Author

# Abdelillah Mokkedem

Bio: Abdelillah Mokkedem is an academic researcher from French Institute for Research in Computer Science and Automation. The author has contributed to research in topics: Temporal logic & Mathematical proof. The author has an hindex of 4, co-authored 5 publications receiving 42 citations.

##### Papers

More filters

••

11 Jul 1994TL;DR: The refined temporal language proposed is closed under W-stuttering and provides a fully abstract semantics with respect to some chosen observation level w, which avoids incorporating irrelevant detail in the temporal semantics of parallel programs.

Abstract: A simple and elegant formulation of compositional proof systems for concurrent programs results from a refinement of temporal logic semantics. The refined temporal language we propose is closed under W-stuttering and, thus, provides a fully abstract semantics with respect to some chosen observation level w. This avoids incorporating irrelevant detail in the temporal semantics of parallel programs. Besides compositional verification, concurrent program design and implementation of a coarser-grained program by a finer-grained one, turn out to be easily practicable in the setting of the new temporal logic.

15 citations

••

29 Jun 1992TL;DR: An operational model of the language is introduced and it is shown that the deductive system is consistent with respect to it and the studied language is a selected subset of the SDL language.

Abstract: We are interested by proofs of concurrent programs properties, such as invariance and eventuality They are connected with execution of a program, and, in order to discuss them, we introduce an operational model of the language and show that the deductive system is consistent with respect to it The studied language is a selected subset of the SDL language A system for computer-aided reasoning on programs is derived as follows: we implement the deductive system in Isabelle [24] and then integrate it into a programming environment developed under Concerto namely Crocos [19] The prover proceeds in an interactive way in which the user's intervention may be required at several stages of the proof derivation

12 citations

••

01 Jul 1995TL;DR: The refined temporal language proposed is closed under w-stuttering and provides a fully abstract semantics with respect to some chosen observation level w, which avoids incorporating irrelevant detail in the temporal semantics of parallel programs.

Abstract: A simple and elegant formulation of compositional proof systems for concurrent programs results from a refinement of temporal logic semantics. The refined temporal language we propose is closed under w-stuttering and, thus, provides a fully abstract semantics with respect to some chosen observation level w. This avoids incorporating irrelevant detail in the temporal semantics of parallel programs. Besides compositional verification, concurrent program design and implementation of a coarser-grained program by a finer-grained one, are easily practicable in the setting of the new temporal logic.

8 citations

••

21 Jun 1993TL;DR: A rigorous and modular method based on a mechanization of Manna-Pnueli’s modular validity concept and on a modular temporal language in which properties are invariant under stuttering is presented.

Abstract: We briefly present a rigorous and modular method, we are developing to design concurrent systems starting from their desired properties. This method is based on a mechanization of Manna-Pnueli’s modular validity concept and on a modular temporal language in which properties are invariant under stuttering[1], A compositional proof system is established to support both specification verification and modular program construction. Each program is developed together with the proof that it meets its specification. A refinement relation is denned by using rules in backward, while the proof is constructed by using the same rules in forward. Constrained by a limited space, we focus attention on the underlying concepts and leave a complete presentation of the proof systems (soundness, relative completeness, modular completeness, and adaptation completeness) in a future paper.

5 citations

••

03 Jul 1995TL;DR: This paper reconsiders the solution proposed by Sanders and shows that the general concept of invariant is sufficient to eliminate the substitution axiom and to provide a sound and relatively complete proof system for Unity logic.

Abstract: The solution proposed by Sanders in [14] consists of eliminating the need of the substitution axiom from Unity in order to eliminate the unsoundness problem caused by this axiom in Unity without loss of completeness. Sander's solution is based on the strongest invariant concept and provides theoretical advantages by formally capturing the effects of the initial conditions on the properties of a program. This solution is less convincing from a practical point of view because it assumes proofs of strongest invariant in the meta-level. In this paper we reconsider this solution showing that the general concept of invariant is sufficient to eliminate the substitution axiom and to provide a sound and relatively complete proof system for Unity logic. The advantage of the new solution is that proofs of invariants are mechanized inside the Unity logic itself.

2 citations

##### Cited by

More filters

••

08 Apr 2002

TL;DR: The design and implementation of a static checker for multithreaded software systems using assume-guarantee reasoning, and relies on the programmer to specify an environment assumption that constrains the interaction between threads.

Abstract: Ensuring the reliability of multithreaded software systems is difficult due to the interaction between threads. This paper describes the design and implementation of a static checker for such systems. To avoid considering all possible thread interleavings, the checker uses assume-guarantee reasoning, and relies on the programmer to specify an environment assumption that constrains the interaction between threads. Using this environment assumption, the checker reduces the verification of the original multithreaded program to the verification of several sequential programs, one for each thread. These sequential programs are subsequently analyzed using extended static checking techniques (based on verification conditions and automatic theorem proving). Experience indicates that the checker is capable of handling a range of synchronization disciplines. In addition, the required environment assumptions are simple and intuitive for common synchronization idioms.

110 citations

••

University of California, Santa Cruz

^{1}, Williams College^{2}, Microsoft^{3}, Carnegie Mellon University^{4}TL;DR: Calvin is presented, a scalable and expressive static checker for multithreaded programs based on automatic theorem proving that can catch common defects in multith readed programs, such as synchronization errors and violations of data invariants.

73 citations

•

01 Jan 2002

TL;DR: Concrete grammar, see grammar, concrete consistency local, 129, 132, 167, 189 temporal,129, 130, 133, 168 dense, 20 derivation tree, 18 deterministic automaton.

Abstract: grammar, see grammar, abstract acceptance Büchi, 36 generalised, 37 action extended, 96 action request, see request, action action urgency, 23 actions, 27 active timer, see timer, active alphabet, 19 APS, see Automatic Protection Switching Automatic Protection Switching, 41 automaton, 36 deterministic, 38 language, 37 run, 37 tableau, 114 complete, 133 timed, 38, 183 timed run, 40 untimed, 36 Backus-Naur Form, 17 bad prefix, see prefix, bad bisimulation, 25 strong, 25 strong timed, 26 timed, 26 weak, 26 weak timed, 26 BNF, see Backus-Naur Form Büchi acceptance, see acceptance, Büchi calculus component, 97 Calculus of Communicating Systems, 27 CCS, 27 closure set, 186 cluster, 105 cluster class, 95 CompCalc, 97 complete tableau, see tableau, complete complete tableau automaton, see automaton, tableau, complete completeness, 130, 190 component calculus, see calculus, component component identifier, 94 component processes, see processes, component conames, 27 concrete grammar, see grammar, concrete consistency local, 129, 132, 167, 189 temporal, 129, 130, 133, 168 dense, 20 derivation tree, 18 deterministic automaton, see automaton, deterministic diamond property, 88 discrete, 20 disjunctive temporal normal form, 141, 177 DTNF, see disjunctive temporal normal form dynamic processes, see processes, dynamic equivalence syntactic, 18 equivalences, 24 extended action, see action, extended extended label, see label, extended

71 citations

••

01 Apr 2001TL;DR: A formal notation for the specification of business components that extends the Object Constraint Language (OCL) and that allows a broader use of the Unified Modeling Language (UML) with respect to the layered structure of software contracts for business components is introduced.

Abstract: INTRODUCTION Compositional plug-and-play-like reuse of black box components requires sophisticated techniques to specify components, especially if we combine third-party components, which are traded on component markets, to customer-individual business application systems. As in established engineering disciplines like mechanical engineering or electrical engineering, we need a formal documentation of business components that becomes part of contractual agreements. Taking this problem as a starting point, we explain the general layered structure of software contracts for business components and show shortcomings of common specification approaches. Furthermore, we introduce a formal notation for the specification of business components that extends the Object Constraint Language (OCL) and that allows a broader use of the Unified Modeling Language (UML) with respect to the layered structure of software contracts for business components. The remainder of the chapter is as follows. After providing background information in the next section, we discuss the necessity of a multi-level notation standard. Thereafter, we explain how the OCL can be used to specify business components. Taking this as a basis, we proceed to the main thrust of our chapter the temporal extension of OCL. Finally, we present our conclusions and give an outlook.

51 citations