Paper detail

Case studies of development of verified programs with Dafny for accessibility assessment

Formal verification techniques aim at formally proving the correctness of a computer program with respect to a formal specification, but the expertise and effort required for applying formal specification and verification techniques and scalability issues have limited their practical application. In recent years, the tremendous progress with SAT and SMT solvers enabled the construction of a new generation of tools that promise to make formal verification more accessible for software engineers, by automating most if not all of the verification process. The Dafny system is a prominent example of that trend. However, little evidence exists yet about its accessibility. To help fill this gap, we conducted a set of 10 case studies of developing verified implementations in Dafny of some real-world algorithms and data structures, to determine its accessibility for software engineers. We found that, on average, the amount of code written for specification and verification purposes is of the same order of magnitude as the traditional code written for implementation and testing purposes (ratio of 1.14) -- an ``overhead'' that certainly pays off for high-integrity software. The performance of the Dafny verifier was impressive, with 2.4 proof obligations generated per line of code written, and 24 ms spent per proof obligation generated and verified, on average. However, we also found that the manual work needed in writing auxiliary verification code may be significant and difficult to predict and master. Hence, further automation and systematization of verification tasks are possible directions for future advances in the field.

preprint2023arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

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

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.