Advertisement

Towards runtime verification of collaborative embedded systems

  • Samira AkiliEmail author
  • Felix Lorenz
Special Issue Paper
  • 16 Downloads

Abstract

A group of collaborative embedded systems does not depend on a central authority to operate in uncertain environments. By engaging in various negotiation protocols, the participants assign roles, schedule tasks, and combine their world views for more resilient perception and planning. To verify functional correctness, critical components can be tested with simulation-based methods, but the possibility of runtime faults still necessitates online monitoring. In this work, we characterize and address the runtime verification problem in the context of collaborative embedded systems. We present a case study based on industrial transport robots and model the main operating procedure, a distributed bidding protocol. The key properties that must hold for functional correctness turn out to comprise multiple semantic concepts that cannot be jointly expressed with any single formalism. To address this issue, we identify three specification languages that are particularly suitable for monitoring of collaborative embedded systems: Certifying distributed algorithms, trace expressions, and real-valued temporal logic. We show how each of them can be used to capture a subset of the relevant properties and outline a way of integrating them into a common framework.

Keywords

Online monitoring Runtime verification Collaborative embedded systems 

References

  1. 1.
    Ancona D, Briola D, Ferrando A, Mascardi V (2016) MAS-drive: a practical approach to decentralized runtime verification of agent interaction protocols. In: WOA, pp. 35–43Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ancona D, Ferrando A, Mascardi V (2016) Comparing trace expressions and linear temporal logic for runtime verification. In: Theory and practice of formal methods. Springer, pp 47–64Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ancona D, Ferrando A, Mascardi V (2017) Parametric runtime verification of multiagent systems. In: Proceedings of the 16th conference on autonomous agents and multiagent systems, pp 1457–1459Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bartocci E, Deshmukh J, Donzé A, Fainekos G, Maler O, Ničković D, Sankaranarayanan S (2018) Specification-based monitoring of cyber-physical systems: a survey on theory, tools and applications. In: Lectures on runtime verification. Springer, pp 135–175Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bauer A, Falcone Y (2012) Decentralised LTL monitoring. In: International symposium on formal methods. Springer, pp 85–100Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bauer A, Falcone Y (2016) Decentralised LTL monitoring. Form Methods Syst Des 48(1–2):46–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bocchi L, Chen TC, Demangeon R, Honda K, Yoshida N (2013) Monitoring networks through multiparty session types. In: Formal techniques for distributed systems. Springer, pp 50–65Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Choi HL, Brunet L, How JP (2009) Consensus-based decentralized auctions for robust task allocation. IEEE Trans Rob 25(4):912–926CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Demangeon R, Honda K, Hu R, Neykova R, Yoshida N (2015) Practical interruptible conversations: distributed dynamic verification with multiparty session types and Python. Form Methods Syst Des 46(3):197–225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Desai A, Dreossi T, Seshia SA (2017) Combining model checking and runtime verification for safe robotics. In: International conference on runtime verification. Springer, pp 172–189Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ferrando A (2017) Rivertools: an IDE for runtime verification of MASs, and beyond. PRIMA demo trackGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ferrando A, Ancona D, Mascardi V (2017) Decentralizing MAS monitoring with decamon. In: Proceedings of the 16th conference on autonomous agents and multiagent systems. International foundation for autonomous agents and multiagent systems, pp 239–248Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Francalanza A, Pérez JA, Sánchez C (2018) Runtime verification for decentralised and distributed systems. In: Lectures on runtime verification. Springer, pp 176–210Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Huget MP (2002) Extending agent UML sequence diagrams. In: International workshop on agent-oriented software engineering. Springer, pp 150–161Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lorenz F, Schlingloff H (2018) Online-monitoring autonomous transport robots with an R-valued temporal logic. In: 14th IEEE international conference on automation science and engineeringGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Luckcuck M, Farrell M, Dennis L, Dixon C, Fisher M (2018) Formal specification and verification of autonomous robotic systems: a survey. arXiv preprint arXiv:1807.00048
  17. 17.
    Völlinger K (2017) Verifying the output of a distributed algorithm using certification. In: International conference on runtime verification. Springer, pp 424–430Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Völlinger K, Akili S (2018) A case study on certifying distributed algorithms: reducing intrusiveness in monitoring cyber-physical systemsGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Völlinger K, Akili S (2018) On a verification framework for certifying distributed algorithms: distributed checking and consistency. In: International conference on formal techniques for distributed objects, components, and systems. Springer, pp 161–180Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Völlinger K, Reisig W (2015) Certification of distributed algorithms solving problems with optimal substructure. In: Software engineering and formal methods. Springer, pp 190–195Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Zheng X, Julien C (2015) Verification and validation in cyber physical systems: research challenges and a way forward. In: IEEE/ACM 1st international workshop on software engineering for smart cyber-physical systems (SEsCPS). IEEE, pp 15–18Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Zheng X, Julien C, Podorozhny R, Cassez F (2015) BraceAssertion: runtime verification of cyber-physical systems. In: IEEE 12th international conference on mobile ad hoc and sensor systems (MASS). IEEE, pp 298–306Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Humboldt University of BerlinBerlinGermany
  2. 2.Technische UniversitätBerlinGermany

Personalised recommendations