<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Highlights on Logic of Autonomous Dynamical Systems</title><link>https://logic.kastel.kit.edu/highlights/</link><description>Recent content in Highlights on Logic of Autonomous Dynamical Systems</description><generator>Hugo</generator><language>en-us</language><atom:link href="https://logic.kastel.kit.edu/highlights/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>KeYmaera X</title><link>https://logic.kastel.kit.edu/highlights/keymaerax/</link><pubDate>Mon, 01 Jan 0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://logic.kastel.kit.edu/highlights/keymaerax/</guid><description>&lt;p>KeYmaera X is a theorem prover for differential dynamic logic
(dL), a logic for specifying and verifying properties of
hybrid systems with mixed discrete and continuous
dynamics. Reasoning about complicated hybrid systems requires
support for sophisticated proof techniques, efficient
computation, and a user interface that crystallizes salient
properties of the system. KeYmaera X allows users to specify
custom proof search techniques as tactics, execute tactics in
parallel, and interface with partial proofs via an extensible
user interface. KeYmaera X also is a verification tool for
differential game logic (dGL), a logic for specifying and
verifying properties of hybrid games with mixed discrete,
continuous and adversarial dynamics.&lt;/p></description></item><item><title>Differential Dynamic Logic</title><link>https://logic.kastel.kit.edu/highlights/dl/</link><pubDate>Mon, 01 Jan 0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://logic.kastel.kit.edu/highlights/dl/</guid><description>&lt;p>Differential dynamic logic (dL) is a logic for
specifying and verifying hybrid systems combining discrete and
continuous dynamical systems. Such hybrid systems combine
discrete dynamics, e.g., for representing the instantaneous
change of computer decisions with continuous dynamics
represented as differential equations, e.g., for the
continuous motion of a car or aircraft. The purpose of dL is
that this logic can be used to describe/specify and
prove/verify correctness properties for hybrid systems given
operationally as hybrid programs using the dL
proof calculus. The logic dL and its proof calculus are the
basis of the deductive verification tool KeYmaera for hybrid
systems and its successor KeYmaera X. In addition,
the hybrid systems and correctness properties formulated in dL
may include symbolic parameters, which can be free or
quantified to discover the required parametric safety
constraints.&lt;/p></description></item><item><title>Logical Foundations of CPS</title><link>https://logic.kastel.kit.edu/highlights/lfcps/</link><pubDate>Mon, 01 Jan 0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://logic.kastel.kit.edu/highlights/lfcps/</guid><description>&lt;p>Cyber-physical systems (CPSs) combine cyber capabilities,
such as computation or communication, with physical
capabilities, such as motion or other physical processes. Cars,
aircraft, and robots are prime examples, because they move
physically in space in a way that is determined by discrete
computerized control algorithms. Designing these algorithms is
challenging due to their tight coupling with physical behavior,
while it is vital that these algorithms be correct because we
rely on them for safety-critical tasks.&lt;/p></description></item><item><title>Semi-competitive differential game logic</title><link>https://logic.kastel.kit.edu/highlights/dglsc/</link><pubDate>Mon, 01 Jan 0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://logic.kastel.kit.edu/highlights/dglsc/</guid><description>&lt;p>Semi-competitive differential game logic (dGLsc) is a logic for verifying two-player non-zero sum games where both players have an individual goal.
The players behave semi-competitively, i.e. they help each other where possible and compete where necessary.
Thus, dGLsc addresses the challenge that even though each player may benefit from knowledge of the other player’s goals, e.g., concerning shared safety objectives, unsafety might still arise if every player were to mutually assume the other player would act to avoid unsafety. The logic is therefore particularly well suited to verify, for example aerial collision avoidance with the dGLsc proof calculus.&lt;/p></description></item></channel></rss>