@inproceedings{2301, abstract = {We describe the design and implementation of P, a domain-specific language to write asynchronous event driven code. P allows the programmer to specify the system as a collection of interacting state machines, which communicate with each other using events. P unifies modeling and programming into one activity for the programmer. Not only can a P program be compiled into executable code, but it can also be tested using model checking techniques. P allows the programmer to specify the environment, used to "close" the system during testing, as nondeterministic ghost machines. Ghost machines are erased during compilation to executable code; a type system ensures that the erasure is semantics preserving. The P language is designed so that a P program can be checked for responsiveness-the ability to handle every event in a timely manner. By default, a machine needs to handle every event that arrives in every state. But handling every event in every state is impractical. The language provides a notion of deferred events where the programmer can annotate when she wants to delay processing an event. The default safety checker looks for presence of unhan-dled events. The language also provides default liveness checks that an event cannot be potentially deferred forever. P was used to implement and verify the core of the USB device driver stack that ships with Microsoft Windows 8. The resulting driver is more reliable and performs better than its prior incarnation (which did not use P); we have more confidence in the robustness of its design due to the language abstractions and verification provided by P.}, author = {Desai, Ankush and Gupta, Vivek and Jackson, Ethan and Qadeer, Shaz and Rajamani, Sriram and Zufferey, Damien}, booktitle = {Proceedings of the 34th ACM SIGPLAN Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation}, location = {Seattle, WA, United States}, pages = {321 -- 331}, publisher = {ACM}, title = {{P: Safe asynchronous event-driven programming}}, doi = {10.1145/2491956.2462184}, year = {2013}, } @inproceedings{2327, abstract = {We define the model-measuring problem: given a model M and specification φ, what is the maximal distance ρ such that all models M′ within distance ρ from M satisfy (or violate) φ. The model measuring problem presupposes a distance function on models. We concentrate on automatic distance functions, which are defined by weighted automata. The model-measuring problem subsumes several generalizations of the classical model-checking problem, in particular, quantitative model-checking problems that measure the degree of satisfaction of a specification, and robustness problems that measure how much a model can be perturbed without violating the specification. We show that for automatic distance functions, and ω-regular linear-time and branching-time specifications, the model-measuring problem can be solved. We use automata-theoretic model-checking methods for model measuring, replacing the emptiness question for standard word and tree automata by the optimal-weight question for the weighted versions of these automata. We consider weighted automata that accumulate weights by maximizing, summing, discounting, and limit averaging. We give several examples of using the model-measuring problem to compute various notions of robustness and quantitative satisfaction for temporal specifications.}, author = {Henzinger, Thomas A and Otop, Jan}, location = {Buenos Aires, Argentina}, pages = {273 -- 287}, publisher = {Springer}, title = {{From model checking to model measuring}}, doi = {10.1007/978-3-642-40184-8_20}, volume = {8052}, year = {2013}, } @inproceedings{2445, abstract = {We develop program synthesis techniques that can help programmers fix concurrency-related bugs. We make two new contributions to synthesis for concurrency, the first improving the efficiency of the synthesized code, and the second improving the efficiency of the synthesis procedure itself. The first contribution is to have the synthesis procedure explore a variety of (sequential) semantics-preserving program transformations. Classically, only one such transformation has been considered, namely, the insertion of synchronization primitives (such as locks). Based on common manual bug-fixing techniques used by Linux device-driver developers, we explore additional, more efficient transformations, such as the reordering of independent instructions. The second contribution is to speed up the counterexample-guided removal of concurrency bugs within the synthesis procedure by considering partial-order traces (instead of linear traces) as counterexamples. A partial-order error trace represents a set of linear (interleaved) traces of a concurrent program all of which lead to the same error. By eliminating a partial-order error trace, we eliminate in a single iteration of the synthesis procedure all linearizations of the partial-order trace. We evaluated our techniques on several simplified examples of real concurrency bugs that occurred in Linux device drivers.}, author = {Cerny, Pavol and Henzinger, Thomas A and Radhakrishna, Arjun and Ryzhyk, Leonid and Tarrach, Thorsten}, location = {St. Petersburg, Russia}, pages = {951 -- 967}, publisher = {Springer}, title = {{Efficient synthesis for concurrency by semantics-preserving transformations}}, doi = {10.1007/978-3-642-39799-8_68}, volume = {8044}, year = {2013}, } @inproceedings{2447, abstract = {Separation logic (SL) has gained widespread popularity because of its ability to succinctly express complex invariants of a program’s heap configurations. Several specialized provers have been developed for decidable SL fragments. However, these provers cannot be easily extended or combined with solvers for other theories that are important in program verification, e.g., linear arithmetic. In this paper, we present a reduction of decidable SL fragments to a decidable first-order theory that fits well into the satisfiability modulo theories (SMT) framework. We show how to use this reduction to automate satisfiability, entailment, frame inference, and abduction problems for separation logic using SMT solvers. Our approach provides a simple method of integrating separation logic into existing verification tools that provide SMT backends, and an elegant way of combining SL fragments with other decidable first-order theories. We implemented this approach in a verification tool and applied it to heap-manipulating programs whose verification involves reasoning in theory combinations. }, author = {Piskac, Ruzica and Wies, Thomas and Zufferey, Damien}, location = {St. Petersburg, Russia}, pages = {773 -- 789}, publisher = {Springer}, title = {{Automating separation logic using SMT}}, doi = {10.1007/978-3-642-39799-8_54}, volume = {8044}, year = {2013}, } @inproceedings{2517, abstract = {Traditional formal methods are based on a Boolean satisfaction notion: a reactive system satisfies, or not, a given specification. We generalize formal methods to also address the quality of systems. As an adequate specification formalism we introduce the linear temporal logic LTL[F]. The satisfaction value of an LTL[F] formula is a number between 0 and 1, describing the quality of the satisfaction. The logic generalizes traditional LTL by augmenting it with a (parameterized) set F of arbitrary functions over the interval [0,1]. For example, F may contain the maximum or minimum between the satisfaction values of subformulas, their product, and their average. The classical decision problems in formal methods, such as satisfiability, model checking, and synthesis, are generalized to search and optimization problems in the quantitative setting. For example, model checking asks for the quality in which a specification is satisfied, and synthesis returns a system satisfying the specification with the highest quality. Reasoning about quality gives rise to other natural questions, like the distance between specifications. We formalize these basic questions and study them for LTL[F]. By extending the automata-theoretic approach for LTL to a setting that takes quality into an account, we are able to solve the above problems and show that reasoning about LTL[F] has roughly the same complexity as reasoning about traditional LTL.}, author = {Almagor, Shaull and Boker, Udi and Kupferman, Orna}, location = {Riga, Latvia}, number = {Part 2}, pages = {15 -- 27}, publisher = {Springer}, title = {{Formalizing and reasoning about quality}}, doi = {10.1007/978-3-642-39212-2_3}, volume = {7966}, year = {2013}, } @inproceedings{2847, abstract = {Depth-Bounded Systems form an expressive class of well-structured transition systems. They can model a wide range of concurrent infinite-state systems including those with dynamic thread creation, dynamically changing communication topology, and complex shared heap structures. We present the first method to automatically prove fair termination of depth-bounded systems. Our method uses a numerical abstraction of the system, which we obtain by systematically augmenting an over-approximation of the system’s reachable states with a finite set of counters. This numerical abstraction can be analyzed with existing termination provers. What makes our approach unique is the way in which it exploits the well-structuredness of the analyzed system. We have implemented our work in a prototype tool and used it to automatically prove liveness properties of complex concurrent systems, including nonblocking algorithms such as Treiber’s stack and several distributed processes. Many of these examples are beyond the scope of termination analyses that are based on traditional counter abstractions.}, author = {Bansal, Kshitij and Koskinen, Eric and Wies, Thomas and Zufferey, Damien}, editor = {Piterman, Nir and Smolka, Scott}, location = {Rome, Italy}, pages = {62 -- 77}, publisher = {Springer}, title = {{Structural Counter Abstraction}}, doi = {10.1007/978-3-642-36742-7_5}, volume = {7795}, year = {2013}, } @article{2854, abstract = {We consider concurrent games played on graphs. At every round of a game, each player simultaneously and independently selects a move; the moves jointly determine the transition to a successor state. Two basic objectives are the safety objective to stay forever in a given set of states, and its dual, the reachability objective to reach a given set of states. First, we present a simple proof of the fact that in concurrent reachability games, for all ε>0, memoryless ε-optimal strategies exist. A memoryless strategy is independent of the history of plays, and an ε-optimal strategy achieves the objective with probability within ε of the value of the game. In contrast to previous proofs of this fact, our proof is more elementary and more combinatorial. Second, we present a strategy-improvement (a.k.a. policy-iteration) algorithm for concurrent games with reachability objectives. Finally, we present a strategy-improvement algorithm for turn-based stochastic games (where each player selects moves in turns) with safety objectives. Our algorithms yield sequences of player-1 strategies which ensure probabilities of winning that converge monotonically (from below) to the value of the game. © 2012 Elsevier Inc.}, author = {Chatterjee, Krishnendu and De Alfaro, Luca and Henzinger, Thomas A}, journal = {Journal of Computer and System Sciences}, number = {5}, pages = {640 -- 657}, publisher = {Elsevier}, title = {{Strategy improvement for concurrent reachability and turn based stochastic safety games}}, doi = {10.1016/j.jcss.2012.12.001}, volume = {79}, year = {2013}, } @proceedings{2885, abstract = {This volume contains the post-proceedings of the 8th Doctoral Workshop on Mathematical and Engineering Methods in Computer Science, MEMICS 2012, held in Znojmo, Czech Republic, in October, 2012. The 13 thoroughly revised papers were carefully selected out of 31 submissions and are presented together with 6 invited papers. The topics covered by the papers include: computer-aided analysis and verification, applications of game theory in computer science, networks and security, modern trends of graph theory in computer science, electronic systems design and testing, and quantum information processing.}, editor = {Kucera, Antonin and Henzinger, Thomas A and Nesetril, Jaroslav and Vojnar, Tomas and Antos, David}, location = {Znojmo, Czech Republic}, pages = {1 -- 228}, publisher = {Springer}, title = {{Mathematical and Engineering Methods in Computer Science}}, doi = {10.1007/978-3-642-36046-6}, volume = {7721}, year = {2013}, } @inproceedings{2181, abstract = {There is a trade-off between performance and correctness in implementing concurrent data structures. Better performance may be achieved at the expense of relaxing correctness, by redefining the semantics of data structures. We address such a redefinition of data structure semantics and present a systematic and formal framework for obtaining new data structures by quantitatively relaxing existing ones. We view a data structure as a sequential specification S containing all "legal" sequences over an alphabet of method calls. Relaxing the data structure corresponds to defining a distance from any sequence over the alphabet to the sequential specification: the k-relaxed sequential specification contains all sequences over the alphabet within distance k from the original specification. In contrast to other existing work, our relaxations are semantic (distance in terms of data structure states). As an instantiation of our framework, we present two simple yet generic relaxation schemes, called out-of-order and stuttering relaxation, along with several ways of computing distances. We show that the out-of-order relaxation, when further instantiated to stacks, queues, and priority queues, amounts to tolerating bounded out-of-order behavior, which cannot be captured by a purely syntactic relaxation (distance in terms of sequence manipulation, e.g. edit distance). We give concurrent implementations of relaxed data structures and demonstrate that bounded relaxations provide the means for trading correctness for performance in a controlled way. The relaxations are monotonic which further highlights the trade-off: increasing k increases the number of permitted sequences, which as we demonstrate can lead to better performance. Finally, since a relaxed stack or queue also implements a pool, we actually have new concurrent pool implementations that outperform the state-of-the-art ones.}, author = {Henzinger, Thomas A and Kirsch, Christoph and Payer, Hannes and Sezgin, Ali and Sokolova, Ana}, booktitle = {Proceedings of the 40th annual ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT symposium on Principles of programming language}, isbn = {978-1-4503-1832-7}, location = {Rome, Italy}, pages = {317 -- 328}, publisher = {ACM}, title = {{Quantitative relaxation of concurrent data structures}}, doi = {10.1145/2429069.2429109}, year = {2013}, } @inproceedings{2182, abstract = {We propose a general framework for abstraction with respect to quantitative properties, such as worst-case execution time, or power consumption. Our framework provides a systematic way for counter-example guided abstraction refinement for quantitative properties. The salient aspect of the framework is that it allows anytime verification, that is, verification algorithms that can be stopped at any time (for example, due to exhaustion of memory), and report approximations that improve monotonically when the algorithms are given more time. We instantiate the framework with a number of quantitative abstractions and refinement schemes, which differ in terms of how much quantitative information they keep from the original system. We introduce both state-based and trace-based quantitative abstractions, and we describe conditions that define classes of quantitative properties for which the abstractions provide over-approximations. We give algorithms for evaluating the quantitative properties on the abstract systems. We present algorithms for counter-example based refinements for quantitative properties for both state-based and segment-based abstractions. We perform a case study on worst-case execution time of executables to evaluate the anytime verification aspect and the quantitative abstractions we proposed.}, author = {Cerny, Pavol and Henzinger, Thomas A and Radhakrishna, Arjun}, booktitle = {Proceedings of the 40th annual ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT symposium on Principles of programming language}, location = {Rome, Italy}, pages = {115 -- 128}, publisher = {ACM}, title = {{Quantitative abstraction refinement}}, doi = {10.1145/2429069.2429085}, year = {2013}, } @inproceedings{1376, abstract = {We consider the distributed synthesis problem for temporal logic specifications. Traditionally, the problem has been studied for LTL, and the previous results show that the problem is decidable iff there is no information fork in the architecture. We consider the problem for fragments of LTL and our main results are as follows: (1) We show that the problem is undecidable for architectures with information forks even for the fragment of LTL with temporal operators restricted to next and eventually. (2) For specifications restricted to globally along with non-nested next operators, we establish decidability (in EXPSPACE) for star architectures where the processes receive disjoint inputs, whereas we establish undecidability for architectures containing an information fork-meet structure. (3) Finally, we consider LTL without the next operator, and establish decidability (NEXPTIME-complete) for all architectures for a fragment that consists of a set of safety assumptions, and a set of guarantees where each guarantee is a safety, reachability, or liveness condition.}, author = {Chatterjee, Krishnendu and Henzinger, Thomas A and Otop, Jan and Pavlogiannis, Andreas}, booktitle = {13th International Conference on Formal Methods in Computer-Aided Design}, location = {Portland, OR, United States}, pages = {18 -- 25}, publisher = {IEEE}, title = {{Distributed synthesis for LTL fragments}}, doi = {10.1109/FMCAD.2013.6679386}, year = {2013}, } @inproceedings{1385, abstract = {It is often difficult to correctly implement a Boolean controller for a complex system, especially when concurrency is involved. Yet, it may be easy to formally specify a controller. For instance, for a pipelined processor it suffices to state that the visible behavior of the pipelined system should be identical to a non-pipelined reference system (Burch-Dill paradigm). We present a novel procedure to efficiently synthesize multiple Boolean control signals from a specification given as a quantified first-order formula (with a specific quantifier structure). Our approach uses uninterpreted functions to abstract details of the design. We construct an unsatisfiable SMT formula from the given specification. Then, from just one proof of unsatisfiability, we use a variant of Craig interpolation to compute multiple coordinated interpolants that implement the Boolean control signals. Our method avoids iterative learning and back-substitution of the control functions. We applied our approach to synthesize a controller for a simple two-stage pipelined processor, and present first experimental results.}, author = {Hofferek, Georg and Gupta, Ashutosh and Könighofer, Bettina and Jiang, Jie and Bloem, Roderick}, booktitle = {2013 Formal Methods in Computer-Aided Design}, location = {Portland, OR, United States}, pages = {77 -- 84}, publisher = {IEEE}, title = {{Synthesizing multiple boolean functions using interpolation on a single proof}}, doi = {10.1109/FMCAD.2013.6679394}, year = {2013}, } @inproceedings{1387, abstract = {Choices made by nondeterministic word automata depend on both the past (the prefix of the word read so far) and the future (the suffix yet to be read). In several applications, most notably synthesis, the future is diverse or unknown, leading to algorithms that are based on deterministic automata. Hoping to retain some of the advantages of nondeterministic automata, researchers have studied restricted classes of nondeterministic automata. Three such classes are nondeterministic automata that are good for trees (GFT; i.e., ones that can be expanded to tree automata accepting the derived tree languages, thus whose choices should satisfy diverse futures), good for games (GFG; i.e., ones whose choices depend only on the past), and determinizable by pruning (DBP; i.e., ones that embody equivalent deterministic automata). The theoretical properties and relative merits of the different classes are still open, having vagueness on whether they really differ from deterministic automata. In particular, while DBP ⊆ GFG ⊆ GFT, it is not known whether every GFT automaton is GFG and whether every GFG automaton is DBP. Also open is the possible succinctness of GFG and GFT automata compared to deterministic automata. We study these problems for ω-regular automata with all common acceptance conditions. We show that GFT=GFG⊃DBP, and describe a determinization construction for GFG automata.}, author = {Boker, Udi and Kuperberg, Denis and Kupferman, Orna and Skrzypczak, Michał}, location = {Riga, Latvia}, number = {PART 2}, pages = {89 -- 100}, publisher = {Springer}, title = {{Nondeterminism in the presence of a diverse or unknown future}}, doi = {10.1007/978-3-642-39212-2_11}, volume = {7966}, year = {2013}, } @phdthesis{1405, abstract = {Motivated by the analysis of highly dynamic message-passing systems, i.e. unbounded thread creation, mobility, etc. we present a framework for the analysis of depth-bounded systems. Depth-bounded systems are one of the most expressive known fragment of the π-calculus for which interesting verification problems are still decidable. Even though they are infinite state systems depth-bounded systems are well-structured, thus can be analyzed algorithmically. We give an interpretation of depth-bounded systems as graph-rewriting systems. This gives more flexibility and ease of use to apply depth-bounded systems to other type of systems like shared memory concurrency. First, we develop an adequate domain of limits for depth-bounded systems, a prerequisite for the effective representation of downward-closed sets. Downward-closed sets are needed by forward saturation-based algorithms to represent potentially infinite sets of states. Then, we present an abstract interpretation framework to compute the covering set of well-structured transition systems. Because, in general, the covering set is not computable, our abstraction over-approximates the actual covering set. Our abstraction captures the essence of acceleration based-algorithms while giving up enough precision to ensure convergence. We have implemented the analysis in the PICASSO tool and show that it is accurate in practice. Finally, we build some further analyses like termination using the covering set as starting point.}, author = {Zufferey, Damien}, issn = {2663-337X}, pages = {134}, publisher = {Institute of Science and Technology Austria}, title = {{Analysis of dynamic message passing programs}}, doi = {10.15479/at:ista:1405}, year = {2013}, } @misc{5402, abstract = {Linearizability requires that the outcome of calls by competing threads to a concurrent data structure is the same as some sequential execution where each thread has exclusive access to the data structure. In an ordered data structure, such as a queue or a stack, linearizability is ensured by requiring threads commit in the order dictated by the sequential semantics of the data structure; e.g., in a concurrent queue implementation a dequeue can only remove the oldest element. In this paper, we investigate the impact of this strict ordering, by comparing what linearizability allows to what existing implementations do. We first give an operational definition for linearizability which allows us to build the most general linearizable implementation as a transition system for any given sequential specification. We then use this operational definition to categorize linearizable implementations based on whether they are bound or free. In a bound implementation, whenever all threads observe the same logical state, the updates to the logical state and the temporal order of commits coincide. All existing queue implementations we know of are bound. We then proceed to present, to the best of our knowledge, the first ever free queue implementation. Our experiments show that free implementations have the potential for better performance by suffering less from contention.}, author = {Henzinger, Thomas A and Sezgin, Ali}, issn = {2664-1690}, pages = {16}, publisher = {IST Austria}, title = {{How free is your linearizable concurrent data structure?}}, doi = {10.15479/AT:IST-2013-123-v1-1}, year = {2013}, } @misc{5406, abstract = {We consider the distributed synthesis problem fortemporal logic specifications. Traditionally, the problem has been studied for LTL, and the previous results show that the problem is decidable iff there is no information fork in the architecture. We consider the problem for fragments of LTLand our main results are as follows: (1) We show that the problem is undecidable for architectures with information forks even for the fragment of LTL with temporal operators restricted to next and eventually. (2) For specifications restricted to globally along with non-nested next operators, we establish decidability (in EXPSPACE) for star architectures where the processes receive disjoint inputs, whereas we establish undecidability for architectures containing an information fork-meet structure. (3)Finally, we consider LTL without the next operator, and establish decidability (NEXPTIME-complete) for all architectures for a fragment that consists of a set of safety assumptions, and a set of guarantees where each guarantee is a safety, reachability, or liveness condition.}, author = {Chatterjee, Krishnendu and Henzinger, Thomas A and Otop, Jan and Pavlogiannis, Andreas}, issn = {2664-1690}, pages = {11}, publisher = {IST Austria}, title = {{Distributed synthesis for LTL Fragments}}, doi = {10.15479/AT:IST-2013-130-v1-1}, year = {2013}, } @inbook{5747, author = {Dragoi, Cezara and Gupta, Ashutosh and Henzinger, Thomas A}, booktitle = {Computer Aided Verification}, isbn = {9783642397981}, issn = {1611-3349}, location = {Saint Petersburg, Russia}, pages = {174--190}, publisher = {Springer Berlin Heidelberg}, title = {{Automatic Linearizability Proofs of Concurrent Objects with Cooperating Updates}}, doi = {10.1007/978-3-642-39799-8_11}, volume = {8044}, year = {2013}, } @misc{6440, abstract = {In order to guarantee that each method of a data structure updates the logical state exactly once, al-most all non-blocking implementations employ Compare-And-Swap (CAS) based synchronization. For FIFO queue implementations this translates into concurrent enqueue or dequeue methods competing among themselves to update the same variable, the tail or the head, respectively, leading to high contention and poor scalability. Recent non-blocking queue implementations try to alleviate high contentionby increasing the number of contention points, all the while using CAS-based synchronization. Furthermore, obtaining a wait-free implementation with competition is achieved by additional synchronization which leads to further degradation of performance.In this paper we formalize the notion of competitiveness of a synchronizing statement which can beused as a measure for the scalability of concurrent implementations. We present a new queue implementation, the Speculative Pairing (SP) queue, which, as we show, decreases competitiveness by using Fetch-And-Increment (FAI) instead of CAS. We prove that the SP queue is linearizable and lock-free.We also show that replacing CAS with FAI leads to wait-freedom for dequeue methods without an adverse effect on performance. In fact, our experiments suggest that the SP queue can perform and scale better than the state-of-the-art queue implementations.}, author = {Henzinger, Thomas A and Payer, Hannes and Sezgin, Ali}, issn = {2664-1690}, pages = {23}, publisher = {IST Austria}, title = {{Replacing competition with cooperation to achieve scalable lock-free FIFO queues }}, doi = {10.15479/AT:IST-2013-124-v1-1}, year = {2013}, } @inproceedings{2328, abstract = {Linearizability of concurrent data structures is usually proved by monolithic simulation arguments relying on identifying the so-called linearization points. Regrettably, such proofs, whether manual or automatic, are often complicated and scale poorly to advanced non-blocking concurrency patterns, such as helping and optimistic updates. In response, we propose a more modular way of checking linearizability of concurrent queue algorithms that does not involve identifying linearization points. We reduce the task of proving linearizability with respect to the queue specification to establishing four basic properties, each of which can be proved independently by simpler arguments. As a demonstration of our approach, we verify the Herlihy and Wing queue, an algorithm that is challenging to verify by a simulation proof.}, author = {Henzinger, Thomas A and Sezgin, Ali and Vafeiadis, Viktor}, location = {Buenos Aires, Argentina}, pages = {242 -- 256}, publisher = {Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik}, title = {{Aspect-oriented linearizability proofs}}, doi = {10.1007/978-3-642-40184-8_18}, volume = {8052}, year = {2013}, } @inproceedings{10903, abstract = {We propose a logic-based framework for automated reasoning about sequential programs manipulating singly-linked lists and arrays with unbounded data. We introduce the logic SLAD, which allows combining shape constraints, written in a fragment of Separation Logic, with data and size constraints. We address the problem of checking the entailment between SLAD formulas, which is crucial in performing pre-post condition reasoning. Although this problem is undecidable in general for SLAD, we propose a sound and powerful procedure that is able to solve this problem for a large class of formulas, beyond the capabilities of existing techniques and tools. We prove that this procedure is complete, i.e., it is actually a decision procedure for this problem, for an important fragment of SLAD including known decidable logics. We implemented this procedure and shown its preciseness and its efficiency on a significant benchmark of formulas.}, author = {Bouajjani, Ahmed and Dragoi, Cezara and Enea, Constantin and Sighireanu, Mihaela}, booktitle = {Automated Technology for Verification and Analysis}, isbn = {9783642333859}, issn = {1611-3349}, location = {Thiruvananthapuram, India}, pages = {167--182}, publisher = {Springer}, title = {{Accurate invariant checking for programs manipulating lists and arrays with infinite data}}, doi = {10.1007/978-3-642-33386-6_14}, volume = {7561}, year = {2012}, }