A Model-Checking Tool for Families of Services

  • Patrizia Asirelli
  • Maurice H. ter Beek
  • Alessandro Fantechi
  • Stefania Gnesi
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6722)

Abstract

We propose a model-checking tool for on-the-fly verification of properties expressed in a branching-time temporal logic based on a deontic interpretation of classical modal and temporal operators over modal transition systems. We apply this tool to the analysis of variability in behavioural descriptions of families of services.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P., Dumas, M., Gottschalk, F., ter Hofstede, A.H.M., La Rosa, M., Mendling, J.: Preserving correctness during business process model configuration. Formal Asp. Comput. 22(3-4), 459–482 (2010)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Åqvist, L.: Deontic Logic. In: Gabbay, D., Guenthner, F. (eds.) Handbook of Philosophical Logic, 2nd edn., vol. 8, pp. 147–264. Kluwer, Dordrecht (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Asirelli, P., ter Beek, M.H., Fantechi, A., Gnesi, S.: A Logical Framework to Deal with Variability. In: Méry, D., Merz, S. (eds.) IFM 2010. LNCS, vol. 6396, pp. 43–58. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bertolino, A., Fantechi, A., Gnesi, S., Lami, G., Maccari, A.: Use Case Description of Requirements for Product Lines. In: [16], pp. 12–18 (2002)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Clarke, E.M., Emerson, E.A., Sistla, A.P.: Automatic Verification of Finite State Concurrent Systems using Temporal Logic Specifications. ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst. 8(2), 244–263 (1986)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Clarke, E.M., Grumberg, O., Peled, D.A.: Model Checking. MIT, Cambridge (1999)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Classen, A., Heymans, P., Schobbens, P.-Y., Legay, A., Raskin, J.-F.: Model Checking Lots of Systems: Efficient Verification of Temporal Properties in Software Product Lines. In: Proceedings 32nd International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE 2010), pp. 335–344. ACM Press, New York (2010)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Classen, A., Heymans, P., Schobbens, P.-Y., Legay, A.: Symbolic Model Checking of Software Product Lines. To appear in: Proceedings 33rd International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE 2011). ACM Press, New York (2011)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Clements, P.C., Northrop, L.: Software Product Lines: Practices and Patterns. Addison-Wesley, Reading (2002)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Cohen, S.G., Krut, R.W. (eds.): Proceedings 1st Workshop on Service-Oriented Architectures and Software Product Lines: What is the Connection? (SOAPL 2007). Technical Report CMU/SEI-2008-SR-006, Carnegie Mellon University (2008)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    De Nicola, R., Vaandrager, F.W.: Three Logics for Branching Bisimulation. J. ACM 42(2), 458–487 (1995)MATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Fantechi, A., Gnesi, S.: Formal Modelling for Product Families Engineering. In: [15], pp. 193–202 (2008)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Fantechi, A., Lapadula, A., Pugliese, R., Tiezzi, F., Gnesi, S., Mazzanti, F.: A Logical Verification Methodology for Service-Oriented Computing. To appear in ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. (2011)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Fischbein, D., Uchitel, S., Braberman, V.A.: A Foundation for Behavioural Conformance in Software Product Line Architectures. In: Hierons, R.M., Muccini, H. (eds.) Proceedings ISSTA 2006 Workshop on Role of Software Architecture for Testing and Analysis (ROSATEA 2006), pp. 39–48. ACM Press, New York (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Geppert, B., Pohl, K. (eds.): Proceedings 12th Software Product Lines Conference (SPLC 2008). IEEE Press, Los Alamitos (2008)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Geppert, B., Schmid, K. (eds.): Proceedings International Workshop on Requirements Engineering for Product Lines (REPL 2002). Technical Report ALR-2002-033, Avaya Labs Research (2002)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gnesi, S., Mazzanti, F.: On the Fly Verification of Networks of Automata. In: Arabnia, H.R., et al. (eds.) Proceedings International Conference on Parallel and Distributed Processing Techniques and Applications (PDPTA 1999), pp. 1040–1046. CSREA Press, Athens (2009)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Godefroid, P., Huth, M., Jagadeesan, R.: Abstraction-based model checking using modal transition systems. In: Larsen, K.G., Nielsen, M. (eds.) CONCUR 2001. LNCS, vol. 2154, pp. 426–440. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Gruler, A., Leucker, M., Scheidemann, K.: Modeling and Model Checking Software Product Lines. In: Barthe, G., de Boer, F.S. (eds.) FMOODS 2008. LNCS, vol. 5051, pp. 113–131. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Gruler, A., Leucker, M., Scheidemann, K.D.: Calculating and Modelling Common Parts of Software Product Lines. In: [15], pp. 203–212 (2008)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Halmans, G., Pohl, K.: Communicating the Variability of a Software-Product Family to Customers. Software and System Modeling 2(1), 15–36 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    John, I., Muthig, D.: Tailoring Use Cases for Product Line Modeling. In: [16], pp. 26–32 (2002)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Krut, R.W., Cohen, S.G. (eds.): Proceedings 2nd Workshop on Service-Oriented Architectures and Software Product Lines: Putting Both Together (SOAPL 2008). In: Thiel, S., Pohl, K. (eds.) Workshop Proceedings 12th Software Product Lines Conference (SPLC 2008), Lero Centre, University of Limerick, pp. 115–147 (2008)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Krut, R.W., Cohen, S.G. (eds.): Proceedings 3rd Workshop on Service-Oriented Architectures and Software Product Lines: Enhancing Variation (SOAPL 2009). In: Muthig, D., McGregor, J.D. (eds.) Proceedings 13th Software Product Lines Conference (SPLC 2009), pp. 301–302. ACM Press, New York (2009)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Larsen, K.G.: Modal Specifications. In: Sifakis, J. (ed.) CAV 1989. LNCS, vol. 407, pp. 232–246. Springer, Heidelberg (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Larsen, K.G.: Proof Systems for Satisfiability in Hennessy-Milner Logic with Recursion. Theor. Comput. Sci. 72(2–3), 265–288 (1990)MATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Larsen, K.G., Nyman, U., Wąsowski, A.: Modal I/O Automata for Interface and Product Line Theories. In: De Nicola, R. (ed.) ESOP 2007. LNCS, vol. 4421, pp. 64–79. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Larsen, K.G., Thomsen, B.: A Modal Process Logic. In: Proceedings 3rd Annual Symposium on Logic in Computer Science (LICS 1988), pp. 203–210. IEEE Press, Los Alamitos (1988)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Lauenroth, K., Pohl, K., Töhning, S.: Model Checking of Domain Artifacts in Product Line Engineering. In: Proceedings 24th International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASE 2009), pp. 269–280. IEEE Press, Los Alamitos (2009)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    von der Maßen, T., Lichter, H.: Modeling Variability by UML Use Case Diagrams. In: [16], pp. 19–25 (2002)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Mazzanti, F.: FMC v5.0b (2011), http://fmt.isti.cnr.it/fmc
  32. 32.
    Muschevici, R., Clarke, D., Proenca, J.: Feature Petri Nets. In: Schaefer, I., Carbon, R. (eds.) Proceedings 1st International Workshop on Formal Methods in Software Product Line Engineering (FMSPLE 2010). University of Lancaster (2010)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Meyer, M.H., Lehnerd, A.P.: The Power of Product Platforms: Building Value and Cost Leadership. The Free Press, New York (1997)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Müller-Olm, M., Schmidt, D.A., Steffen, B.: Model-Checking: A Tutorial Introduction. In: Cortesi, A., Filé, G. (eds.) SAS 1999. LNCS, vol. 1694, pp. 330–354. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Papazoglou, M., Traverso, P., Dustdar, S., Leymann, F.: Service-oriented computing: State of the art and research challenges. IEEE Comput. 40(11), 38–45 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Pohl, K., Böckle, G., van der Linden, F.: Software Product Line Engineering: Foundations, Principles, and Techniques. Springer, Berlin (2005)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Razavian, M., Khosravi, R.: Modeling Variability in Business Process Models Using UML. In: Proceedings 5th International Conference on Information Technology: New Generations (ITNG 2008), pp. 82–87. IEEE Press, Los Alamitos (2008)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Rosemann, M., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: A configurable reference modelling language. Inf. Syst. 32(1), 1–23 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Patrizia Asirelli
    • 1
  • Maurice H. ter Beek
    • 1
  • Alessandro Fantechi
    • 1
    • 2
  • Stefania Gnesi
    • 1
  1. 1.Istituto di Scienza e Tecnologie dell’Informazione“A. Faedo”, CNRPisaItaly
  2. 2.Dipartimento di Sistemi e InformaticaUniversità degli Studi di FirenzeItaly

Personalised recommendations