Another formal proof for Deadline Driven Scheduler

AbstractThe mutual exclusion protocol invented by Mellor-Crummey and Scott (called MCS protocol) is used to exemplify that state picture designs based on which the state machine graphical animation (SMGA) tool produces graphical animations should be better visualized. Variants of MCS protocol have been used in Java virtual machines and therefore the 2006 Edsger W. Dijkstra Prize in Distributed Computing went to their paper on MCS protocol. The new state picture design of a state machine formalizing MCS protocol is assessed based on Gestalt principles, more specifically proximity principle and similarity principle. We report on a core part of a formal verification case study in which the new state picture design and the SMGA tool largely contributed to the successful completion of the formal proof that MCS protocol enjoys the mutual exclusion property. The lessons learned acquired through our experiments are summarized as two groups of tips. The first group is some new tips on how to make state picture designs. The second one is some tips on how to conjecture state machine characteristics by using the SMGA tool. We also report on one more case study in which the state picture design has been made for the mutual exclusion protocol invented by Anderson (called Anderson protocol) and some characteristics of the protocol have been discovered based on the tips.

Download Full-text

International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda—genocide—conspiracy to commit genocide—complicity in genocide—mens rea—judicial notice

The American Journal of International Law ◽

10.1017/s0002930000029614 ◽

2007 ◽

Vol 101 (1) ◽

pp. 157-163 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

Daniel Bodansky ◽

Kevin Jon Heller

Keyword(s):

International Criminal ◽

Common Knowledge ◽

Military Training ◽

International Criminal Tribunal ◽

Executive Leadership ◽

Formal Proof ◽

Mens Rea ◽

Significant Reversal ◽

Republican Movement

Prosecutor v. Karemera, Ngirumpatse, & Nzirorera. Case No. ICTR-98-44-AR73(C). Decision on Prosecutor's Interlocutory Appeal of Decision on Judicial Notice. At <http://www.ictr.org>.International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, Appeals Chamber, June 16, 2006.In an interlocutory appeal in Prosecutor v. Karemera, the appeals chamber of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) held that the commission of genocide against the Tutsis in 1994 is a “fact of common knowledge” of which trial chambers must take judicial notice (Appeals Decision, paras. 35, 38). The decision represents a significant reversal in ICTR practice: although some trial chambers have been willing to take notice of “widespread and systematic attacks” against Tutsis in Rwanda, they have uniformly insisted that the question of whether the attacks amounted to genocide is so fundamental that formal proof is required.As noted in the indictment, Edouard Karemera and Jospeh Nzirorera were minister-level officials in the Rwanda’ interim government (Indictment, paras. 1, 3) and served, along with Mathieu Ngirumpatse, as the national executive leadership of the National Republican Movement for Democracy and Development (MRND) (id., para. 9). They are charged with, inter alia, conspiracy to commit genocide, direct and public incitement to commit genocide, genocide, and—alternatively—complicity in genocide (id.). The prosecution alleges that they created, recruited, and organized the Interahamwe, the vicious youth wing of the MRND; provided members of the Interahamwe with weapons and military training; and helped formulate and implement policies of the interim government of April 8, 1994, that were intended to incite, encourage, and abet killings of Tutsis (id., para. 14).

Download Full-text

A formal proof of properties of a presentation system using Isabelle

2017 IEEE First Ukraine Conference on Electrical and Computer Engineering (UKRCON) ◽

10.1109/ukrcon.2017.8100431 ◽

2017 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

Taras Panchenko ◽

Ievgen Ivanov

Keyword(s):

Formal Proof

Download Full-text