{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,4,16]],"date-time":"2026-04-16T02:09:47Z","timestamp":1776305387458,"version":"3.50.1"},"publisher-location":"Cham","reference-count":26,"publisher":"Springer Nature Switzerland","isbn-type":[{"value":"9783031906596","type":"print"},{"value":"9783031906602","type":"electronic"}],"license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2025,1,1]],"date-time":"2025-01-01T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1735689600000},"content-version":"tdm","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0"},{"start":{"date-parts":[[2025,5,1]],"date-time":"2025-05-01T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1746057600000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":120,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0"}],"content-domain":{"domain":["link.springer.com"],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":[],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2025]]},"abstract":"<jats:title>Abstract<\/jats:title>\n          <jats:p>\n            <jats:sc>CPAchecker<\/jats:sc> is a tool for software verification, witness validation, and test-case generation, based on the concept of <jats:italic>configurable program analysis<\/jats:italic>. One of its main applications is to validate correctness and violation witnesses in versions 1.0 and 2.0. The witness validation is achieved by strengthening a selection of verification algorithms using the information from the witness. Due to the modular approach of <jats:sc>CPAchecker<\/jats:sc>, extending its verification analyses for witness validation can be easily done. Similar to <jats:sc>CPAchecker<\/jats:sc> \u2019s verification approach, witness validation uses a selection of analyses dependent on the witness type, the specification, and program features. To validate correctness witnesses, <jats:sc>CPAchecker<\/jats:sc> uses <jats:italic>k<\/jats:italic>-induction and predicate abstraction to verify that the invariants from the witness hold and the correctness of the program can be proven. To validate violation witnesses, <jats:sc>CPAchecker<\/jats:sc> uses predicate abstraction, value analysis, SMGs, and BDDs. <jats:sc>CPAchecker<\/jats:sc> \u2019s many verification algorithms make it a versatile and successful tool for witness validation.<\/jats:p>","DOI":"10.1007\/978-3-031-90660-2_11","type":"book-chapter","created":{"date-parts":[[2025,5,2]],"date-time":"2025-05-02T11:21:34Z","timestamp":1746184894000},"page":"192-198","update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/springer_crossmark_policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":4,"title":["CPAchecker 4.0 as Witness Validator"],"prefix":"10.1007","author":[{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0003-4832-7662","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Dirk","family":"Beyer","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0002-8172-3184","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Marian","family":"Lingsch-Rosenfeld","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]}],"member":"297","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2025,5,1]]},"reference":[{"key":"11_CR1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Ayaziov\u00e1, P., Beyer, D., Lingsch-Rosenfeld, M., Spiessl, M., Strej\u010dek, J.: Software verification witnesses\u00a02.0. In: Proc. SPIN. pp. 184\u2013203. LNCS\u00a014624, Springer (2024). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/978-3-031-66149-5_11","DOI":"10.1007\/978-3-031-66149-5_11"},{"key":"11_CR2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Baier, D., Beyer, D., Chien, P.C., Jakobs, M.C., Jankola, M., Kettl, M., Lee, N.Z., Lemberger, T., Lingsch-Rosenfeld, M., Wachowitz, H., Wendler, P.: Software verification with CPAchecker 3.0: Tutorial and user guide. In: Proc. FM. pp. 543\u2013570. LNCS\u00a014934, Springer (2024). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/978-3-031-71177-0_30","DOI":"10.1007\/978-3-031-71177-0_30"},{"key":"11_CR3","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Baier, D., Beyer, D., Chien, P.C., Jankola, M., Kettl, M., Lee, N.Z., Lemberger, T., Lingsch-Rosenfeld, M., Spiessl, M., Wachowitz, H., Wendler, P.: CPAchecker 2.3 with strategy selection (competition contribution). In: Proc. TACAS\u00a0(3). pp. 359\u2013364. LNCS\u00a014572, Springer (2024). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/978-3-031-57256-2_21","DOI":"10.1007\/978-3-031-57256-2_21"},{"key":"11_CR4","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Beyer, D., Chien, P.C., Jankola, M., Lee, N.Z.: A transferability study of interpolation-based hardware model checking for software verification. Proc. ACM Softw. Eng. 1(FSE) (2024). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1145\/3660797","DOI":"10.1145\/3660797"},{"key":"11_CR5","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Beyer, D., Chien, P.C., Lee, N.Z.: CPA-DF: A tool for configurable interval analysis to boost program verification. In: Proc. ASE. pp. 2050\u20132053. IEEE (2023). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1109\/ASE56229.2023.00213","DOI":"10.1109\/ASE56229.2023.00213"},{"key":"11_CR6","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Beyer, D., Dangl, M.: Strategy selection for software verification based on boolean features: A simple but effective approach. In: Proc. ISoLA. pp. 144\u2013159. LNCS\u00a011245, Springer (2018). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/978-3-030-03421-4_11. https:\/\/www.sosy-lab.org\/research\/pub\/2018-ISoLA.Strategy_Selection_for_Software_Verification_Based_on_Boolean_Features.pdf","DOI":"10.1007\/978-3-030-03421-4_11"},{"key":"11_CR7","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Beyer, D., Dangl, M., Wendler, P.: Boosting k-induction with continuously-refined invariants. In: Proc. CAV. pp. 622\u2013640. LNCS\u00a09206, Springer (2015). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/978-3-319-21690-4_42","DOI":"10.1007\/978-3-319-21690-4_42"},{"key":"11_CR8","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Beyer, D., Dangl, M., Wendler, P.: A unifying view on SMT-based software verification. J. Autom. Reasoning 60(3), 299\u2013335 (2018). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s10817-017-9432-6","DOI":"10.1007\/s10817-017-9432-6"},{"key":"11_CR9","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Beyer, D., Friedberger, K.: Domain-independent multi-threaded software model checking. In: Proc. ASE. pp. 634\u2013644. ACM (2018). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1145\/3238147.3238195","DOI":"10.1145\/3238147.3238195"},{"key":"11_CR10","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Beyer, D., Friedberger, K.: Domain-independent interprocedural program analysis using block-abstraction memoization. In: Proc. ESEC\/FSE. pp. 50\u201362. ACM (2020). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1145\/3368089.3409718","DOI":"10.1145\/3368089.3409718"},{"key":"11_CR11","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Beyer, D., Friedberger, K.: Violation witnesses and result validation for multi-threaded programs. In: Proc. ISoLA\u00a0(1). pp. 449\u2013470. LNCS\u00a012476, Springer (2020). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/978-3-030-61362-4_26","DOI":"10.1007\/978-3-030-61362-4_26"},{"key":"11_CR12","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Beyer, D., Henzinger, T.A., Th\u00e9oduloz, G.: Configurable software verification: Concretizing the convergence of model checking and program analysis. In: Proc. CAV. pp. 504\u2013518. LNCS\u00a04590, Springer (2007). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/978-3-540-73368-3_51","DOI":"10.1007\/978-3-540-73368-3_51"},{"key":"11_CR13","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Beyer, D., Keremoglu, M.E.: CPAchecker: A tool for configurable software verification. In: Proc. CAV. pp. 184\u2013190. LNCS\u00a06806, Springer (2011). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/978-3-642-22110-1_16","DOI":"10.1007\/978-3-642-22110-1_16"},{"key":"11_CR14","unstructured":"Beyer, D., Keremoglu, M.E., Wendler, P.: Predicate abstraction with adjustable-block encoding. In: Proc. FMCAD. pp. 189\u2013197. FMCAD (2010). https:\/\/dl.acm.org\/doi\/10.5555\/1998496.1998532"},{"key":"11_CR15","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Beyer, D., Lee, N.Z., Wendler, P.: Interpolation and SAT-based model checking revisited: Adoption to software verification. J. Autom. Reasoning 69 (2025). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s10817-024-09702-9, preprint: https:\/\/doi.org\/10.48550\/arXiv.2208.05046","DOI":"10.1007\/s10817-024-09702-9"},{"key":"11_CR16","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Beyer, D., L\u00f6we, S.: Explicit-state software model checking based on CEGAR and interpolation. In: Proc. FASE. pp. 146\u2013162. LNCS\u00a07793, Springer (2013). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/978-3-642-37057-1_11. https:\/\/www.sosy-lab.org\/research\/pub\/2013-FASE.Explicit-State_Software_Model_Checking_Based_on_CEGAR_and_Interpolation.pdf","DOI":"10.1007\/978-3-642-37057-1_11"},{"key":"11_CR17","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Beyer, D., Stahlbauer, A.: BDD-based software model checking with CPAchecker. In: Proc. MEMICS. pp. 1\u201311. LNCS\u00a07721, Springer (2013). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/978-3-642-36046-6_1. https:\/\/www.sosy-lab.org\/research\/pub\/2013-MEMICS.BDD-Based_Software_Model_Checking_with_CPAchecker.pdf","DOI":"10.1007\/978-3-642-36046-6_1"},{"key":"11_CR18","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Beyer, D., Stahlbauer, A.: BDD-based software verification: Applications to event-condition-action systems. Int. J. Softw. Tools Technol. Transfer 16(5), 507\u2013518 (2014). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s10009-014-0334-1","DOI":"10.1007\/s10009-014-0334-1"},{"key":"11_CR19","unstructured":"Beyer, D., Strej\u010dek, J.: Report on SV-COMP 2025. In: Proc. TACAS. LNCS\u00a0, Springer (2025)"},{"key":"11_CR20","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Beyer, D., Wendler, P.: CPAchecker release 4.0. Zenodo (2024). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.5281\/zenodo.14203369","DOI":"10.5281\/zenodo.14203369"},{"key":"11_CR21","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Beyer, D., Wendler, P.: CPAchecker release 4.0 (image). Zenodo (2024). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.5281\/zenodo.14209310","DOI":"10.5281\/zenodo.14209310"},{"key":"11_CR22","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Cimatti, A., Griggio, A., Schaafsma, B.J., Sebastiani, R.: The MathSAT5 SMT solver. In: Proc. TACAS. pp. 93\u2013107. LNCS\u00a07795, Springer (2013). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/978-3-642-36742-7_7","DOI":"10.1007\/978-3-642-36742-7_7"},{"key":"11_CR23","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Dudka, K., Peringer, P., Vojnar, T.: Byte-precise verification of low-level list manipulation. In: Proc. SAS. pp. 215\u2013237. LNCS\u00a07935, Springer (2013). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/978-3-642-38856-9_13","DOI":"10.1007\/978-3-642-38856-9_13"},{"key":"11_CR24","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Friedberger, K.: CPA-BAM: Block-abstraction memoization with value analysis and predicate analysis (competition contribution). In: Proc. TACAS. pp. 912\u2013915. LNCS\u00a09636, Springer (2016). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/978-3-662-49674-9_58","DOI":"10.1007\/978-3-662-49674-9_58"},{"key":"11_CR25","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Henzinger, T.A., Jhala, R., Majumdar, R., McMillan, K.L.: Abstractions from proofs. In: Proc. POPL. pp. 232\u2013244. ACM (2004). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1145\/964001.964021","DOI":"10.1145\/964001.964021"},{"key":"11_CR26","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Wonisch, D., Wehrheim, H.: Predicate analysis with block-abstraction memoization. In: Proc. ICFEM. pp. 332\u2013347. LNCS\u00a07635, Springer (2012). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/978-3-642-34281-3_24","DOI":"10.1007\/978-3-642-34281-3_24"}],"container-title":["Lecture Notes in Computer Science","Tools and Algorithms for the Construction and Analysis of Systems"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/content\/pdf\/10.1007\/978-3-031-90660-2_11","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2025,5,2]],"date-time":"2025-05-02T11:21:36Z","timestamp":1746184896000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/10.1007\/978-3-031-90660-2_11"}},"subtitle":["(Competition Contribution)"],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2025]]},"ISBN":["9783031906596","9783031906602"],"references-count":26,"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/978-3-031-90660-2_11","relation":{},"ISSN":["0302-9743","1611-3349"],"issn-type":[{"value":"0302-9743","type":"print"},{"value":"1611-3349","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2025]]},"assertion":[{"value":"1 May 2025","order":1,"name":"first_online","label":"First Online","group":{"name":"ChapterHistory","label":"Chapter History"}},{"value":"TACAS","order":1,"name":"conference_acronym","label":"Conference Acronym","group":{"name":"ConferenceInfo","label":"Conference Information"}},{"value":"International Conference on Tools and Algorithms for the Construction and Analysis of Systems","order":2,"name":"conference_name","label":"Conference Name","group":{"name":"ConferenceInfo","label":"Conference Information"}},{"value":"Hamilton, ON","order":3,"name":"conference_city","label":"Conference City","group":{"name":"ConferenceInfo","label":"Conference Information"}},{"value":"Canada","order":4,"name":"conference_country","label":"Conference Country","group":{"name":"ConferenceInfo","label":"Conference Information"}},{"value":"2025","order":5,"name":"conference_year","label":"Conference Year","group":{"name":"ConferenceInfo","label":"Conference Information"}},{"value":"3 May 2025","order":7,"name":"conference_start_date","label":"Conference Start Date","group":{"name":"ConferenceInfo","label":"Conference Information"}},{"value":"8 May 2025","order":8,"name":"conference_end_date","label":"Conference End Date","group":{"name":"ConferenceInfo","label":"Conference Information"}},{"value":"31","order":9,"name":"conference_number","label":"Conference Number","group":{"name":"ConferenceInfo","label":"Conference Information"}},{"value":"tacas2025","order":10,"name":"conference_id","label":"Conference ID","group":{"name":"ConferenceInfo","label":"Conference Information"}},{"value":"https:\/\/etaps.org\/2025\/conferences\/tacas\/","order":11,"name":"conference_url","label":"Conference URL","group":{"name":"ConferenceInfo","label":"Conference Information"}}]}}