{"record_type":"pith_number_record","schema_url":"https://pith.science/schemas/pith-number/v1.json","pith_number":"pith:2025:MIQYVRNPSKYYVNEY7TY5IBM56H","short_pith_number":"pith:MIQYVRNP","schema_version":"1.0","canonical_sha256":"62218ac5af92b18ab498fcf1d4059df1cc4f4bfe6a262d2fa7971032efaff40b","source":{"kind":"arxiv","id":"2503.13762","version":1},"attestation_state":"computed","paper":{"title":"Do Unit Proofs Work? An Empirical Study of Compositional Bounded Model Checking for Memory Safety Verification","license":"http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/","headline":"","cross_cats":[],"primary_cat":"cs.SE","authors_text":"Aravind Machiry, James C. Davis, Owen Cochell, Parth V. Patil, Paschal C. Amusuo, Taylor Le Lievre","submitted_at":"2025-03-17T22:55:12Z","abstract_excerpt":"Memory safety defects pose a major threat to software reliability, enabling cyberattacks, outages, and crashes. To mitigate these risks, organizations adopt Compositional Bounded Model Checking (BMC), using unit proofs to formally verify memory safety. However, methods for creating unit proofs vary across organizations and are inconsistent within the same project, leading to errors and missed defects. In addition, unit proofing remains understudied, with no systematic development methods or empirical evaluations.\n  This work presents the first empirical study on unit proofing for memory safety"},"verification_status":{"content_addressed":true,"pith_receipt":true,"author_attested":false,"weak_author_claims":0,"strong_author_claims":0,"externally_anchored":false,"storage_verified":false,"citation_signatures":0,"replication_records":0,"graph_snapshot":true,"references_resolved":false,"formal_links_present":false},"canonical_record":{"source":{"id":"2503.13762","kind":"arxiv","version":1},"metadata":{"license":"http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/","primary_cat":"cs.SE","submitted_at":"2025-03-17T22:55:12Z","cross_cats_sorted":[],"title_canon_sha256":"500120acc6ef9daabc44d698f696b6ea1b18ac51c9f7e0cd3683d8dee701becb","abstract_canon_sha256":"de52971f94153b01e706802331bf2a71a6fb08bd37211c1dfe30ee36ea71b6e5"},"schema_version":"1.0"},"receipt":{"kind":"pith_receipt","key_id":"pith-v1-2026-05","algorithm":"ed25519","signed_at":"2026-07-05T10:33:17.683145Z","signature_b64":"VtsySrQ69Xjn7z8ohrfLkiR6STzsOOLWlEvbOqWNVJendynk1u+Fih8zoRPRrvKtF7i11gzLOAm8ABmWW6MSBA==","signed_message":"canonical_sha256_bytes","builder_version":"pith-number-builder-2026-05-17-v1","receipt_version":"0.3","canonical_sha256":"62218ac5af92b18ab498fcf1d4059df1cc4f4bfe6a262d2fa7971032efaff40b","last_reissued_at":"2026-07-05T10:33:17.682657Z","signature_status":"signed_v1","first_computed_at":"2026-07-05T10:33:17.682657Z","public_key_fingerprint":"8d4b5ee74e4693bcd1df2446408b0d54"},"graph_snapshot":{"paper":{"title":"Do Unit Proofs Work? An Empirical Study of Compositional Bounded Model Checking for Memory Safety Verification","license":"http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/","headline":"","cross_cats":[],"primary_cat":"cs.SE","authors_text":"Aravind Machiry, James C. Davis, Owen Cochell, Parth V. Patil, Paschal C. Amusuo, Taylor Le Lievre","submitted_at":"2025-03-17T22:55:12Z","abstract_excerpt":"Memory safety defects pose a major threat to software reliability, enabling cyberattacks, outages, and crashes. To mitigate these risks, organizations adopt Compositional Bounded Model Checking (BMC), using unit proofs to formally verify memory safety. However, methods for creating unit proofs vary across organizations and are inconsistent within the same project, leading to errors and missed defects. In addition, unit proofing remains understudied, with no systematic development methods or empirical evaluations.\n  This work presents the first empirical study on unit proofing for memory safety"},"claims":{"count":0,"items":[],"snapshot_sha256":"258153158e38e3291e3d48162225fcdb2d5a3ed65a07baac614ab91432fd4f57"},"source":{"id":"2503.13762","kind":"arxiv","version":1},"verdict":{"id":null,"model_set":{},"created_at":null,"strongest_claim":"","one_line_summary":"","pipeline_version":null,"weakest_assumption":"","pith_extraction_headline":""},"integrity":{"clean":true,"summary":{"advisory":0,"critical":0,"by_detector":{},"informational":0},"endpoint":"/pith/2503.13762/integrity.json","findings":[],"available":true,"detectors_run":[],"snapshot_sha256":"c28c3603d3b5d939e8dc4c7e95fa8dfce3d595e45f758748cecf8e644a296938"},"references":{"count":0,"sample":[],"resolved_work":0,"snapshot_sha256":"258153158e38e3291e3d48162225fcdb2d5a3ed65a07baac614ab91432fd4f57","internal_anchors":0},"formal_canon":{"evidence_count":0,"snapshot_sha256":"258153158e38e3291e3d48162225fcdb2d5a3ed65a07baac614ab91432fd4f57"},"author_claims":{"count":0,"strong_count":0,"snapshot_sha256":"258153158e38e3291e3d48162225fcdb2d5a3ed65a07baac614ab91432fd4f57"},"builder_version":"pith-number-builder-2026-05-17-v1"},"aliases":[{"alias_kind":"arxiv","alias_value":"2503.13762","created_at":"2026-07-05T10:33:17.682715+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"arxiv_version","alias_value":"2503.13762v1","created_at":"2026-07-05T10:33:17.682715+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"doi","alias_value":"10.48550/arxiv.2503.13762","created_at":"2026-07-05T10:33:17.682715+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"pith_short_12","alias_value":"MIQYVRNPSKYY","created_at":"2026-07-05T10:33:17.682715+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"pith_short_16","alias_value":"MIQYVRNPSKYYVNEY","created_at":"2026-07-05T10:33:17.682715+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"pith_short_8","alias_value":"MIQYVRNP","created_at":"2026-07-05T10:33:17.682715+00:00"}],"events":[],"event_summary":{},"paper_claims":[],"inbound_citations":{"count":1,"internal_anchor_count":0,"sample":[{"citing_arxiv_id":"2605.10712","citing_title":"AutoSOUP: Safety-Oriented Unit Proof Generation for Component-level Memory-Safety Verification","ref_index":13,"is_internal_anchor":false}]},"formal_canon":{"evidence_count":0,"sample":[],"anchors":[]},"links":{"html":"https://pith.science/pith/MIQYVRNPSKYYVNEY7TY5IBM56H","json":"https://pith.science/pith/MIQYVRNPSKYYVNEY7TY5IBM56H.json","graph_json":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/MIQYVRNPSKYYVNEY7TY5IBM56H/graph.json","events_json":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/MIQYVRNPSKYYVNEY7TY5IBM56H/events.json","paper":"https://pith.science/paper/MIQYVRNP"},"agent_actions":{"view_html":"https://pith.science/pith/MIQYVRNPSKYYVNEY7TY5IBM56H","download_json":"https://pith.science/pith/MIQYVRNPSKYYVNEY7TY5IBM56H.json","view_paper":"https://pith.science/paper/MIQYVRNP","resolve_alias":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/resolve?arxiv=2503.13762&json=true","fetch_graph":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/MIQYVRNPSKYYVNEY7TY5IBM56H/graph.json","fetch_events":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/MIQYVRNPSKYYVNEY7TY5IBM56H/events.json","actions":{"anchor_timestamp":"https://pith.science/pith/MIQYVRNPSKYYVNEY7TY5IBM56H/action/timestamp_anchor","attest_storage":"https://pith.science/pith/MIQYVRNPSKYYVNEY7TY5IBM56H/action/storage_attestation","attest_author":"https://pith.science/pith/MIQYVRNPSKYYVNEY7TY5IBM56H/action/author_attestation","sign_citation":"https://pith.science/pith/MIQYVRNPSKYYVNEY7TY5IBM56H/action/citation_signature","submit_replication":"https://pith.science/pith/MIQYVRNPSKYYVNEY7TY5IBM56H/action/replication_record"}},"created_at":"2026-07-05T10:33:17.682715+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-05T10:33:17.682715+00:00"}