demonstration

A regression proof selection tool for coq

Authors:

Milos GligoricAuthors Info & Claims

ICSE '18: Proceedings of the 40th International Conference on Software Engineering: Companion Proceeedings

Pages 117 - 120

https://doi.org/10.1145/3183440.3183493

Published: 27 May 2018 Publication History

Abstract

Large-scale software verification projects increasingly rely on proof assistants, such as Coq, to construct formal proofs of program correctness. However, such proofs must be checked after every change to a project to ensure expected program behavior. This process of regression proving can require substantial machine time, which is detrimental to productivity and trust in evolving projects. We present iCoq, the first regression proof selection tool. iCoq tracks fine-grained dependencies between Coq definitions, propositions, and proofs, and only checks those proofs affected by changes between two revisions. iCoq is suitable for workflows involving version control and continuous integration services, e.g., Travis CI. We applied iCoq to track dependencies across many revisions in several large Coq projects and measured the time savings compared to proof checking from scratch and when using Coq's timestamp-based toolchain for incremental checking. Our results show that proof checking with iCoq is up to 10 times faster than the former and up to 3 times faster than the latter. The demo video for iCoq can be found at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=egFnHkH5pXI.

References

[1]

2018. coq-dpdgraph. (2018). https://github.com/Karmaki/coq-dpdgraph.

[2]

2018. Coq manual ch. 15. (2018). https://coq.inria.fr/refman/tools.html.

[3]

2018. Coq manual ch. 28. (2018). https://coq.inria.fr/refman/async-proofs.html.

[4]

2018. The Coq Proof Assistant. (2018). https://coq.inria.fr.

[5]

Andrew W. Appel. 2015. Verification of a Cryptographic Primitive: SHA-256. Trans. Program. Lang. Syst. 37, 2 (2015), 7:1--7:31.

Digital Library

[6]

Bruno Barras, Carst Tankink, and Enrico Tassi. 2015. Asynchronous Processing of Coq Documents: From the Kernel up to the User Interface. In ITP. 51--66.

[7]

S. Boldo, J. H. Jourdan, X. Leroy, and G. Melquiond. 2013. A Formally-Verified C Compiler Supporting Floating-Point Arithmetic. In ARITH. 107--115.

Digital Library

[8]

Sylvie Boldo and Guillaume Melquiond. 2011. Flocq: A Unified Library for Proving Floating-Point Algorithms in Coq. In ARITH. 243--252.

Digital Library

[9]

Ahmet Celik, Karl Palmskog, and Milos Gligoric. 2017. iCoq: Regression Proof Selection for Large-Scale Verification Projects. In ASE. 171--182.

Digital Library

[10]

Haogang Chen, Tej Chajed, Alex Konradi, Stephanie Wang, Atalay İleri, Adam Chlipala, M. Frans Kaashoek, and Nickolai Zeldovich. 2017. Verifying a High-performance Crash-safe File System Using a Tree Specification. In SOSP. 270--286.

Digital Library

[11]

Michel Chilowicz, Étienne Duris, and Gilles Roussel. 2009. Syntax tree finger-printing for source code similarity detection. In ICPC. 243--247.

[12]

Milos Gligoric, Lamyaa Eloussi, and Darko Marinov. 2015. Practical Regression Test Selection with Dynamic File Dependencies. In ISSTA. 211--222.

Digital Library

[13]

M. Hilton, T. Tunnell, K. Huang, D. Marinov, and D. Dig. 2016. Usage, Costs, and Benefits of Continuous Integration in Open-Source Projects. In ASE. 426--437.

Digital Library

[14]

Owolabi Legunsen, Farah Hariri, August Shi, Yafeng Lu, Lingming Zhang, and Darko Marinov. 2016. An Extensive Study of Static Regression Test Selection in Modern Software Evolution. In FSE. 583--594.

Digital Library

[15]

Xavier Leroy. 2009. Formal Verification of a Realistic Compiler. Commun. ACM 52, 7 (2009), 107--115.

Digital Library

[16]

Alessandro Orso, Nanjuan Shi, and Mary Jean Harrold. 2004. Scaling Regression Testing to Large Software Systems. In FSE. 241--251.

Digital Library

[17]

Gregg Rothermel and Mary Jean Harrold. 1996. Analyzing Regression Test Selection Techniques. TSE 22, 8 (1996), 529--551.

Digital Library

[18]

TravisCI 2017. Travis CI. (2017). https://travis-ci.org.

[19]

Vladimir Voevodsky. 2015. An experimental library of formalized Mathematics based on the univalent foundations. MSCS 25, 5 (2015), 1278--1294.

[20]

James R. Wilcox, Doug Woos, Pavel Panchekha, Zachary Tatlock, Xi Wang, Michael D. Ernst, and Thomas Anderson. 2015. Verdi: A Framework for Implementing and Formally Verifying Distributed Systems. In PLDI. 357--368.

Digital Library

[21]

Doug Woos, James R. Wilcox, Steve Anton, Zachary Tatlock, Michael D. Ernst, and Thomas Anderson. 2016. Planning for change in a formal verification of the Raft consensus protocol. In CPP. 154--165.

Digital Library

Cited By

First ERabe MRinger TBrun YChandra SBlincoe KTonella P(2023)Baldur: Whole-Proof Generation and Repair with Large Language ModelsProceedings of the 31st ACM Joint European Software Engineering Conference and Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering10.1145/3611643.3616243(1229-1241)Online publication date: 30-Nov-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3611643.3616243
Sanchez-Stern AFirst EZhou TKaufman ZBrun YRinger T(2023)Passport: Improving Automated Formal Verification Using IdentifiersACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems10.1145/359337445:2(1-30)Online publication date: 26-Jun-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3593374
Beyer DJakobs MLemberger T(2020)Difference Verification with ConditionsSoftware Engineering and Formal Methods10.1007/978-3-030-58768-0_8(133-154)Online publication date: 14-Sep-2020
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/978-3-030-58768-0_8
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

A regression proof selection tool for coq
1. Software and its engineering
  1. Software creation and management
    1. Software post-development issues
      1. Software evolution
2. Theory of computation
  1. Logic
    1. Logic and verification

Recommendations

Completeness and decidability of converse PDL in the constructive type theory of Coq
CPP 2018: Proceedings of the 7th ACM SIGPLAN International Conference on Certified Programs and Proofs

The completeness proofs for Propositional Dynamic Logic (PDL) in the literature are non-constructive and usually presented in an informal manner. We obtain a formal and constructive completeness proof for Converse PDL by recasting a completeness proof ...
Proof Reflection in Coq

We formalize natural deduction for first-order logic in the proof assistant Coq, using de Bruijn indices for variable binding. The main judgment we model is of the form Γ⊢d [:] ϕ, stating that d is a proof term of formula ϕ under hypotheses Γ; it can be ...
Call-by-push-value in Coq: operational, equational, and denotational theory
CPP 2019: Proceedings of the 8th ACM SIGPLAN International Conference on Certified Programs and Proofs

Call-by-push-value (CBPV) is an idealised calculus for functional and imperative programming, introduced as a subsuming paradigm for both call-by-value (CBV) and call-by-name (CBN). We formalise weak and strong operational semantics for (effect-free) ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences

ICSE '18: Proceedings of the 40th International Conference on Software Engineering: Companion Proceeedings

May 2018

231 pages

ISBN:9781450356633

DOI:10.1145/3183440

Conference Chair:
Michel Chaudron
Chalmers University of Technology, University of Gothenburg, Sweden
,
General Chair:
Ivica Crnkovic
Chalmers University of Technology, University of Gothenburg, Sweden
,
Program Chairs:
Marsha Chechik
University of Toronto, Canada
,
Mark Harman
Facebook and University College London, United Kingdom

Copyright © 2018 Owner/Author.

Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for third-party components of this work must be honored. For all other uses, contact the Owner/Author.

Sponsors

SIGSOFT: ACM Special Interest Group on Software Engineering
IEEE-CS: Computer Society

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 27 May 2018

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Demonstration

Conference

ICSE '18

Sponsor:

SIGSOFT
IEEE-CS

ICSE '18: 40th International Conference on Software Engineering

May 27 - June 3, 2018

Gothenburg, Sweden

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 276 of 1,856 submissions, 15%

Upcoming Conference

ICSE 2025

2025 IEEE/ACM 46th International Conference on Software Engineering

April 26 - May 3, 2025

Ottawa , ON , Canada

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

5
Total Citations
View Citations
97
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)1
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0

Reflects downloads up to 08 Feb 2025

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

First ERabe MRinger TBrun YChandra SBlincoe KTonella P(2023)Baldur: Whole-Proof Generation and Repair with Large Language ModelsProceedings of the 31st ACM Joint European Software Engineering Conference and Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering10.1145/3611643.3616243(1229-1241)Online publication date: 30-Nov-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3611643.3616243
Sanchez-Stern AFirst EZhou TKaufman ZBrun YRinger T(2023)Passport: Improving Automated Formal Verification Using IdentifiersACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems10.1145/359337445:2(1-30)Online publication date: 26-Jun-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3593374
Beyer DJakobs MLemberger T(2020)Difference Verification with ConditionsSoftware Engineering and Formal Methods10.1007/978-3-030-58768-0_8(133-154)Online publication date: 14-Sep-2020
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/978-3-030-58768-0_8
Palmskog KCelik AGligoric M(2020)Practical Machine-Checked Formalization of Change Impact AnalysisTools and Algorithms for the Construction and Analysis of Systems10.1007/978-3-030-45237-7_9(137-157)Online publication date: 25-Apr-2020
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/978-3-030-45237-7_9
Palmskog KCelik AGligoric MTip FBodden E(2018)piCoq: parallel regression proving for large-scale verification projectsProceedings of the 27th ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis10.1145/3213846.3213877(344-355)Online publication date: 12-Jul-2018
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3213846.3213877

View Options

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Figures

Tables

Media

View Table of Conten