Search results

From Event-B
Jump to navigationJump to search
  • select relevant hypotheses for a proof as opposed to the user doing this the proof control, or automatically as part of the auto tactic.
    4 KB (569 words) - 07:04, 1 August 2011
  • ...ted Event-B model is enforced to implement the mode diagram by a number of proof obligations. ...ts the main development with an orthogonal set of documents and additional proof obligations.
    5 KB (816 words) - 17:37, 3 December 2010
  • * <tt>IPOFile</tt>: proof obligation file * <tt>IPRFile</tt>: proof file
    6 KB (897 words) - 11:47, 29 January 2009
  • Consequently, if we drop the maximality axiom, we have to generate additional proof obligations for showing that every instantiation of a constant belongs to t ...above. However, all these adjustments would be made under the control of proof, rather than performed by a tool. Moreover, the user would have the opportu
    4 KB (704 words) - 10:17, 5 December 2012
  • ...resent systems at different abstraction levels and the use of mathematical proof to verify consistency between refinement levels. You can know more of Event ...or Event-B that provides effective support for refinement and mathematical proof. The platform is open source, contributes to the Eclipse framework and is f
    10 KB (1,629 words) - 12:50, 12 August 2009
  • ...The manipulations are done within Event-B where they can be checked by the Proof Obligation system, and B2C made as simple as possible to maximise reliabili
    1 KB (232 words) - 20:27, 8 February 2010
  • # Proof of Obligation integration to Generic Instantiation file:<br>Axiom replaceme
    2 KB (206 words) - 01:40, 18 August 2014
  • ...See also [[Proof_Skeleton_View#Copy.2FPaste_to_Proof_Tree | Copy/Paste to Proof Tree]]. FR 2844800: Copy from Proof Skeleton to Proof Tree
    11 KB (1,488 words) - 10:06, 28 July 2010
  • |rowspan="9"|'''Automated Proof and Model-checking'''<br/>[Systerel / Düsseldorf / Southampton] |Develop enabledness-preservation proof obligations
    4 KB (584 words) - 09:50, 12 September 2013
  • * Using proof information to improve model checking. ...rder to ensure safe operation. For this task, Siemens has developed custom proof rules for AtelierB. AtelierB, however, was unable to deal with about 80 pro
    17 KB (2,580 words) - 15:55, 28 January 2010
  • ...go through all undischarged POs, just to see them in turn be proved. The "Proof Replay on Undischarged POs" command does it in a single step. It is accessi :See also: [[Proof Obligation Commands]]
    12 KB (1,642 words) - 13:21, 28 July 2010
  • ...o write the set corresponding to <math>T</math> in the editing area of the Proof Control Window || M ...the set corresponding to <math>S \rel T</math> in the editing area of the Proof Control Window || M
    36 KB (5,611 words) - 10:22, 1 February 2024
  • ...0 automatic rewriting rules have been added, making it easier to discharge proof obligations. [[Image:Rodin_Performances_Editor_perf_simplev2.png|850px|Rodin Proof Editor Performances]]
    10 KB (1,277 words) - 13:45, 26 July 2011
  • ...a reference to a IPRReasoner, a newly introduced proof element type. See [[Proof Dependencies and Reasoner Conflicts]]. Bug 3243479: Font is not updated in proof skeleton view
    10 KB (1,354 words) - 13:31, 1 July 2011
  • * Consider adding the proof tactics: [[Rodin Proof Tactics]]
    5 KB (720 words) - 11:28, 15 September 2011
  • plug-in. While looking for a proof, it was allocating megabytes of memory, and upon cancellation the memory wa
    2 KB (337 words) - 11:03, 10 November 2008
  • ...upport for modelling and tool-assisted reasoning, in particular, automated proof. The platform is open source and can be extended with plug-ins. A range of
    2 KB (303 words) - 14:32, 19 May 2020
  • ::- Navigating through proof tree nodes is faster (useless refreshings of search hypotheses where remove ...rily complicated lemmas.Some old proofs could appear as undischarged, the "Proof Replay on Undischarged POs" commmand will discharge these proofs.
    15 KB (2,008 words) - 15:34, 10 January 2011
  • ...and with fewer needed hypotheses which makes proof rules more legible and proof replay less sensitive to modifications of the models. ...create, internally to the reasoner, a small proof tree built from internal proof rules (implemented in class Rules). Each rule contains one predicate and an
    19 KB (3,362 words) - 13:50, 5 June 2014
  • ...h could be customized and parameterized tactics to discharge some specific proof obligations.<br> ...n proof obligations. ProB has also been used for finding count examples to proof rules of the industrial partner Siemens.<br>
    21 KB (3,334 words) - 21:20, 20 April 2012
  • ...the critical shortcomings of the previous version: generation of unwieldy proof obligations (a large disjunction in a goal comprising several hundreds of t ...ive laws result in a more natural and compact model with fewer and simpler proof obligations. The method and the tool were development by Newcastle Universi
    19 KB (2,944 words) - 15:28, 27 January 2011
  • automated proof. The platform is open source and can be extended with
    2 KB (294 words) - 09:58, 16 October 2017
  • The tactic profiles are now quickly available while proving: from Proof Control, click the green triangle dropdown list and choose the profile, it ...simulated before). This avoids strange behaviors that could happen when a proof obligation changes several times.
    8 KB (1,195 words) - 16:35, 9 July 2014
  • # [http://www.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/academic/class/15671-f95/www/handouts/proof/node1.html One point rule] * Proof obligations
    9 KB (1,298 words) - 10:06, 28 July 2010
  • We give an example of Event-B model of which proof obligation can be discharged using an SMT solver: ...into the Rodin Platform, the SMT tactic button is now accessible in the ''Proof Control'' bar.
    17 KB (2,538 words) - 15:41, 2 October 2017
  • Bug 3370087: Cannot save proof with ae Bug 3415433: NPE on proof saving
    11 KB (1,401 words) - 09:39, 8 November 2011
  • ...es) that Atelier B quite often runs out of memory, even with the dedicated proof rules and with maximum memory allocated. In some of the bigger and more rec ...always easy to see for an user if this is caused by the complexity of the proof or by an error.
    16 KB (2,553 words) - 15:12, 27 January 2011
  • 797 ClassCastException when saving proof 361 Add show info and next subgoals buttons to proof tree view
    5 KB (703 words) - 14:37, 29 April 2022
  • automated proof. The platform is open source and can be extended with
    2 KB (356 words) - 12:46, 24 May 2018
  • effective support for modelling and automated proof. The platform is open
    3 KB (368 words) - 12:49, 15 April 2024
  • ...w''': this new view shows the type environment for the current node of the proof (free identifiers and their type). It is accessible through "Window > Show :'''Proof Simplification''': once proofs are complete, they can be automatically simp
    11 KB (1,542 words) - 08:35, 1 March 2012
  • ...n of a refinement of the problem at hand is correct by construction and no proof obligation needs to be generated. ...ction of reusing a pattern within a development to be correct (without any proof), the pattern and the development have to be matched. This means the elemen
    17 KB (2,670 words) - 15:07, 24 January 2012
  • exhibited seem to come from nowhere (in fact, proof obligations of the the proof of the model, as event guards become more and more complex
    6 KB (967 words) - 12:57, 28 October 2008
  • ...ified, only the validated ones are available. By validated, we mean "whose proof obligations are either dischared or reviewed".
    2 KB (338 words) - 17:11, 9 July 2010
  • ...m (using Event-B notation) and study the concerns, properties, conditions, proof obligations, advantages and disadvantages when create/analysing system spec ...ed machine invariant should be visible to the composed machine or not (for proof optimization).
    7 KB (1,161 words) - 11:02, 4 July 2013
  • ...PI simplification''': some operations of the user support work only on the proof tree in main memory. Therefore, they cannot raise any RodinDBException, as Bug 3054228: Proof simplification too slow
    11 KB (1,478 words) - 17:32, 2 May 2012
  • ...nc=detail&aid=3370087&group_id=108850&atid=651669 Bug 3370087: Cannot save proof with ae]
    3 KB (398 words) - 15:31, 22 July 2011
  • 12. While developing refinements (in order to discharge proof obligations) we add invariants to states about a) states of other component
    3 KB (420 words) - 22:08, 30 September 2020
  • 12. While developing refinements (in order to discharge proof obligations) we add invariants to states about a) states of other component
    3 KB (420 words) - 22:10, 30 September 2020
  • [[Proof Hints]]
    3 KB (351 words) - 11:30, 23 January 2014
  • Bug 3565590: Can't open a proof Bug 2957980: Proof Skeleton View : \n displayed as squares
    10 KB (1,301 words) - 07:11, 29 August 2013
  • ...enable users to find sequences of events that prevent safety properties or proof obligations to be fulfilled.
    3 KB (399 words) - 11:20, 27 January 2010
  • * commit the shared project (note that no model/proof files should appear for commit at this stage)
    3 KB (445 words) - 07:03, 1 August 2011
  • ...this case we chose to only put the .tuf (theory unchecked file) and .bpr (proof file) into the archive, because other files (.tcf, .bpo, .bps) are generate
    3 KB (539 words) - 14:57, 14 June 2021
  • ...Solvers'' which both help to raise the number of automatically discharged proof obligations.
    3 KB (500 words) - 09:18, 23 April 2012
  • 743 Error while running tool (Automatic Proof Obligation Manager) 739 Opening a proved proof - prune the proof
    9 KB (1,317 words) - 11:09, 6 July 2017
  • Bug 2957980: Proof Skeleton View : \n displayed as squares Bug 3112539: Proof status after theory change
    10 KB (1,328 words) - 16:14, 3 August 2012
  • ...checked. But it is still worthy because it may simplify a lot, and so make proof obligations simpler and more legible to users. #Finally, the proof rule is made. There are 5 cases :
    10 KB (1,784 words) - 16:04, 18 March 2014
  • ...component configurations (a configuration is a set of static checking and proof generation rules). Currently one can add new bag of rules alongside an exis
    3 KB (518 words) - 11:34, 6 September 2010
  • [[Category:Developer documentation]][[Category:Proof]]
    4 KB (617 words) - 09:43, 19 June 2012
  • ...project. Instead an aim is to develop a sufficient framework to act as a proof-of-concept to enable code generation for the Bosch and SSF pilots. A furth ...real-time embedded systems from code-oriented models. A refinement-based proof method for code-oriented models will be defined and incorporated into the R
    11 KB (1,725 words) - 18:07, 7 December 2009
  • This page contains descriptions of the available proof tactics within the RODIN Platform. ...ails explanation of the tactic, when it is applicable, give the associated proof rule. See [[Inference Rules|Inference rules]] list and [[All Rewrite Rules
    57 KB (6,150 words) - 17:25, 21 February 2012
  • * Proof Obligation Generator === Proof Obligation Generator requirements ===
    19 KB (2,883 words) - 18:20, 17 March 2014
  • * The compatibility is preserved upwardly throught model and proof upward compatibility. However, this compatibility is ensured on models and
    4 KB (532 words) - 06:51, 4 April 2023
  • * Decomposing proof effort: splitting helps to split verification effort. It also helps to reus ...ts and actions contained in them is linearly proportional to the number of proof obligations.
    18 KB (2,784 words) - 10:57, 6 September 2010
  • ...ransitions must be disjoint and complete. Note that we do not yet generate proof obligations to show this. We illustrate the translation with an example fra
    4 KB (659 words) - 09:47, 17 May 2012
  • === <font id="po">Generation of the proof obligations</font> === ...[http://handbook.event-b.org/current/html/generated_proof_obligations.html proof obligations] (PO) have been handled successfully.
    43 KB (6,950 words) - 09:48, 27 October 2011
  • ...uite annoying, especially when the extension does not play any role in the proof, but is just in the way of the prover.
    4 KB (660 words) - 16:36, 18 March 2014
  • **Added proof obligations: WD and INV for (composition) invariants and INV, SIM and GRD f
    4 KB (550 words) - 10:39, 25 November 2014
  • ...the model. The tool statically checks the views and generates a number of proof obligations. ...he start and terminal modes which do not have names. The names are used in proof obligations.
    21 KB (3,472 words) - 20:32, 26 June 2015
  • ...tp://wiki.event-b.org/images/Reasoned_modelling.pdf A Proposal for a Rodin Proof Planner & Reasoned Modelling Plug-in]
    5 KB (766 words) - 09:59, 21 September 2011
  • effective support for modelling and automated proof. The platform is open
    4 KB (595 words) - 09:41, 29 June 2021
  • ...l ones added. Unfortunately, veriT has one restriction: it does not handle proof obligations which contain sets of sets.
    5 KB (797 words) - 10:29, 24 October 2011
  • * Adisak Intana, Michael R. Poppleton, and Geoff V. Merrett: ''Proof-based formal methods for WSN development with Simulation Approach''
    4 KB (521 words) - 13:15, 13 June 2013
  • ...castle University, Swansea University, Invensys Rail) works on integrating proof-based reasoning about time in state-based models, exemplified by Event-B an
    5 KB (718 words) - 11:40, 23 October 2015
  • 781 Problem with the Rodin proof generator 771 Proof view: unreadable formulas (white on white)
    8 KB (1,249 words) - 13:09, 11 September 2020
  • ...types. Along with these additional notations, the user can also define new proof rules (prover extensions). ...es and new proof rules. Theories are developed in the Rodin workspace, and proof obligations are generated to validate prover and mathematical extensions. W
    35 KB (5,228 words) - 10:12, 23 April 2012
  • [[Category:Proof]]
    4 KB (738 words) - 12:53, 12 August 2009
  • :Extending the proof obligation generator : [http://wiki.event-b.org/images/Modelling-verification-proof.pdf Transcript] of a subsequent e-mail discussion between Ken Robinson and
    5 KB (716 words) - 09:28, 22 November 2010
  • ...owing them to provide as many tactic applications as they will for a given proof node, even they apply to the same predicate and at the same position.
    7 KB (746 words) - 13:00, 12 October 2009
  • ..._Proof_Obligation_Generator(How_to_extend_Rodin_Tutorial) | Generating the proof obligations]]}} ...after our extension. The Static Checker (SC) is one dedicated part of the Proof Obligation (PO) generation process. Indeed, the POs are generated from the
    18 KB (2,534 words) - 13:53, 5 September 2013
  • effective support for modelling and automated proof. The platform is open
    5 KB (664 words) - 18:29, 6 June 2016
  • *Proof obligation were added: Well-Definedness (WD) and Invariant preservation (IN
    6 KB (891 words) - 17:21, 11 December 2012
  • ...d massage the latter so that it statically checks and does not produce any proof obligation.
    5 KB (764 words) - 15:49, 19 April 2011
  • The instantiation leads to proof obligations approach employed by Event-B: generating proof obligations. We, initially, focus on adding the facility to specify
    12 KB (1,869 words) - 16:35, 18 March 2014
  • * Decomposing proof effort: splitting helps to split verification effort. It also helps to reus
    6 KB (921 words) - 11:43, 8 January 2010
  • 771 Proof view: unreadable formulas (white on white)
    5 KB (758 words) - 16:28, 7 March 2018
  • ! scope=row |Proof ...arget every assignment, expression or predicate in any context, machine or proof file and upgrade their contents to the new language version.<br />
    14 KB (2,104 words) - 09:40, 11 May 2009
  • ...ome properties (like temporal logic ones), that have currently no matching proof support.
    6 KB (1,016 words) - 10:41, 23 September 2013
  • * [[Accessing Proof Obligations|How to access Proof Obligations]].
    15 KB (2,372 words) - 16:29, 19 May 2015
  • | || 14h40 || Program Development in Event-B with Proof Outlines
    8 KB (1,073 words) - 06:13, 24 June 2014
  • ...:green"> available </span> || ?.x.x || || || Improves chance of automatic proof by selecting relevant hypotheses
    9 KB (1,244 words) - 13:52, 1 April 2022
  • A goal to be achieved is to rename proof obligations when a refactory occurs (not available in this version).
    39 KB (4,626 words) - 08:33, 6 April 2012
  • There is, however, also a additional proof obligation that requires to demonstrate that a call to ''d1_open'' was done
    8 KB (1,166 words) - 20:58, 10 November 2009
  • ...tp://poporo.uma.pt/eventb2dafny/Home.html EventB2Dafny] translates Event-B proof-obligations into the input language of Dafny. Developed by Néstor Cataño. ...Generation (CG) Feature in the initial release is a demonstration tool; a proof of concept, rather than a prototype. The tool has no static checker and, th
    17 KB (2,568 words) - 09:03, 19 October 2015
  • Test Builder = SC + POG + POM, no proof attempt is performed.
    7 KB (787 words) - 08:43, 17 June 2011
  • ...intended transition in the refinement. The bug could not be discovered by proof since the bug resulted in a valid refinement, however, the behaviour was ce
    7 KB (1,130 words) - 14:39, 28 January 2010
  • ...ther plug-ins will be able to extend the text editor as well. And last, a proof-of-concept prototype had been put together very quickly.
    8 KB (1,257 words) - 15:56, 28 January 2010
  • * Jens Bendisposto and Michael Leuschel - Proof Assisted Model Checking for B
    7 KB (1,003 words) - 20:08, 12 October 2009
  • ...n since it has no guard of its own. In a future enhancement we can produce proof obligations to show that the branch is disjoint and guard coverage is compl
    9 KB (1,528 words) - 08:43, 2 September 2013
  • ...nd requests were collected along. At the same time, the Event-B models and proof got bigger and bigger, in the same way as the experience of the users invol ...ava heap size which is, for example, extensively used during the automated proof. After a phase of testing and despite the drawbacks of assembling and maint
    20 KB (3,030 words) - 13:18, 18 July 2012
  • ...ject oriented style for guards and actions but is not as easy to relate to proof goals in the Event-B prover.''
    11 KB (1,713 words) - 20:07, 18 April 2010
  • * Proof Tactics
    9 KB (1,421 words) - 12:41, 8 December 2011
  • ...ome properties (like temporal logic ones), that have currently no matching proof support.
    11 KB (1,711 words) - 09:47, 26 June 2012
  • ...be placed at position 1 whereas a theorem or invariant included purely for proof purposes might be placed at position -10.
    13 KB (1,988 words) - 11:01, 30 May 2020
  • Regardless of whether the closing axiom is introduced, some feasibility proof obligations arising from the use of the
    18 KB (2,643 words) - 12:41, 12 August 2009
  • ...de generation feature as a demonstrator tool; chiefly a tool designed as a proof of concept, used by us to validate the approach. In this sense, the tool as
    12 KB (1,818 words) - 08:31, 20 April 2012
  • ...ts (''ModelProjects'') where the root file contains elements that can have proof obligations associated (in that case they should extends the abstract class
    20 KB (2,461 words) - 16:33, 24 May 2010
  • ...for the event-B tools when defining the granularity of static checking and proof obligation generation.
    14 KB (2,204 words) - 12:58, 12 October 2009
  • [[Image:Rodin_Performances_Editor_perf_simplev2_nos.png|850px|Rodin Proof Editor Performances]]
    13 KB (1,991 words) - 20:57, 20 April 2012

View (previous 100 | next 100) (20 | 50 | 100 | 250 | 500)