Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Hierarchical Non-intrusive In-situ Requirements Monitoring for Embedded Systems

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Runtime Verification (RV 2017)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNPSE,volume 10548))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

Accounting for all operating conditions of a system at the design stage is typically infeasible for complex systems. In-situ runtime monitoring and verification can enable a system to introspectively ensure the system is operating correctly in the presence of dynamic environment, to rapidly detect failures, and to provide detailed execution traces to find the root cause thereof. In this paper, we seek to address two challenges faced in using in-situ runtime verification for embedded systems, including (1) efficiently defining and automatically constructing a requirements model for embedded system software and (2) minimizing the runtime overhead of observing and verifying the runtime execution adheres to the requirements model. We present a methodology to construct a hierarchical runtime monitoring graph from system requirements specified using multiple UML sequence diagrams, which are already commonly used in software development. We further present the design of on-chip hardware that nonintrusively monitors the system at runtime to ensure the execution matches the requirements model. We evaluate the proposed methodology using a case study of a fail-safe autonomous vehicle subsystem and analyze the relationship between event coverage, detection rate, and hardware requirements.

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

References

  1. Alur, R.: Timed automata. In: Halbwachs, N., Peled, D. (eds.) CAV 1999. LNCS, vol. 1633, pp. 8–22. Springer, Heidelberg (1999). doi:10.1007/3-540-48683-6_3

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  2. Backasch, R., et al.: Runtime verification for multicore SoC with high-quality trace data. ACM Trans. Des. Autom. Electron. Syst. 18(2), 18 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Bonakdarpour, B., Navabpour, S., Fischmeister, S.: Sampling-based runtime verification. In: Butler, M., Schulte, W. (eds.) FM 2011. LNCS, vol. 6664, pp. 88–102. Springer, Heidelberg (2011). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-21437-0_9

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  4. Brill, M., Damm, W., Klose, J., Westphal, B., Wittke, H.: Live sequence charts. In: Ehrig, H., Damm, W., Desel, J., Große-Rhode, M., Reif, W., Schnieder, E., Westkämper, E. (eds.) Integration of Software Specification Techniques for Applications in Engineering. LNCS, vol. 3147, pp. 374–399. Springer, Heidelberg (2004). doi:10.1007/978-3-540-27863-4_21

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  5. Chai, M., Schlingloff, B.-H.: Monitoring systems with extended live sequence charts. In: Bonakdarpour, B., Smolka, S.A. (eds.) RV 2014. LNCS, vol. 8734, pp. 48–63. Springer, Cham (2014). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-11164-3_5

    Google Scholar 

  6. David, A.: Hierarchical modeling and analysis of timed systems. IT Tech. Rep. Ser. 2003–50 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Durand, P.J., et al.: An efficient algorithm for similarity analysis of molecules. Internet J. Chem. 2(17), 1–16 (1999)

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  8. Firley, T., Huhn, M., Diethers, K., Gehrke, T., Goltz, U.: Timed sequence diagrams and tool-based analysis — a case study. In: France, R., Rumpe, B. (eds.) UML 1999. LNCS, vol. 1723, pp. 645–660. Springer, Heidelberg (1999). doi:10.1007/3-540-46852-8_45

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  9. Fryer, R.: FPGA based CPU instrumentation for hard real-time embedded system testing. ACM SIGBED Rev. 2(2), 39–42 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Hailpern, B., Santhanam, P.: Software debugging, testing, and verification. IBM Syst. J. 41(1), 4–12 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Hofmann, R., et al.: Distributed performance monitoring: methods, tools, and applications. IEEE Trans. Parallel Distrib. Syst. 5(6), 585–598 (1994)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Jones, M.: What really happened on mars rover pathfinder. Risks Dig. 19(49), 1–2 (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Kane, A., Chowdhury, O., Datta, A., Koopman, P.: A case study on runtime monitoring of an Autonomous Research Vehicle (ARV) system. In: Bartocci, E., Majumdar, R. (eds.) RV 2015. LNCS, vol. 9333, pp. 102–117. Springer, Cham (2015). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-23820-3_7

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  14. Leveson, N.G., Turner, C.S.: An investigation of the Therac-25 accidents. Computer (Long. Beach. Calif) 26(7), 18–41 (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Lu, H.: The design and implementation of P2V, an architecture for zero-overhead online verification of software programs. Science (80), August 2007

    Google Scholar 

  16. Macaulay, K.: ATSB preliminary factual report, in-flight upset, Qantas Airbus A330, 154 Km West of Learmonth, WA, 7 October 2008. Australian Transport Safety Bureau Media Release, 14 November 2008 (1992)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Mijat, R.: Better trace for better software: introducing the new arm coresight system trace macrocell and trace memory controller. ARM, White Pap. (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Nassar, A., et al.: NUVA: architectural support for runtime verification of parametric specifications over multicores. In: 2015 International Conference on Compilers, Architecture and Synthesis for Embedded Systems, CASES 2015, pp. 137–146 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Navabpour, S., Bonakdarpour, B., Fischmeister, S.: Time-triggered runtime verification of component-based multi-core systems. In: Bartocci, E., Majumdar, R. (eds.) RV 2015. LNCS, vol. 9333, pp. 153–168. Springer, Cham (2015). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-23820-3_10

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  20. Pike, L., Niller, S., Wegmann, N.: Runtime verification for ultra-critical systems. In: Khurshid, S., Sen, K. (eds.) RV 2011. LNCS, vol. 7186, pp. 310–324. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-29860-8_23

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  21. Pnueli, A.: The temporal logic of programs. In: 18th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (SFCS 1977), pp. 46–57. IEEE (1977)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Reinbacher, T., Függer, M., Brauer, J.: Real-time runtime verification on chip. In: Qadeer, S., Tasiran, S. (eds.) RV 2012. LNCS, vol. 7687, pp. 110–125. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-35632-2_13

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  23. Rumbaugh, J., et al.: The Unified Modeling Language Reference Manual. Addison-Wesley, Boston (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  24. El Shobaki, M.: On-chip monitoring of single-and multiprocessor hardware real-time operating systems. In: Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Real-Time Computing Systems and Applications (RTCSA) (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Tool, A.V.: SignalTap II Embedded Logic Analyzer (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Tool, X.V.: ChipScope Pro (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Whalen, M., Cofer, D., Miller, S., Krogh, B.H., Storm, W.: Integration of formal analysis into a model-based software development process. In: Leue, S., Merino, P. (eds.) FMICS 2007. LNCS, vol. 4916, pp. 68–84. Springer, Heidelberg (2008). doi:10.1007/978-3-540-79707-4_7

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  28. Wilhelm, R., et al.: The worst-case execution-time problem-overview of methods and survey of tools. ACM Trans. Embed. Comput. Syst. 7(3), 1–53 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USA

    Minjun Seo & Roman Lysecky

Authors
  1. Minjun Seo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Roman Lysecky
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Minjun Seo or Roman Lysecky .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Microsoft Research, Redmond, Washington, USA

    Shuvendu Lahiri

  2. The University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom

    Giles Reger

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this paper

Cite this paper

Seo, M., Lysecky, R. (2017). Hierarchical Non-intrusive In-situ Requirements Monitoring for Embedded Systems. In: Lahiri, S., Reger, G. (eds) Runtime Verification. RV 2017. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 10548. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-67531-2_16

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-67531-2_16

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-67530-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-67531-2

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation