Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Michael Marmar

dblp:133/3611 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 2013
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Theory of computation · 1

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
1 paper
Program verification · 93% Concurrent programming · 7%

Topics — the 5 heaviest of 5, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Program verification
concurrent program verification
0.212013
Quantitative Reasoning for Proving Lock-Freedom · LICS 2013
Program verification › program logic › separation logic
concurrent separation logic
0.212013
Quantitative Reasoning for Proving Lock-Freedom · LICS 2013
Program verification
program logic
0.212013
Quantitative Reasoning for Proving Lock-Freedom · LICS 2013
Program verification › correctness proof
total correctness
0.212013
Quantitative Reasoning for Proving Lock-Freedom · LICS 2013
Concurrent programming › non-blocking algorithms
non-blocking data structures
0.012013
Quantitative Reasoning for Proving Lock-Freedom · LICS 2013

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

rely-guarantee reasoning · 0.2quantitative reasoning · 0.2affine tokens · 0.2
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2013 Quantitative Reasoning for Proving Lock-Freedom
abstract
This article describes a novel quantitative proof technique for the modular and local verification of lock-freedom. In contrast to proofs based on temporal rely-guarantee requirements, this new quantitative reasoning method can be directly integrated in modern program logics that are designed for the verification of safety properties. Using a single formalism for verifying memory safety and lock-freedom allows a combined correctness proof that verifies both properties simultaneously. This article presents one possible formalization of this quantitative proof technique by developing a variant of concurrent separation logic (CSL) for total correctness. To enable quantitative reasoning, CSL is extended with a predicate for affine tokens to account for, and provide an upper bound on the number of loop iterations in a program. Lock-freedom is then reduced to total-correctness proofs. Quantitative reasoning is demonstrated in detail, both informally and formally, by verifying the lock-freedom of Treiber's non-blocking stack. Furthermore, it is shown how the technique is used to verify the lock-freedom of more advanced shared-memory data structures that use elimination-backoff schemes and hazard-pointers.
Jan Hoffmann 0002, Michael Marmar, Zhong Shao 0001
LICS2