By Benjamin Weiß
Software program platforms play a vital function in smooth society, and their correctness is frequently crucially vital. Formal specification and verification are promising ways for making sure correctness extra carefully than simply through trying out. This paintings provides an procedure for deductively verifying design-by-contract standards of object-oriented courses. The method is predicated on dynamic good judgment, and addresses the demanding situations of modularity and automation utilizing dynamic frames and predicate abstraction.
Read Online or Download Deductive verification of object-oriented software : dynamic frames, dynamic logic and predicate abstraction PDF
Similar logic books
Statistical Estimation of Epidemiological Risk provides assurance of an important epidemiological indices, and comprises contemporary advancements within the field. A useful reference resource for biostatisticians and epidemiologists operating in affliction prevention, because the chapters are self-contained and have quite a few actual examples.
This paintings introduces the topic of formal good judgment when it comes to a process that's "like syllogistic logic". Its procedure, like outdated, conventional syllogistic, is a "term logic". The authors' model of good judgment ("term-function logic", TFL) stocks with Aristotle's syllogistic the perception that the logical kinds of statements which are thinking about inferences as premises or conclusions could be construed because the results of connecting pairs of phrases through a logical copula (functor).
- Fuzzy Logic Applications in Engineering Science
- Playing with Infinity: Mathematical Explorations and Excursions
- Fonctions Recursives
- Ensembles Analytiques Capacités Mesures de Hausdorff
Additional resources for Deductive verification of object-oriented software : dynamic frames, dynamic logic and predicate abstraction
SOCRATES In poetry that would be impossible. Now you see that there is a problem. But let us continue. How do you explain that the mathematicians of different countries can usually agree about the truth, while about questions concerning the state, for example, the Persians and the Spartans have quite opposite views from ours in Athens, and, moreover, we here do not often agree with each other? HIPPOCRATES I can answer that last question. In matters concerning the state everybody is personally interested, and these personal interests are often in contradiction.
I, p. v. , I, p. vi. 89 See, for example, Cellucci 1998a, 1998b, 2000, 2002b. 81 34 Carlo Cellucci because that would require far more space than is available. To my mind, however, the questions discussed here should be dealt with in any investigation concerning the nature of mathematics. The book consists of a number of short chapters, each of which can be read independently of the others, although its full meaning will emerge only within the context of the whole book. To illustrate my view, I often use fairly simple mathematical examples, which can be presented briefly and do not require elaborate preliminary explanations.
It is often claimed that ‘plausible’ has a subjective, psychological connotation, so that it is almost equivalent to ‘rhetorically persuasive’, hence plausible arguments are of little interest in mathematics. But ‘plausible’, in the sense explained above, has nothing subjective or psychological about it. To assess whether a given hypothesis is plausible, one examines the reasons for and against it. This examination is carried out using facts which confirm the hypothesis or refute it, where these facts belong to the existing knowledge.