Modeling a landing gear system in Event-B

ABZ 2014

Abstract

This article describes the Event-B modeling of a landing gear system of an aircraft whose complete description can be found in Boniol and Wiels (The Landing Gear System Case Study, ABZ Case Study, Communications in Computer Information Science, vol 433, Springer, Berlin, 2014). This real-life case study has been proposed by the ABZ’2014 track that took place in Toulouse, the European capital of the aeronautic industry. Our modeling is based on the Parnas and Madey’s 4-Variable Model that permits to consider the different parts of a system. These parts are incrementally introduced using the Event-B refinement technique. The entire development has been carried out with the Rodin toolset. To ensure the correctness of the different components, we use several verification techniques (animation, model checking and proof) depending on the complexity and the kind of the properties to verify. Basically, prior to the proof phase that can be tedious and complex, we use the animator AnimB and the model checker ProB that permit to discover some trivial inconsistencies. Once no error is reported, we start the proof phase by using the Atelier B and SMT provers which we installed on Rodin. We conclude the article by drawing up some key findings of and lessons learned from this experience.

Keywords

Event-B Formal development Refinement Development strategy Verification Validation 

References

  1. 1.
  2. 2.
    Abrial, J.-R.: The B-book, Assigning Programs to Meanings. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2005)MATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Abrial, J.-R.: Modeling in Event-B—System and Software Engineering. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2010)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Boniol, F., Wiels, V.: The Landing Gear System Case Study, ABZ Case Study, Communications in Computer Information Science, vol. 433. Springer, Berlin (2014)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Alur, R., Dill, D.-L.: A theory of timed automata. Theor. Comput. Sci. 126(2), 183–235 (1994)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Butler, M.: Towards a cookbook for modelling and refinement of control problems. Working paper. ECS, University of Southampton. http://deploy-eprints.ecs.soton.ac.uk/108/1/cookbook (2009)
  7. 7.
    Butler, M.: Using Event-B refinement to verify a control strategy, working paper. ECS, University of Southampton, http://deploy-eprints.ecs.soton.ac.uk/107/ (2009)
  8. 8.
    Cansell, D., Méry, D., Rehm, J.: Time constraint patterns for Event B development. In: Proceeding of 7th International Conference of B Users (B2007), pp. 140–154 (2007)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Clarke, E.-M., Emerson, E.-A.: Design and synthesis of synchronization skeletons using branching-time temporal logic. In: Kozen, D. (ed.) Logics of Programs. Workshop, Yorktown Heights, New York, May 1981, pp. 52–71. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg (1981)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dutertre, B., Sorea, M.: Modeling and verification of a fault-tolerant real-time startup protocol using calendar automata, FORMATS/FTRTF, pp. 199–214 (2004)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Frappier, M., Gervais, F., Laleau, R., Fraikin, B., Denis, RSt: Extending statecharts with process algebra operators. ISSE 4(3), 285–292 (2008)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Frappier, M., Gervais, F., Laleau, R., Milhau, J.: Refinement patterns for ASTDs. Formal Asp. Comput. 26(5), 919–941 (2014)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hudon, S., Hoang, T.S.: Development of control systems guided by models of their environment. Electron. Notes Theor. Comput. Sci. 280, 57–68 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Iliasov, A., Troubitsyna, E., Laibinis, L., Romanovsky, A., Varpaaniemi, K., Ilic, D., Latvala, T.: Supporting Reuse in Event-B Development: Modularisation Approach. ABZ’2010, pp. 174–188. Springer, LNCS 5977 (2010)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Jeffords, R.-D., Heitmeyer, C.-L., Archer, M., Leonard, E.-I.: Model-based construction and verification of critical systems using composition and partial refinement. Formal Methods Syst. Des. 37(2–3), 265–294 (2010)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Leuschel, M., Butler, M.: Prob: a model checker for B. In: FME 2003: Formal Methods. In: International Symposium of Formal Methods Europe, pp. 855–874 (2003)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Leuschel, M., Butler, M.-J.: ProB: an automated analysis toolset for the B method. In: International Journal on Software Tools for Technology Transfer, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 185–203 (2008)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lorge Parnas, D., Madey, J.: Functional documents for computer systems. Sci. Comput. Program. 25(1), 41–61 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Miller, S.-P., Tribble, A.-C.: Extending the four-variable model to bridge the system-software gap. In: Proceedings of the 20th Digital Avionics Systems Conference (DASC01), Daytona Beach, Florida (2001)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Pnueli, A.: The temporal logic of programs. In: 18th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, pp. 46–57 (1977)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Sarshogh, M.-R., Butler, M.: Specification and refinement of discrete timing properties in Event-B. In: Electronic Communication of the European Association of Software Science and Technology, Vol. 46 (2011)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Silva, R., Pascal, C., Hoang, T.-S., Butler, M.: Decomposition tool for Event-B. Softw. Pract. Exp. 41(2), 199–208 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.CNRS UMR 5157 SAMOVARInstitut Mines-Télécom/Télécom SudParisEvry CedexFrance
  2. 2.Université Paris-EstCreteilFrance

Personalised recommendations