Probabilistic Contracts for Component-Based Design

  • Dana N. Xu
  • Gregor Gössler
  • Alain Girault
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6252)

Abstract

We define a probabilistic contract framework for the construction of component-based embedded systems, based on the theory of Interactive Markov Chains. A contract specifies the assumptions a component makes on its context and the guarantees it provides. Probabilistic transitions allow for uncertainty in the component behavior, e.g. to model observed black-box behavior (internal choice) or reliability. An interaction model specifies how components interact.

We provide the ingredients for a component-based design flow, including (1) contract satisfaction and refinement, (2) parallel composition of contracts over disjoint, interacting components, and (3) conjunction of contracts describing different requirements over the same component. Compositional design is enabled by congruence of refinement.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Aho, A.V., Sethi, R., Ullman, J.D.: Compilers – Principles, Techniques, and Tools. Addison-Wesley, Reading (1986)MATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Caillaud, B., Delahaye, B., Larsen, K.G., Legay, A., Pedersen, M., Wasowski, A.: Compositional design methodology with constraint markov chains. Research Report 6993, INRIA (2009)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Delahaye, B., Caillaud, B.: A model for probabilistic reasoning on assume/guarantee contracts. Research Report 6719, INRIA (2008)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Doyen, L., Petrov, T., Henzinger, T.A., Jobstmann, B.: Interface theories with component reuse. In: Proc. EMSOFT 2008, pp. 79–88. ACM, New York (2008)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Fecher, H., Leucker, M., Wolf, V.: Don’t know in probabilistic systems. In: Valmari, A. (ed.) SPIN 2006. LNCS, vol. 3925, pp. 71–88. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gössler, G., Raclet, J.-B.: Modal contracts for component-based design. In: Proc. SEFM 2009, pp. 295–303. IEEE, Los Alamitos (2009)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gössler, G., Sifakis, J.: Composition for component-based modeling. Science of Computer Programming 55(1-3), 161–183 (2005)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hermanns, H.: Interactive Markov Chains: The Quest for Quantified Quality. LNCS, vol. 2428, p. 57. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)MATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Jonsson, B., Larsen, K.G.: Specification and refinement of probabilistic processes. In: LICS, pp. 266–277. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (1991)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Katoen, J.-P., Klink, D., Neuhäußer, M.R.: Compositional abstraction for stochastic systems. In: Ouaknine, J., Vaandrager, F.W. (eds.) FORMATS 2009. LNCS, vol. 5813, pp. 195–211. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Meyer, B.: Design by Contract. In: Advances in Object-Oriented Software Engineering, pp. 1–50. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs (1991)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Raclet, J.-B., Badouel, E., Benveniste, A., Caillaud, B., Passerone, R.: Why modalities are good for interface theories? In: Proc. ACSD 2009. IEEE, Los Alamitos (2009)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ramadge, P.J., Wonham, W.M.: Supervisory control of a class of discrete event processes. SIAM J. Control and Optimization 25(1) (1987)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Xu, D.N., Gössler, G., Girault, A.: Probabilistic contracts for component-based design. Research Report 7328, INRIA (2010)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Yi, W.: Algebraic reasoning for real-time probabilistic processes with uncertain information. In: Langmaack, H., de Roever, W.-P., Vytopil, J. (eds.) FTRTFT 1994 and ProCoS 1994. LNCS, vol. 863, pp. 680–693. Springer, Heidelberg (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dana N. Xu
    • 1
  • Gregor Gössler
    • 1
  • Alain Girault
    • 1
  1. 1.INRIAFrance

Personalised recommendations