Property Verification with MSC

  • Emmanuel Gaudin
  • Eric Brunel
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7916)


In the development process the very first phase focuses on the requirements. Most of the requirements are dynamic and describe how the system reacts to a set of stimuli. Not all the possible reactions are listed in the requirements but some mandatory reactions are described that can be seen as properties. Later in the development process is a real system or a representative model of the future system. At that point it is possible to gather execution traces of the real system. Based on the work of the European PRESTO project this paper describes the work that has been done to use the same kind of model in both cases and match one against the other.


MSC PSC Sequence Diagram Property verification Trace Artemis 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Clarke, E.M., Emerson, E.A.: Design and synthesis of synchronization skeletons using branching-time temporal logic. In: Kozen, D. (ed.) Logic of Programs 1981. LNCS, vol. 131, pp. 52–71. Springer, Heidelberg (1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Queille, J.P., Sifakis, J.: Specification and verification of concurrent systems in CESAR. In: Dezani-Ciancaglini, M., Montanari, U. (eds.) Programming 1982. LNCS, vol. 137, pp. 337–351. Springer, Heidelberg (1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Compare, D., Inverardi, P., Pelliccione, P., Sebastiani, A.: Integrating model-checking architectural analysis and validation in a real software life-cycle. In: Araki, K., Gnesi, S., Mandrioli, D. (eds.) FME 2003. LNCS, vol. 2805, pp. 114–132. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Holzmann, G.J.: The SPIN Model Checker – Primer and Reference Manual. Addison Wesley (2003)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Holzmann, G.J.: The logic of bugs. In: Proceedings of the 10th ACM SIGSOFT Symposium on Foundations of Software Engineering, SIGSOFT 2002/FSE 2002, pp. 81–87. ACM (2002)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Muscholl, A., Peled, D.: Deciding Properties of Message Sequence Charts. In: Leue, S., Systä, T.J. (eds.) Scenarios. LNCS, vol. 3466, pp. 43–65. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Babica, J.: Message Sequence Charts properties and checking algorithms. Master Thesis at Masarykova Univerzita Fakulta Informatiky Brno (2009),
  8. 8.
    Brill, M., Damm, W., Klose, J., Westphal, B., Wittke, H.: Live Sequence Charts. In: Ehrig, H., Damm, W., Desel, J., Große-Rhode, M., Reif, W., Schnieder, E., Westkämper, E. (eds.) INT 2004. LNCS, vol. 3147, pp. 374–399. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Specification & Description Language - Real-Time (2006),
  10. 10.
    Internation Telecommuication Union: Recommendation Z.120 (02/11) Message Sequence Chart (MSC),
  11. 11.
    Autili, M., Inveradi, P., Pelliccione, P.: Graphical scenarios for specifying temporal properties: an automated approach. Automated Software Engineering 14(3), 293–340 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Dwyer, M.B., Avrunin, G.S., Corbett, J.C.: Patterns in Property Specifications for Finite-State Verification. In: Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Software Engineering, ICE 1999, pp. 411–420. IEEE Computer Society (1999)Google Scholar
  13. 13.

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Emmanuel Gaudin
    • 1
  • Eric Brunel
    • 1
  1. 1.PragmaDevFrance

Personalised recommendations