Hierarchical Modeling and Formal Verification. An Industrial Case Study Using Reo and Vereofy

  • Joachim Klein
  • Sascha Klüppelholz
  • Andries Stam
  • Christel Baier
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6959)

Abstract

In traditional approaches to software development, modeling precedes programming activities. Hence, models represent the intended structure and behavior of the system-to-be. The reverse case, however, is often found in practice: using models to gain insight into an existing software system, enabling the evolution and refactoring of the system to new needs. We report on a case study with the ASK communication platform, an existing distributed software system with multithreaded components. For the modeling of the ASK system we followed a hierarchical top-down approach that allows a high-level description of the system behavior on different levels of abstraction by applying an iterative refinement procedure. The system model is refined by decomposing the components into sub-components together with the “glue code” that orchestrates their interactions. Our model of the ASK system is based on the exogenous coordination language Reo for specifying the glue code and an automata-based formalism for specifying the component interfaces. This approach is supported by the modeling framework of the tool-set Vereofy which is used to establish several properties of the components and the coordination mechanism of the ASK system. Besides demonstrating how modeling and verification can be used in combination to gain insight into legacy software, this case study also illustrates the applicability of exogenous coordination languages such as Reo for modeling and tool-sets such as Vereofy for the formal analysis of industrial systems.

References

  1. 1.
    The Almende research organization, http://www.almende.com/
  2. 2.
    Alur, R., de Alfaro, L., Grosu, R., Henzinger, T.A., Kang, M., Kirsch, C.M., Majumdar, R., Mang, F.Y.C., Wang, B.-Y.: Jmocha: A model checking tool that exploits design structure. In: Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE), pp. 835–836. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos (2001)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Alur, R., Henzinger, T.A.: Reactive modules. Formal Methods in System Design 15(1), 7–48 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Arbab, F.: Reo: A Channel-Based Coordination Model for Component Composition. Mathematical Structures in Computer Science 14(3), 329–366 (2004)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    ASK community systems, http://www.ask-cs.com/
  6. 6.
    Baier, C., Blechmann, T., Klein, J., Klüppelholz, S.: A Uniform Framework for Modeling and Verifying Components and Connectors. In: Field, J., Vasconcelos, V.T. (eds.) COORDINATION 2009. LNCS, vol. 5521, pp. 247–267. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Baier, C., Blechmann, T., Klein, J., Klüppelholz, S.: Formal Verification for Components and Connectors. In: de Boer, F.S., Bonsangue, M.M., Madelaine, E. (eds.) FMCO 2008. LNCS, vol. 5751, pp. 82–101. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Baier, C., Sirjani, M., Arbab, F., Rutten, J.: Modeling Component Connectors in Reo by Constraint Automata. Science of Computer Programming 61, 75–113 (2006)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Blechmann, T., Klein, J., Klüppelholz, S.: Vereofy User Manual. Technische Universität Dresden (2008–2011), http://www.vereofy.de/
  10. 10.
    Cimatti, A., Clarke, E., Giunchiglia, F., Roveri, M.: NUSMV: A new symbolic model checker. International Journal on Software Tools for Technology Transfer 2(4), 410–425 (2000)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gößler, G., Sifakis, J.: Component-based construction of deadlock-free systems. In: Pandya, P.K., Radhakrishnan, J. (eds.) FSTTCS 2003. LNCS, vol. 2914, pp. 420–433. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Holzmann, G.J.: The model checker SPIN. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 23, 279–295 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Papadopoulos, G.A., Arbab, F.: Coordination models and languages. Technical report, CWI, Amsterdam, The Netherlands (1998)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Joachim Klein
    • 1
  • Sascha Klüppelholz
    • 1
  • Andries Stam
  • Christel Baier
    • 1
  1. 1.Technische Universität DresdenGermany

Personalised recommendations