Conformance Checking of Real-Time Models
We compare conformance checking based on symbolic execution to conformance checking via bounded model checking. The application context is fault-based test case generation, focusing on real-time faults. The existing bounded model checking approach is performed on timed automata. It supports time-relevant mutation operators and a preprocessing functionality for removing silent transitions and non-determinism. The new symbolic execution approach is performed on timed action systems, which are a novel variant of Back’s action systems augmented by clock variables and real-time semantics. It supports the same set of mutation operators, silent transitions, non-determinism and data variables. We show how to encode timed automata as timed action systems and perform experiments on three variants of a car alarm system, to investigate the influence of silent transitions, non-determinism and data variables. Both approaches rely on the SMT solver Z3.
The research leading to these results has received funding from the ARTEMIS Joint Undertaking under grant agreement Nº 332830 and from the Austrian Research Promotion Agency (FFG) under grant agreements Nº 838498 for the implementation of the project CRYSTAL, Critical System Engineering Acceleration and Nº 845582 for the project TRUCONF, Trust via cost function driven model based test case generation for non-functional properties of systems of systems.
- 6.Aichernig, B.K., Tappler, M.: Symbolic input-output conformance checking for model-based mutation testing. In: USE (2015)Google Scholar
- 7.Albert, E., de Boer, F.S., Hähnle, R., Johnsen, E.B., Laneve, C.: Engineering virtualized services. In: Second Nordic Symposium on Cloud Computing & Internet Technologies, NordiCloud 2013, Oslo, Norway, 1–3 September 2013, pp. 59–63 (2013)Google Scholar
- 10.Back, R.-J., Kurki-Suonio, R.: Decentralization of process nets withcentralized control. In: Proceedings of the Second Annual ACM SIGACT-SIGOPS Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, 17-19 August 1983, pp. 131–142 (1983)Google Scholar
- 18.Jaghoori, M.M., Longuet, D., de Boer, F.S., Chothia, T.: Schedulability and compatibility of real time asynchronous objects. In: Real-Time Systems Symposium 2008, pp. 70–79, November 2008Google Scholar
- 27.Wabenhorst, A.: A model of real-time distributed systems. In: PROCOMET 1998, pp. 462–481. Chapman and Hall (1998)Google Scholar
- 29.Westerlund, T., Plosila, J.: Formal timing model for hardware components. In: Norchip Conference, 2004. Proceedings, pp. 293–296, November 2004Google Scholar