TY - GEN
T1 - A program logic for union bounds
AU - Barthe, Gilles
AU - Gaboardi, Marco
AU - Grégoire, Benjamin
AU - Hsu, Justin
AU - Strub, Pierre Yves
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© Gilles Barthe, Marco Gaboardi, Benjamin Grégoire, Justin Hsu, and Pierre-Yves Strub.
PY - 2016/8/1
Y1 - 2016/8/1
N2 - We propose a probabilistic Hoare logic aHL based on the union bound, a tool from basic probability theory. While the union bound is simple, it is an extremely common tool for analyzing randomized algorithms. In formal verification terms, the union bound allows flexible and compositional reasoning over possible ways an algorithm may go wrong. It also enables a clean separation between reasoning about probabilities and reasoning about events, which are expressed as standard first-order formulas in our logic. Notably, assertions in our logic are non-probabilistic, even though we can conclude probabilistic facts from the judgments. Our logic can also prove accuracy properties for interactive programs, where the program must produce intermediate outputs as soon as pieces of the input arrive, rather than accessing the entire input at once. This setting also enables adaptivity, where later inputs may depend on earlier intermediate outputs. We show how to prove accuracy for several examples from the differential privacy literature, both interactive and non-interactive.
AB - We propose a probabilistic Hoare logic aHL based on the union bound, a tool from basic probability theory. While the union bound is simple, it is an extremely common tool for analyzing randomized algorithms. In formal verification terms, the union bound allows flexible and compositional reasoning over possible ways an algorithm may go wrong. It also enables a clean separation between reasoning about probabilities and reasoning about events, which are expressed as standard first-order formulas in our logic. Notably, assertions in our logic are non-probabilistic, even though we can conclude probabilistic facts from the judgments. Our logic can also prove accuracy properties for interactive programs, where the program must produce intermediate outputs as soon as pieces of the input arrive, rather than accessing the entire input at once. This setting also enables adaptivity, where later inputs may depend on earlier intermediate outputs. We show how to prove accuracy for several examples from the differential privacy literature, both interactive and non-interactive.
KW - Accuracy
KW - Formal Verification
KW - Hoare Logic
KW - Probabilistic Algorithms
KW - Union Bound
U2 - 10.4230/LIPIcs.ICALP.2016.107
DO - 10.4230/LIPIcs.ICALP.2016.107
M3 - Conference contribution
AN - SCOPUS:85012923754
T3 - Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics, LIPIcs
BT - 43rd International Colloquium on Automata, Languages, and Programming, ICALP 2016
A2 - Rabani, Yuval
A2 - Chatzigiannakis, Ioannis
A2 - Sangiorgi, Davide
A2 - Mitzenmacher, Michael
PB - Schloss Dagstuhl- Leibniz-Zentrum fur Informatik GmbH, Dagstuhl Publishing
T2 - 43rd International Colloquium on Automata, Languages, and Programming, ICALP 2016
Y2 - 12 July 2016 through 15 July 2016
ER -