Abstract Distributed architectures are used to improve performance and reliability of various systems. Examples include drone swarms and load-balancing servers. An important capability of a distributed architecture is the ability to reach consensus among all its nodes. Several consensus algorithms have been proposed, and many of these algorithms come with intricate proofs of correctness, that are not mechanically checked. In the controls community, algorithms often achieve consensusasymptotically, e.g., for problems such as the design of human control systems, or the analysis of natural systems like bird flocking. This is in contrast to exact consensus algorithm such as Paxos, which have received much more recent attention in the formal methods community. This paper presents the first formal proof of an asymptotic consensus algorithm, and addresses various challenges in its formalization. Using the Coq proof assistant, we verify the correctness of a widely used consensus algorithm in the distributed controls community, theWeighted-Mean Subsequence Reduced (W-MSR) algorithm. We formalize the necessary and sufficient conditions required to achieve resilient asymptotic consensus under the assumed attacker model. During the formalization, we clarify several imprecisions in the paper proof, including an imprecision on quantifiers in the main theorem.

The LAProof library provides formal machine-checked proofs of the accuracy of basic linear algebra operations: inner product using conventional multiply and add, inner product using fused multiply-add, scaled matrix-vector and matrix-matrix multiplication, and scaled vector and matrix addition. These proofs can connect to concrete implementations of low-level basic linear algebra subprograms; as a proof of concept we present a machine-checked correctness proof of a C function implementing sparse matrix-vector multiplication using the compressed sparse row format. Our accuracy proofs are backward error bounds and mixed backward-forward error bounds that account for underflow, proved subject to no assumptions except a low-level formal model of IEEE-754 arithmetic. We treat low-order error terms concretely, not approximating as $\mathcal{O}\left( {{u^2}} \right)$.