The correctness of a program for wait-free linearization of an arbitrary shared data object in bounded memory is verified mechanically. The program uses atomic read-write registers, an array of consensus registers and one compare and swap register. In the program, a number of processes concurrently inspect and modify a pointer structure without waiting. Consequently, the proof of correctness is very delicate. The theorem prover NQTHM of Boyer and Moore has been used to mechanically certify the correctness.</p
Given a sequential implementation of an arbitrary data object, a wait-free, linearizable concurrent ...
We consider shared memory systems in which asynchronous processes cooperate with each other by commu...
Given a sequential implementation of an arbitrary data object, a wait-free, linearizable concurrent ...
The correctness of a program for wait-free linearization of an arbitrary shared data object in bound...
The correctness of a program for wait-free linearization of an arbitrary shared data object in bound...
The correctness of a program for wait-free linearization of an arbitrary shared data object in bound...
The correctness of a program for wait-free linearization of an arbitrary shared data object in bound...
The correctness of a program for wait-free linearization of an arbitrary shared data object in bound...
The correctness of a program for wait-free linearization of an arbitrary shared data object in bound...
Given a sequential implementation of an arbitrary data object, a wait-free, linearizable concurrent ...
Given a sequential implementation of an arbitrary data object, a wait-free, linearizable concurrent ...
Efficient implementations of data structures such as queues, stacks or hash-tables allow for concurr...
Abstract. Distributed algorithms are inherently complex to verify. In this paper we show how to veri...
Proofs of linearizability are typically intricate and lengthy, and readers may find it difficult to ...
Most work on the verification of concurrent objects for shared memory assumes sequential consistency...
Given a sequential implementation of an arbitrary data object, a wait-free, linearizable concurrent ...
We consider shared memory systems in which asynchronous processes cooperate with each other by commu...
Given a sequential implementation of an arbitrary data object, a wait-free, linearizable concurrent ...
The correctness of a program for wait-free linearization of an arbitrary shared data object in bound...
The correctness of a program for wait-free linearization of an arbitrary shared data object in bound...
The correctness of a program for wait-free linearization of an arbitrary shared data object in bound...
The correctness of a program for wait-free linearization of an arbitrary shared data object in bound...
The correctness of a program for wait-free linearization of an arbitrary shared data object in bound...
The correctness of a program for wait-free linearization of an arbitrary shared data object in bound...
Given a sequential implementation of an arbitrary data object, a wait-free, linearizable concurrent ...
Given a sequential implementation of an arbitrary data object, a wait-free, linearizable concurrent ...
Efficient implementations of data structures such as queues, stacks or hash-tables allow for concurr...
Abstract. Distributed algorithms are inherently complex to verify. In this paper we show how to veri...
Proofs of linearizability are typically intricate and lengthy, and readers may find it difficult to ...
Most work on the verification of concurrent objects for shared memory assumes sequential consistency...
Given a sequential implementation of an arbitrary data object, a wait-free, linearizable concurrent ...
We consider shared memory systems in which asynchronous processes cooperate with each other by commu...
Given a sequential implementation of an arbitrary data object, a wait-free, linearizable concurrent ...