BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Alexander Knapp

Alexander Knapp contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Logic in Computer ScienceSoftware EngineeringFormal Languages and Automata Theory

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 15 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
3works
0followers
3topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

3 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

A Hoare Logic with Regular Behavioral Specifications

We present a Hoare logic that extends program specifications with regular expressions that capture behaviors in terms of sequences of events that arise during the execution. The idea is similar to session types or process-like behavioral contracts, two currently popular research directions. The approach presented here strikes a particular balance between expressiveness and proof automation, notably, it can capture interesting sequential behavior across multiple iterations of loops. The approach is modular and integrates well with autoactive deductive verification tools. We describe and demonstrate our prototype implementation in SecC using two case studies: A matcher for E-Mail addresses and a specification of the game steps in the VerifyThis Casino challenge.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2014arXiv

An Institution for Simple UML State Machines

We present an institution for UML state machines without hierarchical states. The interaction with UML class diagrams is handled via institutions for guards and actions, which provide dynamic components of states (such as valuations of attributes) but abstract away from details of class diagrams. We also study a notion of interleaving product, which captures the interaction of several state machines. The interleaving product construction is the basis for a semantics of composite structure diagrams, which can be used to specify the interaction of state machines. This work is part of a larger effort to build a framework for formal software development with UML, based on a heterogeneous approach using institutions.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2014arXiv

An Institutional Framework for Heterogeneous Formal Development in UML

We present a framework for formal software development with UML. In contrast to previous approaches that equip UML with a formal semantics, we follow an institution based heterogeneous approach. This can express suitable formal semantics of the different UML diagram types directly, without the need to map everything to one specific formalism (let it be first-order logic or graph grammars). We show how different aspects of the formal development process can be coherently formalised, ranging from requirements over design and Hoare-style conditions on code to the implementation itself. The framework can be used to verify consistency of different UML diagrams both horizontally (e.g., consistency among various requirements) as well as vertically (e.g., correctness of design or implementation w.r.t. the requirements).

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access