The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Proving the Correctness of Multiprocess Programs
Abstract
The inductive assertion method is generalized to permit formal, machine-verifiable proofs of correctness for multiprocess programs. Individual processes are represented by ordinary flowcharts, and no special synchronization mechanisms are assumed, so the method can be applied to a large class of multiprocess programs. A correctness proof can be designed together with the program by a hierarchical process of stepwise refinement, making the method practical for larger programs. The resulting proofs tend to be natural formalizations of the informal proofs that are now used.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Practical byzantine fault tolerance and proactive recovery
Castro, M., & Liskov, B. (2002) · ACM Transactions on Computer Systems · doi:10.1145/571637.571640 · Cited by 2,475
The temporal semantics of concurrent programs
Pnueli, A. (1981) · Theoretical Computer Science · doi:10.1016/0304-3975(81)90110-9 · Cited by 699
Thorough static analysis of device drivers
Ball, T., Bounimova, E., Cook, B., Levin, V., Lichtenberg, J., McGarvey, C., Ondrusek, B., Rajamani, S. K., & Ustuner, A. (2006) · Proceedings of the 1st ACM SIGOPS/EuroSys European Conference on Computer Systems 2006 · doi:10.1145/1217935.1217943 · Cited by 371
Metadata
- Authors
- Lamport, L.
- Venue
- IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering
- Published
- 1977-03
- Volume
- SE-3
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 125-143
- ISSN
- 0098-5589 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-3520
- 2326-3881
- OpenAlex
- W2132334337
- Cited by
- 1,138
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 10.62
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Proving the Correctness of Multiprocess Programs. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/tse.1977.229904
- The paper
- Lamport, L. (1977). Proving the Correctness of Multiprocess Programs. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering. https://doi.org/10.1109/tse.1977.229904
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
