Network


Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where Howard Barringer is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by Howard Barringer.


verification model checking and abstract interpretation | 2004

Rule-Based Runtime Verification

Howard Barringer; Allen Goldberg; Klaus Havelund; Koushik Sen

We present a rule-based framework for defining and implementing finite trace monitoring logics, including future and past time temporal logic, extended regular expressions, real-time logics, interval logics, forms of quantified temporal logics, and so on. Our logic, Eagle, is implemented as a Java library and involves novel techniques for rule definition, manipulation and execution. Monitoring is done on a state-by-state basis, without storing the execution trace.


symposium on the theory of computing | 1984

Now you may compose temporal logic specifications

Howard Barringer; Ruurd Kuiper; Amir Pnueli

A compositional temporal logic proof system for the specification and verification of concurrent programs is presented. Versions of the system are developed for shared variables and communication based programming languages that include procedures.


automated software engineering | 2002

Assumption generation for software component verification

Dimitra Giannakopoulou; Corina S. Pasareanu; Howard Barringer

Model checking is an automated technique that can be used to determine whether a system satisfies certain required properties. The typical approach to verifying properties of software components is to check them for all possible environments. In reality, however, a component is only required to satisfy properties in specific environments. Unless these environments are formally characterized and used during verification (assume-guarantee paradigm), the results returned by verification can be overly pessimistic. This work defines a framework that brings a new dimension to model checking of software components. When checking a component against a property, our model checking algorithms return one of the following three results: the component satisfies a property for any environment; the component violates the property for any environment; or finally, our algorithms generate an assumption that characterizes exactly those environments in which the component satisfies its required property. Our approach has been implemented in the LTSA tool and has been applied to the analysis of a NASA application.


symposium on principles of programming languages | 1986

A really abstract concurrent model and its temporal logic

Howard Barringer; Ruurd Kuiper; Amir Pnueli

In this paper we advance the radical notion that a computational model based on the <i>reals</i> provides a more abstract description of concurrent and reactive systems, than the conventional <i>integers</i> based behavioral model of execution <i>sequences.</i> The real model is studied in the setting of temporal logic, and we illustrate its advantages by providing a <i>fully abstract</i> temporal semantics for a simple concurrent language, and an example of verification of a concurrent program within the real temporal logic defined here. It is shown that, by imposing the crucial condition of <i>finite variability,</i> we achieve a balanced formalism that is insensitive to <i>finite</i> stuttering, but can recognize <i>infinite</i> stuttering, a distinction which is essential for obtaining a fully abstract semantics of non-terminating processes. Among other advantages, going into real-based semantics obviates the need for the controversial representation of concurrency by interleaving, and most of the associated fairness constraints.


Acta Informatica | 1984

A logic covering undefinedness in program proofs

Howard Barringer; J H Cheng; Cliff B. Jones

SummaryRecursive definition often results in partial functions; iteration gives rise to programs which may fail to terminate for some imputs. Proofs about such functions or programs should be conducted in logical systems which reflect the possibility of “undefined values”. This paper provides an axiomatization of such a logic together with examples of its use.


rex workshop on stepwise refinement of distributed systems models formalisms correctness | 1989

METATEM: a framework for programming in temporal logic

Howard Barringer; Michael Fisher; Dov M. Gabbay; Graham Gough; Richard Owens

In this paper we further develop the methodology of temporal logic as an executable imperative language, presented by Moszkowski [Mos86] and Gabbay [Gab87, Gab89] and present a concrete framework, called MetateM for executing (modal and) temporal logics. Our approach is illustrated by the development of an execution mechanism for a propositional temporal logic and for a restricted first order temporal logic.


Journal of Logic and Computation | 2010

Rule Systems for Run-time Monitoring

Howard Barringer; David E. Rydeheard; Klaus Havelund

In Barringer et al. (2004,Vol. 2937, LNCS), Eagle was introduced as a general purpose rule-based temporal logic for specifying run-time monitors. A novel interpretative trace-checking scheme via stepwise transformation of an Eagle monitoring formula was defined and implemented. However, even though Eagle presents an elegant formalism for the expression of complex trace properties, Eagles interpretation scheme is complex and appears difficult to implement efficiently. In this article, we introduce RuleR, a primitive conditional rule-based system, which has a simple and easily implemented algorithm for effective run-time checking, and into which one can compile a wide range of temporal logics and other specification formalisms used for run-time verification. As a formal demonstration, we provide a translation scheme for linear-time propositional temporal logic with a proof of translation correctness. We then introduce a parameterized version of RuleR, in which rule names may have rule-expression or data parameters, which then coincides with the same expressivity as Eagle with data arguments. RuleR with just rule-expression parameters extend the expressiveness of RuleR strictly beyond the class of context-free languages. For the language classes expressible in propositional RuleR, the addition of rule-expression and data parameters enables more compact translations. Finally, we outline a few simple syntactic extensions of ‘core’ RuleR that can lead to further conciseness of specification but still enabling easy and efficient implementation.


formal methods | 2008

Learning to divide and conquer: applying the L* algorithm to automate assume-guarantee reasoning

Corina S. Păsăreanu; Dimitra Giannakopoulou; Mihaela Gheorghiu Bobaru; Jamieson M. Cobleigh; Howard Barringer

Assume-guarantee reasoning enables a “divide-and-conquer” approach to the verification of large systems that checks system components separately while using assumptions about each component’s environment. Developing appropriate assumptions used to be a difficult and manual process. Over the past five years, we have developed a framework for performing assume-guarantee verification of systems in an incremental and fully automated fashion. The framework uses an off-the-shelf learning algorithm to compute the assumptions. The assumptions are initially approximate and become more precise by means of counterexamples obtained by model checking components separately. The framework supports different assume-guarantee rules, both symmetric and asymmetric. Moreover, we have recently introduced alphabet refinement, which extends the assumption learning process to also infer assumption alphabets. This refinement technique starts with assumption alphabets that are a subset of the minimal interface between a component and its environment, and adds actions to it as necessary until a given property is shown to hold or to be violated in the system. We have applied the learning framework to a number of case studies that show that compositional verification by learning assumptions can be significantly more scalable than non-compositional verification.


Theoretical Computer Science | 2005

Combining test case generation and runtime verification

Cyrille Artho; Howard Barringer; Allen Goldberg; Klaus Havelund; Sarfraz Khurshid; Michael R. Lowry; Corina S. Pasareanu; Grigore Rosu; Koushik Sen; Willem Visser; Richard Washington

Software testing is typically an ad hoc process where human testers manually write test inputs and descriptions of expected test results, perhaps automating their execution in a regression suite. This process is cumbersome and costly. This paper reports results on a framework to further automate this process. The framework consists of combining automated test case generation based on systematically exploring the input domain of the program with runtime verification, where execution traces are monitored and verified against properties expressed in temporal logic. Capabilities also exist for analyzing traces for concurrency errors, such as deadlocks and data races. The input domain of the program is explored using a model checker extended with symbolic execution. Properties are formulated in an expressive temporal logic. A methodology is advocated that automatically generates properties specific to each input rather than formulating properties uniformly true for all inputs. The paper describes an application of the technology to a NASA rover controller.


Formal Aspects of Computing | 1995

MetateM: An introduction

Howard Barringer; Michael Fisher; Dov M. Gabbay; Graham Gough; Richard Owens

In this paper a methodology for the use of temporal logic as an executable imperative language is introduced. The approach, which provides a concrete framework, calledMetateM, for executing temporal formulae, is motivated and illustrated through examples. In addition, this introduction provides references to further, more detailed, work relating to theMetateM approach to executable logics.

Collaboration


Dive into the Howard Barringer's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Dov M. Gabbay

University of Luxembourg

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Graham Gough

University of Manchester

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Klaus Havelund

University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Brian Monahan

University of Manchester

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Koushik Sen

University of California

View shared research outputs
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge