Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Applied Bounded Model Checking for Interlocking System Designs

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Software Engineering and Formal Methods (SEFM 2013)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNPSE,volume 8368))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

In this paper the verification and validation of interlocking systems is investigated. Reviewing both geographical and route-related interlocking, the verification objectives can be structured from a perspective of computer science into (1) verification of static semantics, and (2) verification of behavioural (operational) semantics. The former checks that the plant model – that is, the software components reflecting the physical components of the interlocking system – has been set up in an adequate way. The latter investigates trains moving through the network, with the objective to uncover potential safety violations. From a formal methods perspective, these verification objectives can be approached by theorem proving, global, or bounded model checking. This paper explains the techniques for application of bounded model checking techniques, and discusses their advantages in comparison to the alternative approaches.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    We do not need to consider the weak until operator \({\mathbf {W}}\), or the release operator \({\mathbf {R}}\).

  2. 2.

    Recall from Sect. 2.1 that \(V\) contains the variable symbols for element identification (\(id\)), element type (\(t\)), channels connecting to neighbouring elements (\(a,\ldots ,h\)), and additional type-specific attributes (\(a_1,\ldots ,a_k\)). For some \(v\in V\), notation \(s_0(v)\) denotes the value of variable \(v\) to be determined by the SMT solver for the initial state \(s_0\).

  3. 3.

    Two states \(\sigma _i\) and \(\sigma _{i+1}\) are successive, if there is a transition from \(\sigma _i\) to \(\sigma _{i+1}\) according to \({\mathcal {M}}\).

References

  1. Guide to the software engineering body of knowledge. Technical report, IEEE Computer Society (2004). http://www.computer.org/portal/web/swebok/htmlformat

  2. Behm, P., Benoit, P., Faivre, A., Meynadier, J.-M.: Météor: a successful application of B in a large project. In: Wing, J.M., Woodcock, J., Davies, J. (eds.) FM 1999. LNCS, vol. 1708, pp. 369–387. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Biere, A., Cimatti, A., Clarke, E., Zhu, Y.: Symbolic model checking without BDDs. In: Cleaveland, W.R. (ed.) TACAS 1999. LNCS, vol. 1579, pp. 193–207. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Biere, A., Heljanko, K., Junttila, T., Latvala, T., Schuppan, V.: Linear encodings of bounded LTL model checking. Log. Meth. Comput. Sci. 2(5), 1–64 (2006)

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  5. Bjørner, D.: New results and current trends in formal techniques for the development of software for transportation systems. In: Proceedings of the Symposium on Formal Methods for Railway Operation and Control Systems (FORMS’2003). L’Harmattan Hongrie, Budapest, 15–16 May 2003

    Google Scholar 

  6. Clabaut, M., Metayer, C., Morand, E.: 4B–2 formal data validation - formal techniques applied to verification of data properties. In: Embedded Real Time Software and Systems ERTS (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Clarke, E.M., Grumberg, O., Peled, D.A.: Model Checking. The MIT Press, Cambridge (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Drechsler, R., Große, D.: System level validation using formal techniques. IEE Proc. - Comput. Digit. Tech. 152(3), 393–406 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. European Committee for Electrotechnical Standardization: EN 50128:2011 - Railway Applications - Communications, Signalling and Processing Systems - Software for Railway Control and Protection Systems. CENELEC, Brussels (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Fantechi, A.: Distributing the challenge of model checking interlocking control tables. In: Margaria, T., Steffen, B. (eds.) ISoLA 2012, Part II. LNCS, vol. 7610, pp. 276–289. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Fantechi, A., Fokkink, W.J., Morzenti, A.: Some trends in formal methods applications to railway signaling. In: Formal Methods for Industrial Critical Systems, pp. 61–84. Wiley, Hoboken (2012)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  12. Ferrari, A., Magnani, G., Grasso, D., Fantechi, A.: Model checking interlocking control tables. In: Schnieder, E., Tarnai, G. (eds.) Proceedings of Formal Methods for Automation and Safety in Railway and Automotive Systems (FORMS/FORMAT 2010). Springer, Braunschweig (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Haxthausen, A.E., Peleska, J.: Formal development and verification of a distributed railway control system. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 26(8), 687–701 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Haxthausen, A.E.: Towards a framework for modelling and verification of relay interlocking systems. In: Calinescu, R., Jackson, E. (eds.) Monterey Workshop 2010. LNCS, vol. 6662, pp. 176–192. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Haxthausen, A.E.: Automated generation of safety requirements from railway interlocking tables. In: Margaria, T., Steffen, B. (eds.) ISoLA 2012, Part II. LNCS, vol. 7610, pp. 261–275. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Haxthausen, A.E., Peleska, J.: Efficient development and verification of safe railway control software. In: Railways: Types, Design and Safety Issues, pp. 127–148. Nova Science Publishers Inc, New York (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Haxthausen, A.E., Peleska, J., Kinder, S.: A formal approach for the construction and verification of railway control systems. Formal Aspects Comput. 23(2), 191–219 (2011)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  18. Lecomte, T., Burdy, L., Leuschel, M.: Formally checking large data sets in the railways. CoRR, abs/1210.6815 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Manna, Z., Pnueli, A.: The Temporal Logic of Reactive and Concurrent Systems. Springer, New York (1992)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  20. Moller, F., Nguyen, H.N., Roggenbach, M., Schneider, S., Treharne, H.: Defining and model checking abstractions of complex railway models using CSP\(||\)B. In: Biere, A., Nahir, A., Vos, T. (eds.) HVC. LNCS, pp. 193–208. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Pachl, J.: Railway Operation and Control. VTD Rail Publishing, Mountlake Terrace (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Peleska, J: Industrial-strength model-based testing - state of the art and current challenges. In: Petrenko, A.K., Schlingloff, H. (eds.) Proceedings Eighth Workshop on Model-Based Testing, Rome, 17 March 2013. Electronic Proceedings in Theoretical Computer Science, vol. 111, pp. 3–28. Open Publishing Association (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Peleska, J., Vorobev, E., Lapschies, F.: Automated test case generation with SMT-solving and abstract interpretation. In: Bobaru, M., Havelund, K., Holzmann, G.J., Joshi, R. (eds.) NFM 2011. LNCS, vol. 6617, pp. 298–312. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Sistla, A.P.: Liveness and fairness in temporal logic. Form. Aspects Comput. 6(5), 495–512 (1994)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  25. Winter, K.: Optimising ordering strategies for symbolic model checking of railway interlockings. In: Margaria, T., Steffen, B. (eds.) ISoLA 2012, Part II. LNCS, vol. 7610, pp. 246–260. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The first author has been supported by the RobustRailS project funded by the Danish Council for Strategic Research. The second and third authors have been supported by the openETCS project funded by the European ITEA2 organisation.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. DTU Compute, Technical University of Denmark, Kongens Lyngby, Denmark

    Anne E. Haxthausen

  2. Department of Mathematics and Computer Science, Universität Bremen, Bremen, Germany

    Jan Peleska

  3. Siemens AG, Braunschweig, Germany

    Ralf Pinger

Authors
  1. Anne E. Haxthausen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jan Peleska
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ralf Pinger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anne E. Haxthausen .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Brunel University, Uxbridge, Middlesex, United Kingdom

    Steve Counsell

  2. Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Madrid, Spain

    Manuel Núñez

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this paper

Cite this paper

Haxthausen, A.E., Peleska, J., Pinger, R. (2014). Applied Bounded Model Checking for Interlocking System Designs. In: Counsell, S., Núñez, M. (eds) Software Engineering and Formal Methods. SEFM 2013. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 8368. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-05032-4_16

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-05032-4_16

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-05031-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-05032-4

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation