<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<OAI-PMH xmlns="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/OAI-PMH.xsd">
  <responseDate>2026-07-20T12:09:16Z</responseDate>
  <request identifier="3611" metadataPrefix="oai_dc" verb="GetRecord">https://drops.dagstuhl.de/oai</request>
  <GetRecord>
    <record>
      <header>
        <identifier>oai:drops-oai.dagstuhl.de:3611</identifier>
        <datestamp>2024-03-06T10:34:25Z</datestamp>
        <setSpec>ddc:004</setSpec>
        <setSpec>open_access</setSpec>
      </header>
      <metadata>
        <oai_dc:dc xmlns:oai_dc="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc.xsd">
          <dc:title>Using Answer Set Programming in the Development of Verified Software</dc:title>
          <dc:creator>Schanda, Florian</dc:creator>
          <dc:creator>Brain, Martin</dc:creator>
          <dc:subject>Answer Set Programming</dc:subject>
          <dc:subject>verification</dc:subject>
          <dc:subject>SPARK</dc:subject>
          <dc:subject>Ada</dc:subject>
          <dc:subject>contract based verification</dc:subject>
          <dc:subject>safety critical</dc:subject>
          <dc:description>Software forms a key component of many modern safety and security critical systems. One approach to achieving the required levels of assurance is to prove that the software is free from bugs and meets its specification. If a proof cannot be constructed it is important to identify the root cause as it may be a flaw in the specification or a bug. Novice users often find this process frustrating and discouraging, and it can be time-consuming for experienced users. The paper describes a commercial application based on Answer Set Programming called Riposte. It generates simple counter-examples for false and unprovable verification conditions (VCs). These help users to understand why problematic VC are false and makes the development of verified software easier and faster.</dc:description>
          <dc:publisher>Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik</dc:publisher>
          <dc:contributor>Florian Schanda and Martin Brain</dc:contributor>
          <dc:date>2012</dc:date>
          <dc:relation>Is Part Of LIPIcs, Volume 17, Technical Communications of the 28th International Conference on Logic Programming (ICLP'12) (2012)</dc:relation>
          <dc:type>InProceedings</dc:type>
          <dc:type>Text</dc:type>
          <dc:type>doc-type:ResearchArticle</dc:type>
          <dc:type>publishedVersion</dc:type>
          <dc:format>application/pdf</dc:format>
          <dc:identifier>doi:10.4230/LIPIcs.ICLP.2012.72</dc:identifier>
          <dc:identifier>urn:nbn:de:0030-drops-36114</dc:identifier>
          <dc:identifier>https://drops.dagstuhl.de/entities/document/10.4230/LIPIcs.ICLP.2012.72</dc:identifier>
          <dc:language>eng</dc:language>
          <dc:rights>https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/3.0/legalcode</dc:rights>
        </oai_dc:dc>
      </metadata>
    </record>
  </GetRecord>
</OAI-PMH>
