Advertisement

Compositional verification of real-time systems using Ecdar

  • Alexandre David
  • Kim. G. Larsen
  • Axel Legay
  • Mikael H. Møller
  • Ulrik NymanEmail author
  • Anders P. Ravn
  • Arne Skou
  • Andrzej Wąsowski
MTM

Abstract

We present a specification theory for timed systems implemented in the Ecdar tool. We illustrate the operations of the specification theory on a running example, showing the models and verification checks. To demonstrate the power of the compositional verification, we perform an in depth case study of a leader election protocol; Modeling it in Ecdar as Timed input/output automata Specifications and performing both monolithic and compositional verification of two interesting properties on it. We compare the execution time of the compositional to the classical verification showing a huge difference in favor of compositional verification.

Keywords

Timed input/output automata Compositional verification Real-time systems Leader election protocol 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Abadi M., Lamport L.: Composing specifications. ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst. 15(1), 73–132 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Alur R., Dill D.L.: A theory of timed automata. Theor. Comput. Sci. 126(2), 183–235 (1994)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Alur, R., Henzinger, T.A., Kupferman, O., Vardi, M.Y.: Alternating refinement relations. In: CONCUR’98. LNCS, vol. 1466. Springer, Berlin (1998)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Andersen H.R., Winskel G.: Compositional checking of satisfaction. In: Larsen, K.G., Skou, A. (eds.) CAV. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 575, pp. 24–36. Springer, Berlin (1991)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Baeten J.C.M.: A brief history of process algebra. Theor. Comput. Sci. 335(2–3), 131–146 (2005)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Barnett, M., Rustan, K., Leino, M., Schulte, W.: The Spec# programming system: an overview. In: CASSIS 2004. LNCS, vol. 3362. Springer, Berlin (2004)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Behrmann, G., Cougnard, A., David, A., Fleury, E., Larsen, K.G., Lime, D.: Uppaal-tiga: time for playing games! In: CAV. LNCS, vol. 4590. Springer, Berlin (2007)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bulychev, P., Chatain, T., David, A., Larsen, K.G.: Efficient on-the-fly algorithm for checking alternating timed simulation. In: FORMATS. LNCS, vol. 5813, pp. 73–87. Springer, Berlin (2009)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bulychev, P.E., David, A., Larsen, K.G., Mikucionis, M., Legay, A.: Distributed parametric and statistical model checking. In: Barnat, J., Heljanko, K. (eds.) PDMC. EPTCS, vol. 72, pp. 30–42 (2011)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Cassez, F., David, A., Fleury, E., Larsen, K.G., Lime, D.: Efficient on-the-fly algorithms for the analysis of timed games. In: CONCUR (2005)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    David A., Larsen K.G., Legay A., Mikucionis M., Poulsen D.B., van Vliet J., Wang Z.: Statistical model checking for networks of priced timed automata. In: Fahrenberg, U., Tripakis, S. (eds.) FORMATS. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 6919, pp. 80–96. Springer, Berlin (2011)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    David A., Larsen K.G., Legay A., Mikucionis M., Wang Z.: Time for statistical model checking of real-time systems. In: Gopalakrishnan, G., Qadeer, S. (eds.) CAV. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 6806, pp. 349–355. Springer, Berlin (2011)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    David A., Larsen K.G., Legay A., Nyman U., Wasowski A.: Timed i/o automata: a complete specification theory for real-time systems. In: Johansson, K.H., Yi, W. (eds.) HSCC, pp. 91–100. ACM, New York (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    de Alfaro, L., Henzinger, T.A.: Interface automata. In: FSE, Vienna, Austria, September 2001. pp. 109–120. ACM Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    de Alfaro, L., Henzinger, T.A.: Interface-based design. In: In Engineering Theories of Software Intensive Systems, Marktoberdorf Summer School. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (2004)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    de Alfaro L., Henzinger T.A., Stoelinga M.I.A.: Timed interfaces. In: Sangiovanni-Vincentelli, A.L., Sifakis, J. (eds.) EMSOFT. LNCS, vol. 2491, pp. 108–122. Springer, Berlin (2002)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    De Nicola, R., Segala, R.: A process algebraic view of input/output automata. Theor. Comput. Sci. 138 (1995)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Fahrenberg U., Legay A., Wasowski A.: Vision paper: make a difference! (semantically). In: Whittle, J., Clark, T., Kühne, T. (eds.) MoDELS. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 6981, pp. 490–500. Springer, Berlin (2011)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Floyd R.W.: Assigning meanings to programs. Proceedings of the American Mathematical Society Symposia on Applied Mathematics 19, 19–31 (1967)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Garland, S.J., Lynch, N.A.: The IOA language and toolset: support for designing, analyzing, and building distributed systems. Technical report, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge (1998)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hoare C.A.R.: An axiomatic basis for computer programming. Commun. ACM 12(10), 576–580 (1969)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Hoare C.A.R., He J.: The weakest prespecification. Inf. Process. Lett. 24, 127–132 (1987)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Hoare C.A.R.: Communicating Sequential Processes. International Series in Computer Science. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River (1985)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Jones C.B.: Specification as a design base (extended abstract). In: Duijvestijn, A.J.W., Lockemann, P.C. (eds.) ECI. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 123, pp. 103–105. Springer, Berlin (1981)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Jones C.B.: Systematic Software Development using VDM. Series in Computer Science. Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River (1986)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Kaynar, D.K., Lynch, N.A., Segala, R., Vaandrager, F.W.: Timed i/o automata: A mathematical framework for modeling and analyzing real-time systems. In: RTSS, pp. 166–177. IEEE Computer Society, New York (2003)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Larsen, K.G.: Context-Dependent Bisimulation Between Processes. PhD thesis, Department of Computer Science, University of Edinburgh (1986)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Larsen K.G., Xinxin L.: Compositionality through an operational semantics of contexts. In: Paterson, M. (ed.) ICALP. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 443, pp. 526–539. Springer, Berlin (1990)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Leavens G.T., Baker A.L.: Enhancing the pre- and postcondition technique for more expressive specifications. In: Wing, J.M., Woodcock, J., Davies, J. (eds.) FM’99—Formal Methods: World Congress on Formal Methods in Development of Computer Systems. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 1709, pp. 1087–1106. Springer, Berlin (1999)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Lynch, N.: I/O automata: a model for discrete event systems. In: Annual Conference on Information Sciences and Systems, pp. 29–38. Princeton University, Princeton (1988)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Lynch, N.A., Tuttle, M.R.: An introduction to input/output automata. Technical Report MIT/LCS/TM-373. The MIT Press, Cambridge (1988)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Owicki S.S., Gries D.: An axiomatic proof technique for parallel programs i. Acta Inf. 6, 319–340 (1976)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Stark, E.W., Cleavland, R., Smolka, S.A.: A process-algebraic language for probabilistic I/O automata. In: CONCUR. LNCS, pp. 189–203. Springer, Berlin (2003)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Sun, J., Liu, Y., Dong, J.S.: Model checking csp revisited: Introducing a process analysis toolkit. In: Proceedings of the Third International Symposium on Leveraging Applications of Formal Methods, Verification and Validation (ISoLA 2008). Communications in Computer and Information Science, vol. 17, pp. 307–322. Springer, Berlin (2008)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Sun, J., Liu, Y., Dong, J.S., Liu, Y., Shi, L., Etienne, A.: Modeling and verifying hierarchical real-time systems using stateful timed csp. ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. (2012, Accepted)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Szyperski C.: Component Software, Beyond Object-Oriented Programming. Addison-Wesley, Boston (1997)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Vaandrager, F.W.: On the relationship between process algebra and input/output automata. In: LICS. pp. 387–398 (1991)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alexandre David
    • 1
  • Kim. G. Larsen
    • 1
  • Axel Legay
    • 2
  • Mikael H. Møller
    • 1
  • Ulrik Nyman
    • 1
    Email author
  • Anders P. Ravn
    • 1
  • Arne Skou
    • 1
  • Andrzej Wąsowski
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceAalborg UniversityAalborgDenmark
  2. 2.INRIA/IRISARennes CedexFrance
  3. 3.IT University of CopenhagenCopenhagenDenmark

Personalised recommendations