Rule-Based Incremental Verification Tools Applied to Railway Designs and Regulations

  • Bjørnar Luteberget
  • Christian Johansen
  • Claus Feyling
  • Martin Steffen
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9995)

Abstract

When designing railway infrastructure (tracks, signalling systems, etc.), railway engineers need to keep in mind numerous regulations for ensuring safety. Many of these regulations are simple, but demonstrably conforming with them often involves tedious manual work. We have worked on automating the verification of regulations against CAD designs, and integrated a verification tool and methodology into the tool chain of railway engineers. Automatically generating a model from the railway designs and running the verification tool on it is a valuable step forward, compared to manually reviewing the design for compliance and consistency. To seamlessly integrate the consistency checking into the CAD work-flow of the design engineers, however, requires a fast, on-the-fly mechanism, similar to real-time compilation done in standard programming tools.

In consequence, in this paper we turn to incremental verification and investigate existing rule-based tools, looking at various aspects relevant for engineering railway designs. We discuss existing state-of-the-art methods for incremental verification in the setting of rule-based modelling. We survey and compare relevant tools (ca. 30) and discuss if/how they could be integrated in a railway design environment, such as CAD software. We examine and compare four promising tools: XSB Prolog, a standard tool in the Datalog community, RDFox from the semantic web community, Dyna from the AI community, and LogicBlox, a proprietary solution.

References

  1. 1.
    Abiteboul, S., Hull, R., Vianu, V. (eds.): Foundations of Databases, 1st edn. Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Boston (1995)MATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Aref, M., ten Cate, B., Green, T.J., Kimelfeld, B., Olteanu, D., Pasalic, E., Veldhuizen, T.L., Washburn, G.: Design and implementation of the LogicBlox system. In: SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data, pp. 1371–1382. ACM (2015)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Doyle, J.: A truth maintenance system. Artif. Intell. 12(3), 231–272 (1979)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Eisner, J., Filardo, N.W.: Dyna: extending datalog for modern AI. In: Moor, O., Gottlob, G., Furche, T., Sellers, A. (eds.) Datalog 2.0 2010. LNCS, vol. 6702, pp. 181–220. Springer, Heidelberg (2011). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-24206-9_11 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gupta, A., Mumick, I.S., et al.: Maintenance of materialized views: problems, techniques, and applications. IEEE Data Eng. Bull. 18(2), 3–18 (1995)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gupta, A., Mumick, I.S., Subrahmanian, V.S.: Maintaining views incrementally. In: SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data, pp. 157–166. ACM (1993)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Harrison, J.V., Dietrich, S.W.: Maintenance of materialized views in a deductive database: an update propagation approach. In: Workshop on Deductive Databases, pp. 56–65 (1992)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Luteberget, B., Johansen, C., Steffen, M.: Rule-based consistency checking of railway infrastructure designs. In: Ábrahám, E., Huisman, M. (eds.) IFM 2016. LNCS, vol. 9681, pp. 491–507. Springer, Heidelberg (2016). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-33693-0_31 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Luteberget, B., Johansen, C., Steffen, M.: Rule-based consistency checking of railway infrastructure designs (long version). Technical report 450, University of Oslo (IFI) (2016)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Motik, B., Nenov, Y., Piro, R.E.F., Horrocks, I.: Incremental update of datalog materialisation: the backward/forward algorithm. In: Proceedings of AAAI 2015. AAAI Press (2015)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Nash, A., Huerlimann, D., Schütte, J., Krauss, V.P.: RailML – a standard data interface for railroad applications, pp. 233–240. WIT Press (2004)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Saha, D., Ramakrishnan, C.R.: Incremental evaluation of tabled logic programs. In: Palamidessi, C. (ed.) ICLP 2003. LNCS, vol. 2916, pp. 392–406. Springer, Heidelberg (2003). doi:10.1007/978-3-540-24599-5_27 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Swift, T.: Incremental tabling in support of knowledge representation and reasoning. Theory Pract. Log. Program. 14(4–5), 553–567 (2014)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Swift, T., Warren, D.S.: XSB: extending Prolog with tabled logic programming. Theory Pract. Log. Program. 12(1–2), 157–187 (2012)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ullman, J.D.: Principles of Database and Knowledge-base systems, vol. I & II. Computer Society Press (1988)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bjørnar Luteberget
    • 1
  • Christian Johansen
    • 2
  • Claus Feyling
    • 1
  • Martin Steffen
    • 2
  1. 1.RailComplete ASSandvikaNorway
  2. 2.Department of InformaticsUniversity of OsloOsloNorway

Personalised recommendations