Systematic Design of Separation Logics
Roberto Bruni, Lorenzo Gazzella, Roberta Gori
Abstract
Thanks to the locality principle, separation logics support modular, scalable analysis of large codebases by relying on local axioms and frame rules to focus only on the heap fragments required for verification. However, depending on the direction—forward vs. backward—and sense of approximation—over vs. under—of the analysis, designing the corresponding proof systems can require some ingenuity. In his work on the calculational design of program logics, Patrick Cousot outlines a methodology for deriving proof systems directly from program semantics using abstract interpretation, covering both correctness and incorrectness analyses. Unfortunately, when applied to heap-manipulating programs, Cousot’s calculational approach cannot handle the locality principle, because it does not provide a calculational way to derive frame rules and produces axioms that refer to the global heap. In this paper, we propose a general methodology for systematically deriving local axioms in which the locality principle is embedded by construction. For heap-manipulating primitives, we can derive the minimal required heap and the corresponding pre- and postconditions, complemented by universal frame rules without additional syntactic side conditions. Our method is parametric w.r.t. a set of semantic closure properties that are exploited to design local axioms; it can deal with different memory models; it favors the reuse of many inference rules across over- and under-approximation; and it produces logical systems capable of deriving a broader range of triples w.r.t. existing, cleverly designed, program logics for (in)correctness, ranging from Separation Logic (SL) and Incorrectness Separation Logic (ISL) to Separation Sufficient Incorrectness Logic (SepSIL). Furthermore, we demonstrate the flexibility of our methodology by applying it to design a novel proof system for inferring necessary preconditions with separation logic.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext 83288e96-adf8-47d4-a3e7-12b40b320b84Builds on17
- Incorrectness logicPeter W. O'HearnPOPL 2020 · 122 citations
- Local Reasoning About the Presence of Bugs: Incorrectness Separation LogicAzalea Raad, Josh Berdine, Hoang-Hai Dang, Derek Dreyer et al.CAV 2020 · 70 citations
- Finding real bugs in big programs with incorrectness logicQuang Loc Le, Azalea Raad, Jules Villard, Josh Berdine et al.OOPSLA 2022 · 52 citations
- Outcome Logic: A Unifying Foundation for Correctness and Incorrectness ReasoningNoam Zilberstein, Derek Dreyer, Alexandra SilvaOOPSLA 2023 · 39 citations
- A probabilistic separation logicGilles Barthe, Justin Hsu, Kevin LiaoPOPL 2020 · 35 citations
Related papers
- Revealing Sources of (Memory) Errors via Backward AnalysisFlavio Ascari, Roberto Bruni, Roberta Gori, Francesco LogozzoOOPSLA 2025 · 4 citations
- FO-Complete Program Verification for Heap LogicsAdithya Murali, Hrishikesh Balakrishnan, Aaron Councilman, P. MadhusudanOOPSLA 2025
- Calculational Design of Hyperlogics by Abstract InterpretationPatrick Cousot, Jeffery WangPOPL 2025 · 3 citations
- A Logic for Locally Complete Abstract InterpretationsRoberto Bruni, Roberto Giacobazzi, Roberta Gori, Francesco RanzatoLICS 2021 · 34 citations
- Inductive Synthesis of Inductive Heap PredicatesZiyi Yang, Ilya SergeyOOPSLA 2025 · 1 citation
