Abstract: Technologies pertaining to top-down interprocedural analysis of a computer program are described herein. A query is received for processing over a root procedure in the computer program. Responsive to the query being received, the root procedure is explored, and calls to sub-procedures are located. Sub-queries are generated upon encountering the calls to the sub-procedures, and execution of the sub-queries is performed in parallel across multiple computing nodes.

Abstract: Various technologies described herein pertain to approximating an inputted probabilistic model for statistical relational learning. An initial approximation of formulae included in an inputted probabilistic model can be formed, where the initial approximation of the formulae omits axioms included in the inputted probabilistic model. Further, an approximated probabilistic model of the inputted probabilistic model can be constructed, where the approximated probabilistic model includes the initial approximation of the formulae. Moreover, the approximated probabilistic model and evidence can be fed to a relational learning engine, and a most probable explanation (MPE) world can be received from the relational learning engine. The evidence can comprise existing valuations of a subset of relations included in the inputted probabilistic model. The MPE world can include valuations for the relations included in the inputted probabilistic model.

Abstract: A quantified belief propagation (QBP) algorithm receives as input an existentially quantified boolean formula (QBF) of existentially quantified boolean variables, universally quantified variables, and boolean operators. A tripartite graph is constructed, and includes (i) there-exists nodes that correspond to and represent the existentially quantified variables, (ii) for-all nodes that correspond to and represent the universally quantified variables, and (iii) sub-formula nodes that correspond to and represent sub-formulas of the QBF. A set of boolean values of the existentially quantified variables is found by (i) passing a first message from an arbitrary sub-formula node to an arbitrary for-all node, and (ii) in response, passing a second message from the arbitrary for-all node to the arbitrary sub-formula node.

Abstract: The method executes the application and if there are no errors from the execution of the application, the method ends. If errors exist, the errors are collected from the execution of the application in an error report. Labeled application paths are created by adding a unique label to individual application paths where the application paths are individual loops and individual functions in the application. An analysis is created of the labeled application paths by executing the application with the labeled paths, reviewing the error report for data related to the labels and if an error is sufficiently related to application paths with labels, storing the path that created the errors in a report. If an error is not sufficient related to the application path with labels, the method is repeated by the creating the analysis again by substituting additional application paths for the application paths.

Abstract: A method of analyzing a computer application is disclosed. The method may break an application into components and the method may determine if the components have already been analyzed for errors, either through static analysis or by a code analysis. If the component has already been analyzed, the previous analysis may be used and the method may move on to the next code section. If the component has not been analyzed, it may be determined if the component may be reached from a given starting point. If the component cannot be reached from a given starting point, the component may not be analyzed. Both static and code testing tools may be used to determine if errors exist. The fined-grained coupling and alternation of may (universal) and must (existential) summaries allow the method to easily navigate through these code fragments while traditional may-only, must-only or non-compositional may-must al-gorithms are stuck in their specific analyses.

Abstract: The method executes the application and if there are no errors from the execution of the application, the method ends. If errors exist, the errors are collected from the execution of the application in an error report. Labeled application paths are created by adding a unique label to individual application paths where the application paths are individual loops and individual functions in the application. An analysis is created of the labeled application paths by executing the application with the labeled paths, reviewing the error report for data related to the labels and if an error is sufficiently related to application paths with labels, storing the path that created the errors in a report. If an error is not sufficient related to the application path with labels, the method is repeated by the creating the analysis again by substituting additional application paths for the application paths.

Abstract: A “property checker” uses light-weight symbolic execution to prove that software programs satisfy safety properties by simultaneously performing program testing and program abstraction. A simple example of safety properties includes conditions that must be satisfied for proper program execution, such as whether an application properly interfaces with API methods or functions. Program tests are an “under-approximation” of program behavior, and abstractions are an “over-approximation” of the program. This simultaneous testing either finds a test-case that reaches an error state, or finds an abstraction showing that no path in the state space of the program can reach any error state. If a test-case reaches an error state, the property checker has discovered a violation of the safety property. Conversely, if no path in the state space can reach any error state, the property checker has proved that the program satisfies the desired safety property.