dc.contributor.author | Lim, Junghee | |
| dc.contributor.author | Lal, Akash | |
| dc.contributor.author | Thakur, Aditya | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2013-04-18T15:09:25Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2013-04-18T15:09:25Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2013-04-16 | |
| dc.identifier.citation | TR1790 | en |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://digital.library.wisc.edu/1793/65368 | |
| dc.description.abstract | In abstract interpretation, the choice of an abstract domain fixes a limit on the precision of the inductive invariants that one can express; however, for a given abstract domain A, there is a most-precise (``strongest'', ``best'') inductive A-invariant for each program. Many techniques have been developed in abstract interpretation for finding over-approximate solutions, but only a few algorithms have been given that can achieve the fundamental limits that abstract-interpretation theory establishes. In this paper, we present an algorithm that solves the following problem: Given program P, an abstract domain A, and access to an SMT solver, find the most-precise inductive A-invariant for P. | en |
| dc.subject | machine code | en |
| dc.subject | predicate abstraction | en |
| dc.subject | symbolic abstraction | en |
| dc.subject | inductive invariants | en |
| dc.subject | abstract interpretation | en |
| dc.title | PostHat and All That: Attaining Most-Precise Inductive Invariants | en |
| dc.type | Technical Report | en |
Files in this item
This item appears in the following Collection(s)
-
CS Technical Reports
Technical Reports Archive for the Department of Computer Sciences at the University of Wisconsin-Madison

