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

Gudmund Grov

Gudmund Grov contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Logic in Computer ScienceArtificial IntelligenceSoftware EngineeringCryptography and SecurityHuman-Computer InteractionMachine LearningProgramming Languages

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 21 - Emerging
9works
0followers
7topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

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

9 published item(s)

preprint2026arXiv

Towards Agentic Investigation of Security Alerts

Security analysts are overwhelmed by the volume of alerts and the low context provided by many detection systems. Early-stage investigations typically require manual correlation across multiple log sources, a task that is usually time-consuming. In this paper, we present an experimental, agentic workflow that leverages large language models (LLMs) augmented with predefined queries and constrained tool access (structured SQL over Suricata logs and grep-based text search) to automate the first stages of alert investigation. The proposed workflow integrates queries to provide an overview of the available data, and LLM components that selects which queries to use based on the overview results, extracts raw evidence from the query results, and delivers a final verdict of the alert. Our results demonstrate that the LLM-powered workflow can investigate log sources, plan an investigation, and produce a final verdict that has a significantly higher accuracy than a verdict produced by the same LLM without the proposed workflow. By recognizing the inherent limitations of directly applying LLMs to high-volume and unstructured data, we propose combining existing investigation practices of real-world analysts with a structured approach to leverage LLMs as virtual security analysts, thereby assisting and reducing the manual workload.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2016arXiv

Semi-Automated Design Space Exploration for Formal Modelling

Refinement based formal methods allow the modelling of systems through incremental steps via abstraction. Discovering the right levels of abstraction, formulating correct and meaningful invariants, and analysing faulty models are some of the challenges faced when using this technique. Here, we propose Design Space Exploration, an approach that aims to assist a designer by automatically providing high-level modelling guidance in real-time. More specifically, through the combination of common patterns of modelling with techniques from automated theory formation and automated reasoning, different design alternatives are explored and suitable models that deal with faults are proposed.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2016arXiv

Understanding and maintaining tactics graphically OR how we are learning that a diagram can be worth more than 10K LoC

The use of a functional language to implement proof strategies as proof tactics in interactive theorem provers, often provides short, concise and elegant implementations. Whilst being elegant, the use of higher order features and combinator languages often results in a very procedural view of a strategy, which may deviate significantly from the high-level ideas behind it. This can make a tactic hard to understand and hence difficult to to debug and maintain for experts and non-experts alike: one often has to tear apart complex combinations of lower level tactics manually in order to analyse a failure in the overall strategy. In an industrial technology transfer project, we have been working on porting a very large and complex proof tactic into PSGraph, a graphical language for representing proof strategies, supported by the Tinker tool. The goal of this work is to improve understandability and maintainability of tactics. Motivated by some initial successes with this, we here extend PSGraph with additional features for development and debugging. Through the re-implementation and refactoring of several existing tactics, we demonstrates the advantages of PSGraph compared with a typical linear (term-based) tactic language with respect to debugging, readability and maintenance. In order to act as guidance for others, we give a fairly detailed comparison of the user experience with the two approaches. The paper is supported by a web page providing further details about the implementation as well as interactive illustrations of the examples.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2015arXiv

Automating change of representation for proofs in discrete mathematics

Representation determines how we can reason about a specific problem. Sometimes one representation helps us find a proof more easily than others. Most current automated reasoning tools focus on reasoning within one representation. There is, therefore, a need for the development of better tools to mechanise and automate formal and logically sound changes of representation. In this paper we look at examples of representational transformations in discrete mathematics, and show how we have used Isabelle's Transfer tool to automate the use of these transformations in proofs. We give a brief overview of a general theory of transformations that we consider appropriate for thinking about the matter, and we explain how it relates to the Transfer package. We show our progress towards developing a general tactic that incorporates the automatic search for representation within the proving process.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2014arXiv

Some Ideas for Program Verifier Tactics

A program verifier is a tool that can be used to verify that a "contract" for a program holds - i.e. given a precondition the program guarantees that a given postcondition holds - by only working at the level of the annotated program. An alternative approach is to use an interactive theorem prover, which enables users to encode common proof patterns as special programs called "tactics". This offers more flexibility than program verifiers, but at the expense of skills required by the user. Here, we add such flexibility to program verifiers by developing "tactics" as a form of program refactoring called DTacs. A formal characterisation and set of examples are given, illustrated with a case study from NASA.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2014arXiv

Tinker, tailor, solver, proof

We introduce Tinker, a tool for designing and evaluating proof strategies based on proof-strategy graphs, a formalism previously introduced by the authors. We represent proof strategies as open-graphs, which are directed graphs with additional input/output edges. Tactics appear as nodes in a graph, and can be `piped' together by adding edges between them. Goals are added to the input edges of such a graph, and flow through the graph as the strategy is evaluated. Properties of the edges ensure that only the right `type' of goals are accepted. In this paper, we detail the Tinker tool and show how it can be integrated with two different theorem provers: Isabelle and ProofPower.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2013arXiv

A Graphical Language for Proof Strategies

Complex automated proof strategies are often difficult to extract, visualise, modify, and debug. Traditional tactic languages, often based on stack-based goal propagation, make it easy to write proofs that obscure the flow of goals between tactics and are fragile to minor changes in input, proof structure or changes to tactics themselves. Here, we address this by introducing a graphical language called PSGraph for writing proof strategies. Strategies are constructed visually by "wiring together" collections of tactics and evaluated by propagating goal nodes through the diagram via graph rewriting. Tactic nodes can have many output wires, and use a filtering procedure based on goal-types (predicates describing the features of a goal) to decide where best to send newly-generated sub-goals. In addition to making the flow of goal information explicit, the graphical language can fulfil the role of many tacticals using visual idioms like branching, merging, and feedback loops. We argue that this language enables development of more robust proof strategies and provide several examples, along with a prototype implementation in Isabelle.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2013arXiv

Machine Learning in Proof General: Interfacing Interfaces

We present ML4PG - a machine learning extension for Proof General. It allows users to gather proof statistics related to shapes of goals, sequences of applied tactics, and proof tree structures from the libraries of interactive higher-order proofs written in Coq and SSReflect. The gathered data is clustered using the state-of-the-art machine learning algorithms available in MATLAB and Weka. ML4PG provides automated interfacing between Proof General and MATLAB/Weka. The results of clustering are used by ML4PG to provide proof hints in the process of interactive proof development.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2013arXiv

Towards Automated Proof Strategy Generalisation

The ability to automatically generalise (interactive) proofs and use such generalisations to discharge related conjectures is a very hard problem which remains unsolved. Here, we develop a notion of goal types to capture key properties of goals, which enables abstractions over the specific order and number of sub-goals arising when composing tactics. We show that the goal types form a lattice, and utilise this property in the techniques we develop to automatically generalise proof strategies in order to reuse it for proofs of related conjectures. We illustrate our approach with an example.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access