Files
papers/lux-symbolic-execution-halmos/sections/05-understanding-counterexamples.tex
zeekay abf99d05fc papers: reorganize into per-paper dirs, add Antje Worring as co-author
Restructured from flat .tex/.pdf files into per-paper subdirectories.
Added Antje Worring as co-author on all papers.
Synced PDFs to pdfs/ for download site.
2026-04-18 21:50:07 -07:00

35 lines
1.2 KiB
TeX

\section{Understanding Counterexamples}
When Halmos finds a violation, it produces a concrete counterexample. Reading these
correctly is critical.
\subsection{Anatomy of a Counterexample}
\begin{lstlisting}[language=bash,caption={Halmos counterexample output}]
$ halmos --function check_transfer_conserves_supply
Counterexample:
p_from_address = 0x1234...
p_to_address = 0x1234...
p_amount_uint256 = 1000
Violation: assert(supplyAfter == supplyBefore) at line 18
\end{lstlisting}
This tells us: when \texttt{from == to}, the transfer implementation double-counts.
The fix: add \texttt{vm.assume(from != to)} or fix the contract.
\subsection{False Positives}
Halmos may report violations that cannot occur in practice because:
\begin{itemize}[nosep]
\item \textbf{Missing assumptions}: The test does not constrain inputs enough. Fix: add
\texttt{vm.assume}.
\item \textbf{Abstracted storage}: Halmos starts with arbitrary storage unless you set
it up explicitly.
\item \textbf{Hash collisions}: Halmos treats \texttt{keccak256} as an uninterpreted
function. It may find ``collisions'' that cannot occur with the real hash function.
\end{itemize}
%% ============================================================