Isabelle_DOF/examples/scholarly_paper/2018-cicm-isabelle_dof-appl.../document/root.bib

282 lines
11 KiB
BibTeX
Executable File

@STRING{pub-springer={Springer} }
@STRING{pub-springer:adr=""}
@STRING{s-lncs = "LNCS" }
@Manual{ wenzel:isabelle-isar:2017,
title = {The Isabelle/Isar Reference Manual},
author = {Makarius Wenzel},
OPTorganization = {},
OPTaddress = {},
OPTedition = {},
OPTmonth = {},
year = {2017},
note = {Part of the Isabelle distribution.},
OPTannote = {}
}
@Book{ adler:r:2010,
abstract = {Presents a guide to the R computer language, covering such
topics as the user interface, packages, syntax, objects,
functions, object-oriented programming, data sets, lattice
graphics, regression models, and bioconductor.},
added-at = {2013-01-10T22:39:38.000+0100},
address = {Sebastopol, CA},
author = {Adler, Joseph},
isbn = {9780596801700 059680170X},
keywords = {R},
publisher = {O'Reilly},
refid = 432987461,
title = {R in a nutshell},
year = 2010
}
@InCollection{ wenzel.ea:building:2007,
abstract = {We present the generic system framework of
Isabelle/Isarunderlying recent versions of Isabelle. Among
other things, Isar provides an infrastructure for Isabelle
plug-ins, comprising extensible state components and
extensible syntax that can be bound to tactical ML
programs. Thus the Isabelle/Isar architecture may be
understood as an extension and refinement of the
traditional LCF approach, with explicit infrastructure for
building derivative systems. To demonstrate the technical
potential of the framework, we apply it to a concrete
formalmethods tool: the HOL-Z 3.0 environment, which is
geared towards the analysis of Z specifications and formal
proof of forward-refinements.},
author = {Makarius Wenzel and Burkhart Wolff},
booktitle = {TPHOLs 2007},
editor = {Klaus Schneider and Jens Brandt},
language = {USenglish},
acknowledgement={none},
pages = {352--367},
publisher = pub-springer,
address = pub-springer:adr,
number = 4732,
series = s-lncs,
title = {Building Formal Method Tools in the {Isabelle}/{Isar}
Framework},
doi = {10.1007/978-3-540-74591-4_26},
year = 2007
}
@Misc{w3c:ontologies:2015,
title={Ontologies},
organisation={W3c},
url={https://www.w3.org/standards/semanticweb/ontology},
year=2018
}
@BOOK{boulanger:cenelec-50128:2015,
AUTHOR = "Boulanger, Jean-Louis",
TITLE = "{CENELEC} 50128 and {IEC} 62279 Standards",
PUBLISHER = "Wiley-ISTE",
YEAR = "2015",
ADDRESS = "Boston",
NOTE = "The reference on the standard."
}
@Booklet{ cc:cc-part3:2006,
bibkey = {cc:cc-part3:2006},
key = {Common Criteria},
institution = {Common Criteria},
language = {USenglish},
month = sep,
year = 2006,
public = {yes},
title = {Common Criteria for Information Technology Security
Evaluation (Version 3.1), {Part} 3: Security assurance
components},
note = {Available as document
\href{http://www.commoncriteriaportal.org/public/files/CCPART3V3.1R1.pdf}
{CCMB-2006-09-003}},
number = {CCMB-2006-09-003},
acknowledgement={brucker, 2007-04-24}
}
@Book{ nipkow.ea:isabelle:2002,
author = {Tobias Nipkow and Lawrence C. Paulson and Markus Wenzel},
title = {Isabelle/HOL---A Proof Assistant for Higher-Order
Logic},
publisher = pub-springer,
address = pub-springer:adr,
series = s-lncs,
volume = 2283,
doi = {10.1007/3-540-45949-9},
abstract = {This book is a self-contained introduction to interactive
proof in higher-order logic (\acs{hol}), using the proof
assistant Isabelle2002. It is a tutorial for potential
users rather than a monograph for researchers. The book has
three parts.
1. Elementary Techniques shows how to model functional
programs in higher-order logic. Early examples involve
lists and the natural numbers. Most proofs are two steps
long, consisting of induction on a chosen variable followed
by the auto tactic. But even this elementary part covers
such advanced topics as nested and mutual recursion. 2.
Logic and Sets presents a collection of lower-level tactics
that you can use to apply rules selectively. It also
describes Isabelle/\acs{hol}'s treatment of sets, functions
and relations and explains how to define sets inductively.
One of the examples concerns the theory of model checking,
and another is drawn from a classic textbook on formal
languages. 3. Advanced Material describes a variety of
other topics. Among these are the real numbers, records and
overloading. Advanced techniques are described involving
induction and recursion. A whole chapter is devoted to an
extended example: the verification of a security protocol. },
year = 2002,
acknowledgement={brucker, 2007-02-19},
bibkey = {nipkow.ea:isabelle:2002},
tags = {noTAG},
clearance = {unclassified},
timestap = {2008-05-26}
}
@InProceedings{ wenzel:asynchronous:2014,
author = {Makarius Wenzel},
title = {Asynchronous User Interaction and Tool Integration in
Isabelle/{PIDE}},
booktitle = {Interactive Theorem Proving (ITP)},
pages = {515--530},
year = 2014,
crossref = {klein.ea:interactive:2014},
doi = {10.1007/978-3-319-08970-6_33},
timestamp = {Sun, 21 May 2017 00:18:59 +0200},
abstract = { Historically, the LCF tradition of interactive theorem
proving was tied to the read-eval-print loop, with
sequential and synchronous evaluation of prover commands
given on the command-line. This user-interface technology
was adequate when R. Milner introduced his LCF proof
assistant in the 1970-ies, but it severely limits the
potential of current multicore hardware and advanced IDE
front-ends.
Isabelle/PIDE breaks this loop and retrofits the
read-eval-print phases into an asynchronous model of
document-oriented proof processing. Instead of feeding a
sequence of individual commands into the prover process,
the primary interface works via edits over a family of
document versions. Execution is implicit and managed by the
prover on its own account in a timeless and stateless
manner. Various aspects of interactive proof checking are
scheduled according to requirements determined by the
front-end perspective on the proof document, while making
adequate use of the CPU resources on multicore hardware on
the back-end.
Recent refinements of Isabelle/PIDE provide an explicit
concept of asynchronous print functions over existing proof
states. This allows to integrate long-running or
potentially non-terminating tools into the document-model.
Applications range from traditional proof state output
(which may consume substantial time in interactive
development) to automated provers and dis-provers that
report on existing proof document content (e.g.
Sledgehammer, Nitpick, Quickcheck in Isabelle/HOL).
Moreover, it is possible to integrate query operations via
additional GUI panels with separate input and output (e.g.
for Sledgehammer or find-theorems). Thus the Prover IDE
provides continuous proof processing, augmented by add-on
tools that help the user to continue writing proofs.
}
}
@Proceedings{ klein.ea:interactive:2014,
editor = {Gerwin Klein and Ruben Gamboa},
title = {Interactive Theorem Proving - 5th International
Conference, {ITP} 2014, Held as Part of the Vienna Summer
of Logic, {VSL} 2014, Vienna, Austria, July 14-17, 2014.
Proceedings},
series = s-lncs,
volume = 8558,
publisher = pub-springer,
year = 2014,
doi = {10.1007/978-3-319-08970-6},
isbn = {978-3-319-08969-0}
}
@InProceedings{ bezzecchi.ea:making:2018,
title = {Making Agile Development Processes fit for V-style
Certification Procedures},
author = {Bezzecchi, S. and Crisafulli, P. and Pichot, C. and Wolff,
B.},
booktitle = {{ERTS'18}},
abstract = {We present a process for the development of safety and
security critical components in transportation systems
targeting a high-level certification (CENELEC 50126/50128,
DO 178, CC ISO/IEC 15408).
The process adheres to the objectives of an ``agile
development'' in terms of evolutionary flexibility and
continuous improvement. Yet, it enforces the overall
coherence of the development artifacts (ranging from proofs
over tests to code) by a particular environment (CVCE).
In particular, the validation process is built around a
formal development based on the interactive theorem proving
system Isabelle/HOL, by linking the business logic of the
application to the operating system model, down to code and
concrete hardware models thanks to a series of refinement
proofs.
We apply both the process and its support in CVCE to a
case-study that comprises a model of an odometric service
in a railway-system with its corresponding implementation
integrated in seL4 (a secure kernel for which a
comprehensive Isabelle development exists). Novel
techniques implemented in Isabelle enforce the coherence of
semi-formal and formal definitions within to specific
certification processes in order to improve their
cost-effectiveness. },
pdf = {https://www.lri.fr/~wolff/papers/conf/2018erts-agile-fm.pdf},
year = 2018,
series = {ERTS Conference Proceedings},
location = {Toulouse}
}
@MISC{owl2012,
title = {OWL 2 Web Ontology Language},
note={\url{https://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-overview/}, Document Overview (Second Edition)},
author = {World Wide Web Consortium}
}
@MISC{ protege,
title = {Prot{\'e}g{\'e}},
note={\url{https://protege.stanford.edu}},
year = {2018}
}
@MISC{ cognitum,
title = {Fluent Editor},
note={\url{http://www.cognitum.eu/Semantics/FluentEditor/}},
year = {2018}
}
@MISC{ neon,
title = {The NeOn Toolkit},
note = {\url{http://neon-toolkit.org}},
year = {2018}
}
@MISC{ owlgred,
title = {OWLGrEd},
note={\url{http://owlgred.lumii.lv/}},
year = {2018}
}
@MISC{ rontorium,
title = {R Language Package for FLuent Editor (rOntorion)},
note={\url{http://www.cognitum.eu/semantics/FluentEditor/rOntorionFE.aspx}},
year = {2018}
}