Supervisor Meeting 9

Missing Attendees

• None

Agenda

1. Please read through section IV.E and the corresponding proof in Appendix B. Focus especially on step <1>3. Is the proof convincing?

2. We are considering two interpretations of an abstract table, we will present the options at the meeting and want your input on which one makes the most sense to you.

3. The abstract semantics is moving along slowly, we are still working on how it should be written.

Meeting notes

Nothing to talk about for the comments.

Casper presents two ways for us to represent the abstraction of the table. There is not one good answer to our questions - the representation should be chosen as the best one for the properties we wish to show. In general, Gabriela struggles with relating the papers we reference with the things we try to do, and would like to have some concrete examples.

We will have a strategy meeting after this, so we can plan the remainder of our time properly, and prioritize some missing things.

Gabriela: Where is this going to be used?

• You base this on an article where they have a concrete context, but you do not seem to have

• Do you have a context, or do you want this to be used for everything.

For example: If you have no restrictions on the operations you can do on the update, for example, it is very difficult for us to prove anything.

May be relevant to clarify that the semantic cover the available operations.

Next meeting Monday 2024-04-22 09:00.

Action items

These action items should be written on the GitHub project board