Proof Obligation Names (Rodin User Manual): Difference between revisions

From Event-B
Jump to navigationJump to search
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 Theorem||<math>m</math>  / WD||<math>m</math> is the theorem name
|Well-definedness of a Derived Axiom||<math>m</math>  / WD||<math>m</math> is the axiom name
|-
|-
|Theorem||<math>m</math>  / THM||<math>m</math> is the theorem 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 Theorem||<math>m</math>  / WD||<math>m</math> is the theorem name
|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
|-
|-
|Theorem||<math>m</math>  / THM||<math>m</math> is the theorem 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 theorem saying the the disjunction of the abstract guards imply the disjunction of the concrete guards.
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 m / WD m is the axiom name
Well-definedness of a Derived Axiom m / WD m is the axiom name
Derived Axiom m / THM m is the axiom name

Next is a table showing the name of machine proof obligations:

Well-definedness of an Invariant v / WD v is the invariant name
Well-definedness of a Derived Invariant m / WD m is the invariant name
Well-definedness of an event Guard t / d / WD t is the event name

d is the action name

Well-definedness of an event Action t / d / WD t is the event name

d is the action name

Feasibility of a non-det. event Action t / d / FIS t is the event name

d is the action name

Derived Invariant m / THM m is the invariant name
Invariant Establishment INIT. / v / INV v is the invariant name
Invariant Preservation t / v / INV t is the event name

v is the invariant name

Next are the proof obligations concerned with machine refinements:

Guard Strengthening t / d / GRD t is the concrete event name

d is the abstract guard name

Guard Strengthening (merge) t / MRG t is the concrete event name
Action Simulation t / d / SIM t is the concrete event name

d is the abstract action name

Equality of a preserved Variable t / v / EQL t is the concrete event name

v is the preserved variable


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 t / NAT t is the new event name
Decreasing of Variant t / VAR t is the new event name

Finally, here are the proof obligations concerned with witnesses:

Well definedness of Witness t / p / WWD t is the concrete event name

p is parameter name

or a primed variable name

Feasibility of non-det. Witness t / p / WFIS t is the concrete event name

p is parameter 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.