Elaborating on the example of non-interference: Non-interference can't be represented as a "property" in the formal sense because there's no inclusion-test that could be applied to a single program trace; non-interference is an assertion about how neighboring traces are similar to each other and it does no good to look at one trace at a time. "Hyperproperties" are the extension from properties as predicates on traces to properties as relations between traces.
Definitions
Traces and systems
Hyperproperties are defined in terms of traces of a computational system. A trace is a sequence of states; a system is a set of traces. Intuitively, a program corresponds to the set of all of its possible execution traces, given any inputs. Formally, the set of traces over a set of states is .
A trace property is a set of traces. Safety and liveness properties are trace properties. Formally, a trace property is an element of , where is the powerset operator. A hyperproperty is a set of trace properties, that is, an element of .
Trace properties may be divided into safety properties (intuitively, properties that ensure "bad things don't happen") and liveness properties ("good things do happen"), and every trace property is the intersection of a safety property and a liveness property.[4] Analogously, hyperproperties may be divided into hypersafety and hyperliveness hyperproperties, and every hyperproperty is an intersection of a safety hyperproperty and a liveness hyperproperty.[5]
-safety properties are safety hyperproperties such that every violation of the property can be witnessed by a set of at most traces.[6]
Examples
Every safety property can be lifted to a 1-safety hyperproperty that expresses the same condition.[7]
-safety hyperproperties:
(lifts of safety properties):
false, defined to be the set containing the empty set. Formally, . This hyperproperty is not satisfied by any system.[8]
true, defined to be the set of all traces. Formally, . This hyperproperty is satisfied by all systems.[9]
^Clarkson & Schneider 2010, p. 13: "observational determinism OD (2.6) cannot be expressed as a 2-safety property, but it is a 2-safety hyperproperty".
^Dardinier, Thibault; Müller, Peter (2023-01-24). "Hyper Hoare Logic: (Dis-)Proving Program Hyperproperties (extended version)". arXiv:2301.10037 [cs.LO].
^Finkbeiner, Bernd; Rabe, Markus N.; Sánchez, César (2015). "Algorithms for Model Checking HyperLTL and HyperCTL $$^*$$". In Kroening, Daniel; Păsăreanu, Corina S. (eds.). Computer Aided Verification. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Vol. 9206. Cham: Springer International Publishing. pp. 30–48. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-21690-4_3. ISBN978-3-319-21690-4.
^Hsu, Tzu-Han; Sánchez, César; Bonakdarpour, Borzoo (2021). "Bounded Model Checking for Hyperproperties". In Groote, Jan Friso; Larsen, Kim Guldstrand (eds.). Tools and Algorithms for the Construction and Analysis of Systems. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Vol. 12651. Cham: Springer International Publishing. pp. 94–112. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-72016-2_6. ISBN978-3-030-72016-2. PMC7979203.