skip to main content
research-article

Formalization of Measure Theory and Lebesgue Integration for Probabilistic Analysis in HOL

Published:01 January 2013Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

Dynamic systems that exhibit probabilistic behavior represent a large class of man-made systems such as communication networks, air traffic control, and other mission-critical systems. Evaluation of quantitative issues like performance and dependability of these systems is of paramount importance. In this paper, we propose a generalized methodology to formally reason about probabilistic systems within a theorem prover. We present a formalization of measure theory in the HOL theorem prover and use it to formalize basic concepts from the theory of probability. We also use the Lebesgue integration to formalize statistical properties of random variables. To illustrate the practical effectiveness of our methodology, we formally prove classical results from the theories of probability and information and use them in a data compression application in HOL.

References

  1. Baier, C. and Katoen, J. 2008. Principles of Model Checking. MIT Press. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Baier, C., Haverkort, B., Hermanns, H., and Katoen, J. 2003. Model checking algorithms for continuous time Markov chains. IEEE Trans. Softw. Engin 29, 4, 524--541. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Berberian, S. K. 1998. Fundamentals of Real Analysis. Springer.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Bialas, J. 1990. The σ-additive measure theory. J. Formal. Math. 2.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Bogachev, V. I. 2006. Measure Theory. Springer.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Chaum, D. 1988. The dining cryptographers problem: Unconditional sender and recipient untraceability. J. Cryptology 1, 1, 65--75. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. Coble, A. R. 2010. Anonymity, information, and machine-assisted proof. Ph.D. thesis, University of Cambridge.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Cover, T. M. and Thomas, J. A. 1991. Elements of Information Theory. Wiley-Interscience. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. de Alfaro, L. 1997. Ph.D. thesis, Stanford University.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Fraenkel, A., Bar-Hillel, Y., and Levy, A. 1973. Foundations of Set Theory. North Holland.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Gordon, M. 1989. Mechanizing programming logics in higher-order logic. In Current Trends in Hardware Verification and Automated Theorem Proving. Springer, 387--439. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Gordon, M. and Melham, T. 1993. Introduction to HOL: A theorem proving environment for higher-order logic. Cambridge University Press. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Halmos, P. R. 1944. The foundations of probability. Amer. Math. Monthly 51, 9, 493--510.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. Harrison, J. 2009. Handbook of Practical Logic and Automated Reasoning. Cambridge University Press. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Hasan, O. and Tahar, S. 2007. Verification of expectation properties for discrete random variables in HOL. In Theorem Proving in Higher-Order Logics. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 4732. Springer, 119--134. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Hasan, O. and Tahar, S. 2009a. Formal verification of tail distribution bounds in the HOL theorem prover. Math. Methods Appl. Sci. 32, 4 (March), 480--504.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. Hasan, O. and Tahar, S. 2009b. Performance analysis and functional verification of the stop-and-wait protocol in HOL. J. Autom. Reasoning 42, 1, 1--33. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Hasan, O., Abbasi, N., Akbarpour, B., Tahar, S., and Akbarpour, R. 2009. Formal reasoning about expectation properties for continuous random variables. In Proceedings of the 2nd World Congress on Formal Methods. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 5850. 435--450. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Hasan, O., Tahar, S., and Abbasi, N. 2009. Formal reliability analysis using theorem proving. Trans. Comput. 59, 579--592. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Hurd, J. 2002. Formal verifcation of probabilistic algorithms. Ph.D. thesis, University of Cambridge.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Kwiatkowska, M., Norman, G., and Parker, D. 2005. Quantitative analysis with the probabilistic model checker PRISM. Electron. Notes in Theor Comput Sci. 153, 2, 5--31. Elsevier. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Lester, D. 2007. Topology in PVS: Continuous mathematics with applications. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Automated Formal Methods. ACM, 11--20. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Mhamdi, T., Hasan, O., and Tahar, S. 2010a. Formal analysis of systems with probabilistic behavior in HOL. http://users.encs.concordia.ca/~mhamdi/hol/probability/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Mhamdi, T., Hasan, O., and Tahar, S. 2010b. On the formalization of the Lebesgue integration theory in HOL. In Proceedings of the Conference on Interactive Theorem Proving. 387--402. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Nȩdzusiak, A. 1989. σ-fields and Probability. J. Formal. Math. 1.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Owre, S., Rushby, J. M., and Shankar, N. 1992. PVS: A prototype verification system. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Automated Deduction. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 607. 748--752. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Papoulis, A. 1984. Probability, Random Variables, and Stochastic Processes. Mc-Graw Hill.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Parker, D. 2001. Ph.D. thesis, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Paulson, L. C. 1994. Isabelle: A Generic Theorem Prover. Springer.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  30. Reiter, M. K. and Rubin, A. D. 1998. Crowds: Anonymity for web transactions. ACM Trans. Inf. Syst. Secur. 1, 1, 66--92. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. Richter, S. 2004. Formalizing integration theory with an application to probabilistic algorithms. In Proceedings of the 17the International Conference on Theorem Proving in Higher Order Logics. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. vol. 3223. 271--286.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Rutten, J., Kwaiatkowska, M., Normal, G., and Parker, D. 2004. Mathematical Techniques for Analyzing Concurrent and Probabilisitc Systems. CRM Monograph Series, vol. 23. American Mathematical Society.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Sen, K., Viswanathan, M., and Agha, G. 2005. VESTA: A statistical model-checker and analyzer for probabilistic systems. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on the Quantitative Evaluation of Systems. 251--252. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. Smith, G. 2009. On the foundations of quantitative information flow. In Proceedings of the Conference on Foundations of Software Science and Computational Structures. 288--302. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. Wagon, S. 1993. The Banach-Tarski Paradox. Cambridge University Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Formalization of Measure Theory and Lebesgue Integration for Probabilistic Analysis in HOL

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in

      Full Access

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader
      About Cookies On This Site

      We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website.

      Learn more

      Got it!