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

Fred Mesnard

Fred Mesnard contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Logic in Computer ScienceProgramming LanguagesSoftware Engineering

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 19 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
5works
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

5 published item(s)

preprint2026arXiv

Automated Theorem Proving for Prolog Verification

LPTP (Logic Program Theorem Prover) is an interactive natural-deduction-based theorem prover for pure Prolog programs with negation as failure, unification with the occurs check, and a restricted but extensible set of built-in predicates. With LPTP, one can formally prove termination and partial correctness of such Prolog programs. LPTP was designed in the mid-1990's by Robert F. Staerk. It is written in ISO-Prolog and comes with an Emacs user-interface. From a theoretical point of view, in his publications about LPTP, Staerk associates a set of first-order axioms IND(P) to the considered Prolog program P. IND(P) contains the Clark's equality theory for P, definitions of success, failure and termination for each user-defined logic procedure in P, axioms relating these three points of view, and an axiom schema for proving inductive properties. LPTP is thus a dedicated proof editor where these axioms are hard-wired. We propose to translate these axioms as first-order formulas (FOFs), and apply automated theorem provers to check the property of interest. Using FOF as an intermediary language, we experiment the use of automated theorem provers for Prolog program verification. We evaluate the approach over a benchmark of about 400 properties of Prolog programs from the library available with LPTP. Both the compiler which generates a set of FOF files from a given input Prolog program together with its properties and the benchmark are publicly available.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

An SMT-Based Concolic Testing Tool for Logic Programs

Concolic testing mixes symbolic and concrete execution to generate test cases covering paths effectively. Its benefits have been demonstrated for more than 15 years to test imperative programs. Other programming paradigms, like logic programming, have received less attention. In this paper, we present a concolic-based test generation method for logic programs. Our approach exploits SMT-solving for constraint resolution. We then describe the implementation of a concolic testing tool for Prolog and validate it on some selected benchmarks.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Concolic Testing in CLP

Concolic testing is a popular software verification technique based on a combination of concrete and symbolic execution. Its main focus is finding bugs and generating test cases with the aim of maximizing code coverage. A previous approach to concolic testing in logic programming was not sound because it only dealt with positive constraints (by means of substitutions) but could not represent negative constraints. In this paper, we present a novel framework for concolic testing of CLP programs that generalizes the previous technique. In the CLP setting, one can represent both positive and negative constraints in a natural way, thus giving rise to a sound and (potentially) more efficient technique. Defining verification and testing techniques for CLP programs is increasingly relevant since this framework is becoming popular as an intermediate representation to analyze programs written in other programming paradigms.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2015arXiv

Concolic Testing in Logic Programming

Software testing is one of the most popular validation techniques in the software industry. Surprisingly, we can only find a few approaches to testing in the context of logic programming. In this paper, we introduce a systematic approach for dynamic testing that combines both concrete and symbolic execution. Our approach is fully automatic and guarantees full path coverage when it terminates. We prove some basic properties of our technique and illustrate its practical usefulness through a prototype implementation.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2012arXiv

The Automatic Synthesis of Linear Ranking Functions: The Complete Unabridged Version

The classical technique for proving termination of a generic sequential computer program involves the synthesis of a ranking function for each loop of the program. Linear ranking functions are particularly interesting because many terminating loops admit one and algorithms exist to automatically synthesize it. In this paper we present two such algorithms: one based on work dated 1991 by Sohn and Van Gelder; the other, due to Podelski and Rybalchenko, dated 2004. Remarkably, while the two algorithms will synthesize a linear ranking function under exactly the same set of conditions, the former is mostly unknown to the community of termination analysis and its general applicability has never been put forward before the present paper. In this paper we thoroughly justify both algorithms, we prove their correctness, we compare their worst-case complexity and experimentally evaluate their efficiency, and we present an open-source implementation of them that will make it very easy to include termination-analysis capabilities in automatic program verifiers.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access