Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Menu
Find a journal Publish with us
Search
Cart
  1. Home
  2. International Journal on Software Tools for Technology Transfer
  3. Article

On the applicability of hybrid systems safety verification tools from the automotive perspective

  • General
  • Regular
  • Open Access
  • Published: 30 June 2023
  • (2023)
Download PDF

You have full access to this open access article

International Journal on Software Tools for Technology Transfer Aims and scope Submit manuscript
On the applicability of hybrid systems safety verification tools from the automotive perspective
Download PDF
  • Stefan Schupp1,
  • Erika Ábrahám1,
  • Md Tawhid Bin Waez2,
  • Thomas Rambow2 &
  • …
  • Zeng Qiu2 

  • 131 Accesses

  • Explore all metrics

  • Cite this article

Abstract

Traditionally, extensive vehicle testing is applied to assure the robustness and safety of automotive systems. This approach is highly challenged by increasing system complexity. Formal verification lends a powerful framework for model-based safety assurance, but due to the mixed discrete–continuous behavior of automotive systems, traditional tools for discrete program verification are helpful but not sufficient.

In academia, during the last two decades new approaches arose for the formal verification of such mixed discrete-continuous systems. However, the industry is not fully aware of this development, the tools are seldom tried and their applicability is not well examined. In a Ford–RWTH research alliance project, we aimed at evaluating the potential of knowledge and technology transfer in this area.

This paper has two main objectives. Firstly, we want to report on the state-of-the-art in the above-mentioned academic development in a generally understandable form, targeted to interested potential users. Secondly, we want to share our observations after testing different available tools for their applicability and usability in the automotive sector and as a conclusion devise some recommendations.

Download to read the full article text

Use our pre-submission checklist

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

References

  1. https://cps-vo.org/group/ARCH/FriendlyCompetition

  2. https://www.wolfram.com/engine/

  3. https://cps-vo.org/group/ARCH/benchmarks

  4. Ahrendt, W., Beckert, B., Bubel, R., Hähnle, R., Schmitt, P.H., Ulbrich, M. (eds.): Deductive Software Verification – The KeY Book – From Theory to Practice. LNCS, vol. 10001. Springer, Berlin (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Alla, H., David, R.: Continuous and hybrid Petri nets. J. Circuits Syst. Comput. 8(01), 159–188 (1998)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  6. Althoff, M.: An introduction to CORA 2015 (tool presentation). In: Proc. of ARCH’15. EPiC Series in Computing, vol. 34, pp. 120–151. EasyChair (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Althoff, M., Bak, S., Cattaruzza, D., Chen, X., Frehse, G., Ray, R., Schupp, S.: ARCH-COMP17 category report: continuous and hybrid systems with linear continuous dynamics. In: Proc. of ARCH’17. EPiC Series in Computing, vol. 48, pp. 143–159. EasyChair (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Althoff, M., Bak, S., Chen, X., Fan, C., Forets, M., Frehse, G., Kochdumper, N., Li, Y., Mitra, S., Ray, R., Schilling, C., Schupp, S.: ARCH-COMP18 category report: continuous and hybrid systems with linear continuous dynamics. In: Proc. of ARCH’18. EPiC Series in Computing, vol. 54, pp. 23–52. EasyChair (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Althoff, M., Bak, S., Forets, M., Frehse, G., Kochdumper, N., Ray, R., Schilling, C., Schupp, S.: ARCH-COMP19 category report: continuous and hybrid systems with linear continuous dynamics. In: Proc. of ARCH’19. EPiC Series in Computing, vol. 61, pp. 14–40. EasyChair (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Bak, S., Caccamo, M.: Computing reachability for nonlinear systems with HyCreate (2013). Poster at HSCC’13

  11. Bak, S., Duggirala, P.S.: Hylaa: a tool for computing simulation-equivalent reachability for linear systems. In: Proc. of HSCC’17, pp. 173–178. ACM, New York (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Bak, S., Bogomolov, S., Johnson, T.T.: Hyst: a source transformation and translation tool for hybrid automaton models. In: Proc. of HSCC’15, pp. 128–133. ACM, New York (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Ben Makhlouf, I., Kowalewski, S.: Networked cooperative platoon of vehicles for testing methods and verification tools. In: Proc. of ARCH’14. EPiC Series in Computing, vol. 34, pp. 37–42. EasyChair (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Benvenuti, L., Bresolin, D., Casagrande, A., Collins, P., Ferrari, A., Mazzi, E., Sangiovanni-Vincentelli, A., Villa, T.: Reachability computation for hybrid systems with ariadne. IFAC Proc. Vol. 41(2), 8960–8965 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Berger, P., Katoen, J.P., Ábrahám, E., Waez, M.T.B., Rambow, T.: Verifying auto-generated C code from Simulink. In: Proc. of FM’18, pp. 312–328. Springer, Berlin (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Berger, P., Nellen, J., Katoen, J.P., Ábrahám, E., Waez, M.T.B., Rambow, T.: Multiple analyses, requirements once: simplifying testing and verification in automotive model-based development. In: Proc. of FMICS’19. LNCS, vol. 11687, pp. 59–75. Springer, Berlin (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Bergman, R.N., Ider, Y.Z., Bowden, C.R., Cobelli, C.: Quantitative estimation of insulin sensitivity. Am. J. Physiol: Endocrinol. Metab. 236(6), E667 (1979)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Bergman, R.N., Phillips, L.S., Cobelli, C.: Physiologic evaluation of factors controlling glucose tolerance in man: measurement of insulin sensitivity and beta-cell glucose sensitivity from the response to intravenous glucose. J. Clin. Invest. 68(6), 1456–1467 (1981)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Bergman, R.N., Finegood, D.T., Ader, M.: Assessment of insulin sensitivity in vivo. Endocr. Rev. 6(1), 45–86 (1985)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Bertot, Y., Castéran, P.: Interactive Theorem Proving and Program Development: Coq’Art: The Calculus of Inductive Constructions. Springer, Berlin (2013)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  21. Bogomolov, S., Forets, M., Frehse, G., Potomkin, K., Schilling, C.: JuliaReach: a toolbox for set-based reachability. In: Proc. of HSCC’19, pp. 39–44. ACM, New York (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Chen, X., Ábrahám, E., Sankaranarayanan, S.: Flow*: an analyzer for non-linear hybrid systems. In: Proc. of CAV’13, pp. 258–263. Springer, Berlin (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Chen, X., Schupp, S., Ben Makhlouf, I., Ábrahám, E., Frehse, G., Kowalewski, S.: A benchmark suite for hybrid systems reachability analysis. In: Proc. of NFM’15, pp. 408–414. Springer, Berlin (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Damm, W., Möhlmann, E., Rakow, A.: Component based design of hybrid systems: a case study on concurrency and coupling. In: Proc. of HSCC’14, pp. 145–150. ACM, New York (2014)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  25. Donzé, A., Frehse, G.: Modular, hierarchical models of control systems in SpaceEx. In: Proc. of ECC’13, pp. 4244–4251. IEEE, New York (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Fan, C., Qi, B., Mitra, S., Viswanathan, M., Duggirala, P.S.: Automatic reachability analysis for nonlinear hybrid models with C2E2. In: Proc. of CAV’16, pp. 531–538. Springer, Berlin (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Fehnker, A., Ivančić, F.: Benchmarks for hybrid systems verification. In: Proc. of HSCC’04, pp. 326–341. Springer, Berlin (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  28. Frehse, G., Le Guernic, C., Donzé, A., Cotton, S., Ray, R., Lebeltel, O., Ripado, R., Girard, A., Dang, T., Maler, O.: SpaceEx: scalable verification of hybrid systems. In: Proc. of CAV’11, pp. 379–395. Springer, Berlin (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Fulton, N., Mitsch, S., Quesel, J.D., Völp, M., Platzer, A.: KeYmaera X: an axiomatic tactical theorem prover for hybrid systems. In: Proc. of CADE’15, pp. 527–538. Springer, Berlin (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  30. Henzinger, T.A.: The theory of hybrid automata. In: Verification of Digital and Hybrid Systems, pp. 265–292. Springer, Berlin (2000)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  31. Henzinger, T.A., Kopke, P.W., Puri, A., Varaiya, P.: What’s decidable about hybrid automata? J. Comput. Syst. Sci. 57(1), 94–124 (1998)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  32. Kong, S., Gao, S., Chen, W., Clarke, E.: dReach: \(\delta \)-reachability analysis for hybrid systems. In: Proc. of TACAS’15, pp. 200–205. Springer, Berlin (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  33. Masood, J., Philippsen, R., Duracz, J., Taha, W., Eriksson, H., Grante, C.: Domain analysis for standardised functional safety: a case study on design-time verification of automatic emergency braking. In: Proc. of FISITA’14, pp. 2–6. KIVI (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  34. Meiss, J.D.: Differential Dynamical Systems, vol. 14. SIAM, Philadelphia (2007)

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  35. Mishra, A., Roy, S.K.: Towards formal verification of adaptive cruise controller using SpaceEx. In: Proc. of VLSI-SATA’16, pp. 1–6. IEEE, New York (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  36. Müller, A., Mitsch, S., Platzer, A.: Verified traffic networks: component-based verification of cyber-physical flow systems. In: Proc. of ITSC’15, pp. 757–764. IEEE, New York (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  37. Nellen, J., Rambow, T., Waez, M.T.B., Ábrahám, E., Katoen, J.P.: Formal verification of automotive Simulink controller models: empirical technical challenges, evaluation and recommendations. In: Proc. of FM’18, pp. 382–398. Springer, Berlin (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  38. Nipkow, T., Paulson, L.C., Wenzel, M.: Isabelle/HOL: A Proof Assistant for Higher-Order Logic, vol. 2283. Springer, Berlin (2002)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  39. Owre, S., Rushby, J.M., Shankar, N.: Pvs: a prototype verification system. In: Proc. of CADE-11, pp. 748–752. Springer, Berlin (1992)

    Google Scholar 

  40. Pence, B.L., Chen, J.: A framework for control oriented modeling of Pem fuel cells. In: Proc. of DSCC’15, vol. 57250, p. V002T26A002. American Society of Mechanical Engineers, New York (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  41. Platzer, A.: Differential-algebraic dynamic logic for differential-algebraic programs. J. Log. Comput. 20(1), 309–352 (2010)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  42. Ratschan, S., She, Z.: Safety verification of hybrid systems by constraint propagation-based abstraction refinement. ACM Trans. Embed. Comput. Syst. 6(1), 8–31 (2007)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  43. Schupp, S., Ábrahám, E., Ben Makhlouf, I., Kowalewski, S.: HyPro: a C++ library for state set representations for hybrid systems reachability analysis. In: Proc. of NFM’17. LNCS, vol. 10227, pp. 288–294. Springer, Berlin (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  44. Schupp, S., Nellen, J., Ábrahám, E.: Divide and conquer: variable set separation in hybrid systems reachability analysis. In: Proc. of QAPL’17, EPTCS, vol. 250, pp. 1–14. Open Publishing Association (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  45. Schupp, S., Ábrahám, E., Ebert, T.: Recent developments in theory and tool support for hybrid systems verification with hypro. Inf. Comput. 289, 104945 (2022)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  46. Taha, W., Duracz, A., Zeng, Y., Atkinson, K., Bartha, F.A., Brauner, P., Duracz, J., Xu, F., Cartwright, R., Konečnỳ, M., et al.: Acumen: an open-source testbed for cyber-physical systems research. In: Proc. of IIoTS’15, pp. 118–130. Springer, Berlin (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  47. Testylier, R., Dang, T.: NLTOOLBOX: a library for reachability computation of nonlinear dynamical systems. In: Proc. of ATVA’13, pp. 469–473. Springer, Berlin (2013)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  48. Tran, H.D., Nguyen, L.V., Johnson, T.T.: Large-scale linear systems from order-reduction (benchmark proposal). In: Proc. of ARCH’16. EPiC Series in Computing, vol. 43, pp. 60–67. EasyChair (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  49. Westhofen, L., Berger, P., Katoen, J.P.: Benchmarking software model checkers on automotive code. Preprint, CoRR (2020). arXiv:2003.11689

  50. Yang, L., Karnik, A., Pence, B., Waez, M.T.B., Ozay, N.: Fuel cell thermal management: modeling, specifications, and correct-by-construction control synthesis. IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol. 28, 1638–1651 (2020)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to Amey Karnik and his Ford team for sharing the model of the fuel cell system with us. We thank Liren Yang and his University of Michigan team for providing and patiently explaining the controller of this fuel cell system. We appreciate the help of Tristan Ebert, Marta Grobelna, Sergej Neuberger, and Tom Schäfers in the evaluation. We also thank our anonymous reviewers for their detailed feedback.

Funding

Open Access funding enabled and organized by Projekt DEAL. We are thankful for the funding of this work by Ford Motor Company in the course of the project “Safety Verification for Mixed Discrete–Continuous Automotive Systems”.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany

    Stefan Schupp & Erika Ábrahám

  2. Ford Motor Company, Dearborn, MI, USA

    Md Tawhid Bin Waez, Thomas Rambow & Zeng Qiu

Authors
  1. Stefan Schupp
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Erika Ábrahám
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Md Tawhid Bin Waez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Thomas Rambow
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Zeng Qiu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stefan Schupp.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Schupp, S., Ábrahám, E., Waez, M.T.B. et al. On the applicability of hybrid systems safety verification tools from the automotive perspective. Int J Softw Tools Technol Transfer (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10009-023-00707-0

Download citation

  • Accepted: 30 May 2023

  • Published: 30 June 2023

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10009-023-00707-0

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Keywords

  • Hybrid systems
  • Reachability analysis
  • Formal methods
  • Safety verification
Use our pre-submission checklist

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

Advertisement

Search

Navigation

  • Find a journal
  • Publish with us

Discover content

  • Journals A-Z
  • Books A-Z

Publish with us

  • Publish your research
  • Open access publishing

Products and services

  • Our products
  • Librarians
  • Societies
  • Partners and advertisers

Our imprints

  • Springer
  • Nature Portfolio
  • BMC
  • Palgrave Macmillan
  • Apress
  • Your US state privacy rights
  • Accessibility statement
  • Terms and conditions
  • Privacy policy
  • Help and support

Not affiliated

Springer Nature

© 2023 Springer Nature