Proof Obligation Names (Rodin User Manual): Difference between revisions
imported>Mathieu m New page: Next is a table describing the names of context proof obligations: <center> {{SimpleHeader}} |Well-definedness of an Axiom||<math>m</math> / WD||<math>m</math> is the axiom name |- |Well... |
imported>Ladenberger No edit summary |
||
| (2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{| class="wikitable" style="font-style:italic; text-align: center; font-size:120%; border: 3px dashed red;" | |||
|- | |||
! scope="col" | Do not edit! This content has been migrated to Subversion. | |||
|- | |||
|([http://handbook.event-b.org Nightly Handbook Build]) | |||
|} | |||
Next is a table describing the names of context proof obligations: | Next is a table describing the names of context proof obligations: | ||
| Line 5: | Line 12: | ||
|Well-definedness of an Axiom||<math>m</math> / WD||<math>m</math> is the axiom name | |Well-definedness of an Axiom||<math>m</math> / WD||<math>m</math> is the axiom name | ||
|- | |- | ||
|Well-definedness of a | |Well-definedness of a Derived Axiom||<math>m</math> / WD||<math>m</math> is the axiom name | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | |Derived Axiom||<math>m</math> / THM||<math>m</math> is the axiom name | ||
|} | |} | ||
</center> | </center> | ||
| Line 17: | Line 24: | ||
|Well-definedness of an Invariant||<math>v</math> / WD||<math>v</math> is the invariant name | |Well-definedness of an Invariant||<math>v</math> / WD||<math>v</math> is the invariant name | ||
|- | |- | ||
|Well-definedness of a | |Well-definedness of a Derived Invariant||<math>m</math> / WD||<math>m</math> is the invariant name | ||
|- | |- | ||
|Well-definedness of an event Guard||<math>t</math> / <math>d</math> / WD | |Well-definedness of an event Guard||<math>t</math> / <math>d</math> / WD | ||
| Line 34: | Line 41: | ||
<math>d</math> is the action name | <math>d</math> is the action name | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | |Derived Invariant||<math>m</math> / THM||<math>m</math> is the invariant name | ||
|- | |- | ||
|Invariant Establishment||INIT. / <math>v</math> / INV||<math>v</math> is the invariant name | |Invariant Establishment||INIT. / <math>v</math> / INV||<math>v</math> is the invariant name | ||
| Line 101: | Line 108: | ||
</center> | </center> | ||
Remark: At the moment, the deadlock freeness proof obligation generation is missing. If you need it, you can generate it yourself as a | Remark: At the moment, the deadlock freeness proof obligation generation is missing. If you need it, you can generate it yourself as a derived invariant saying the the disjunction of the abstract guards imply the disjunction of the concrete guards. | ||
| Line 107: | Line 114: | ||
[[Category:Rodin Platform|Proof Obligation Names]] | [[Category:Rodin Platform|Proof Obligation Names]] | ||
[[Category:User manual|Proof Obligation Names]] | [[Category:User manual|Proof Obligation Names]] | ||
[[Category:Proof]] | |||
Latest revision as of 15:09, 15 September 2011
| Do not edit! This content has been migrated to Subversion. |
|---|
| (Nightly Handbook Build) |
Next is a table describing the names of context proof obligations:
| Well-definedness of an Axiom | / WD |
is the axiom name
|
| Well-definedness of a Derived Axiom | / WD |
is the axiom name
|
| Derived Axiom | / THM |
is the axiom name
|
Next is a table showing the name of machine proof obligations:
| Well-definedness of an Invariant | / WD |
is the invariant name
|
| Well-definedness of a Derived Invariant | / WD |
is the invariant name
|
| Well-definedness of an event Guard | / / WD
|
is the event name
|
| Well-definedness of an event Action | / / WD
|
is the event name
|
| Feasibility of a non-det. event Action | / / FIS
|
is the event name
|
| Derived Invariant | / THM |
is the invariant name
|
| Invariant Establishment | INIT. / / INV |
is the invariant name
|
| Invariant Preservation | / / INV
|
is the event name
|
Next are the proof obligations concerned with machine refinements:
| Guard Strengthening | / / GRD
|
is the concrete event name
|
| Guard Strengthening (merge) | / MRG |
is the concrete event name
|
| Action Simulation | / / SIM
|
is the concrete event name
|
| Equality of a preserved Variable | / / EQL
|
is the concrete event name
|
Next are the proof obligations concerned with the new events variant:
| Well definedness of Variant | VWD | |
| Finiteness for a set Variant | FIN | |
| Natural number for a numeric Variant | / NAT |
is the new event name
|
| Decreasing of Variant | / VAR |
is the new event name
|
Finally, here are the proof obligations concerned with witnesses:
| Well definedness of Witness | / / WWD
|
is the concrete event name
or a primed variable name |
| Feasibility of non-det. Witness | / / WFIS
|
is the concrete event name
or a primed variable name |
Remark: At the moment, the deadlock freeness proof obligation generation is missing. If you need it, you can generate it yourself as a derived invariant saying the the disjunction of the abstract guards imply the disjunction of the concrete guards.
/ WD
/ WD
/
/ WD
/ WWD