Adaptable Transition Systems

  • Roberto Bruni
  • Andrea Corradini
  • Fabio Gadducci
  • Alberto Lluch Lafuente
  • Andrea Vandin
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7841)


We present an essential model of adaptable transition systems inspired by white-box approaches to adaptation and based on foundational models of component based systems. The key feature of adaptable transition systems are control propositions, imposing a clear separation between ordinary, functional behaviours and adaptive ones. We instantiate our approach on interface automata yielding adaptable interface automata, but it may be instantiated on other foundational models of component-based systems as well. We discuss how control propositions can be exploited in the specification and analysis of adaptive systems, focusing on various notions proposed in the literature, like adaptability, control loops, and control synthesis.


Adaptation autonomic systems control data interface automata 


  1. 1.
    de Alfaro, L.: Game models for open systems. In: Dershowitz, N. (ed.) Verification: Theory and Practice. LNCS, vol. 2772, pp. 269–289. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    de Alfaro, L., Henzinger, T.A.: Interface automata. In: ESEC/SIGSOFT FSE 2001. ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes, vol. 26(5), pp. 109–120. ACM (2001)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Alur, R., Henzinger, T.A., Kupferman, O.: Alternating-time temporal logic. Journal of the ACM 49(5), 672–713 (2002)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bhaduri, P., Ramesh, S.: Interface synthesis and protocol conversion. Formal Aspects of Computing 20(2), 205–224 (2008)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bruni, R., Corradini, A., Gadducci, F., Lluch Lafuente, A., Vandin, A.: A conceptual framework for adaptation. In: de Lara, J., Zisman, A. (eds.) FASE 2012. LNCS, vol. 7212, pp. 240–254. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cordy, M., Classen, A., Heymans, P., Legay, A., Schobbens, P.-Y.: Model Checking Adaptive Software with Featured Transition Systems. In: Cámara, J., de Lemos, R., Ghezzi, C., Lopes, A. (eds.) Assurances for Self-Adaptive Systems. LNCS, vol. 7740, pp. 1–29. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    De Nicola, R., Vaandrager, F.W.: Action versus state based logics for transition systems. In: Guessarian, I. (ed.) LITP 1990. LNCS, vol. 469, pp. 407–419. Springer, Heidelberg (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hölzl, M., Wirsing, M.: Towards a system model for ensembles. In: Agha, G., Danvy, O., Meseguer, J. (eds.) Formal Modeling: Actors, Open Systems, Biological Systems. LNCS, vol. 7000, pp. 241–261. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    IBM Corporation: An Architectural Blueprint for Autonomic Computing (2006)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kulkarni, S.S., Biyani, K.N.: Correctness of component-based adaptation. In: Crnković, I., Stafford, J.A., Schmidt, H.W., Wallnau, K. (eds.) CBSE 2004. LNCS, vol. 3054, pp. 48–58. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lints, T.: The essentials in defining adaptation. Aerospace and Electronic Systems 27(1), 37–41 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Maraninchi, F., Rémond, Y.: Mode-automata: About modes and states for reactive systems. In: Hankin, C. (ed.) ESOP 1998. LNCS, vol. 1381, pp. 185–199. Springer, Heidelberg (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Merelli, E., Paoletti, N., Tesei, L.: A multi-level model for self-adaptive systems. In: Kokash, N., Ravara, A. (eds.) FOCLASA 2012. EPTCS, vol. 91, pp. 112–126 (2012)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Oreizy, P., Gorlick, M.M., Taylor, R.N., Heimbigner, D., Johnson, G., Medvidovic, N., Quilici, A., Rosenblum, D.S., Wolf, A.L.: An architecture-based approach to self-adaptive software. Intelligent Systems and their Applications 14(3), 54–62 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Laddaga, R., Robertson, P., Shrobe, H.: Introduction to self-adaptive software: Applications. In: Laddaga, R., Robertson, P., Shrobe, H. (eds.) IWSAS 2001. LNCS, vol. 2614, pp. 1–5. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Salehie, M., Tahvildari, L.: Self-adaptive software: Landscape and research challenges. ACM Transactions on Autonomous and Adaptive Systems 4(2), 1–42 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Salvaneschi, G., Ghezzi, C., Pradella, M.: Context-oriented programming: A programming paradigm for autonomic systems (v2). CoRR abs/1105.0069 (2012)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Zadeh, L.A.: On the definition of adaptivity. Proceedings of the IEEE 51(3), 469–470 (1963)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Zhang, J., Goldsby, H., Cheng, B.H.C.: Modular verification of dynamically adaptive systems. In: Moreira, A., Schwanninger, C., Baillargeon, R., Grechanik, M. (eds.) AOSD, pp. 161–172. ACM (2009)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Zhao, Y., Ma, D., Li, J., Li, Z.: Model checking of adaptive programs with mode-extended linear temporal logic. In: EASe, pp. 40–48. IEEE Computer Society (2011)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Roberto Bruni
    • 1
  • Andrea Corradini
    • 1
  • Fabio Gadducci
    • 1
  • Alberto Lluch Lafuente
    • 2
  • Andrea Vandin
    • 2
  1. 1.Dipartimento di InformaticaUniversity of PisaItaly
  2. 2.IMT Institute for Advanced StudiesLuccaItaly

Personalised recommendations