Advertisement

V&V of Lexical, Syntactic and Semantic Properties for Interactive Systems through Model Checking of Formal Description of Dialog

  • Guillaume Brat
  • Célia Martinie
  • Philippe Palanque
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8004)

Abstract

During early phases of the development of an interactive system, future system properties are identified (through interaction with end users in the brainstorming and prototyping phase of the application, or by other stakeholders) imposing requirements on the final system. They can be specific to the application under development or generic to all applications such as usability principles. Instances of specific properties include visibility of the aircraft altitude, speed…in the cockpit and the continuous possibility of disengaging the autopilot in whatever state the aircraft is. Instances of generic properties include availability of undo (for undoable functions) and availability of a progression bar for functions lasting more than four seconds. While behavioral models of interactive systems using formal description techniques provide complete and unambiguous descriptions of states and state changes, it does not provide explicit representation of the absence or presence of properties. Assessing that the system that has been built is the right system remains a challenge usually met through extensive use and acceptance tests. By the explicit representation of properties and the availability of tools to support checking these properties, it becomes possible to provide developers with means for systematic exploration of the behavioral models and assessment of the presence or absence of these properties. This paper proposes the synergistic use two tools for checking both generic and specific properties of interactive applications: Petshop and Java PathFinder. Petshop is dedicated to the description of interactive system behavior. Java PathFinder is dedicated to the runtime verification of Java applications and as an extension dedicated to User Interfaces. This approach is exemplified on a safety critical application in the area of interactive cockpits for large civil aircrafts.

Keywords

Model Check Interactive System Semantic Property Formal Verification Interactive Application 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    ARINC 661 specification: Cockpit Display System Interfaces to User Systems, Prepared by AEEC. Published by Aeronautical Radio, Inc. (April 22, 2002) Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bass, L., John, B., Juristo Juzgado, N., Sánchez Segura, M.I.: Usability-Supporting Architectural Patterns. In: ICSE 2004, pp. 716–717 (2004)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bastide, R., Navarre, D., Palanque, P.: A Tool-Supported Design Framework for Safety Critical Interactive Systems. Interacting with Computers 15(3), 309–328 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Brat, G., Drusinsky, D., Giannakopoulou, D., Goldberg, A., Havelund, K., Lowry, M., Pasareanu, C., Venet, A., Washington, R., Visser, W.: Experimental Evaluation of Verification and Validation Tools on Martian Rover Software. Journal on Formal Methods in Systems Design 25(2-3) (September 2004)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Campos, J.C., Harrison, M.D.: Model Checking Interactor Specifications. Journal of Automated Software Engineering 8(3-4), 275–310 (2001)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Clarke, E.M., Emerson, E.A., Sistla, A.P.: Automatic verification of finite-state concurrent systems using temporal logic specifications. ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems 8(2), 244–263 (1986)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Combéfis, S., Giannakopoulou, D., Pecheur, C., Feary, M.: A Formal Framework for Design and Analysis of Human-Machine Interaction. In: Proceedings of IEEE System, Man and Cybernetics (SMC), Anchorage, USA, pp. 1801–1808 (2011)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dix, A.: Upside down As and algorithms – computational formalisms and theory. In: Carroll, J. (ed.) HCI Models Theories and Frameworks: Toward a Multidisciplinary Science, ch. 14, pp. 381–429. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gram, C., Cockton, G.: Design principles for Interactive Software. Chapman & Hall, London (1996)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fuchs, N.E.: Specifications are (preferably) executable. Journal on Software Engineering 7(5), 323–334 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hewelt, M., Wagner, T., Cabac, L.: Integrating verification into the PAOSE approach. In: Proceedings of the Petri Nets and Software Engineering. International Workshop PNSE 2011, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK, pp. 124–135 (June 2011)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Jensen, K., Kristensen, L.M., Wells, L.: Coloured Petri Nets and CPN Tools for modelling and validation of concurrent systems. International Journal on Software Tools for Technology Transfer 9(3-4), 213–254 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kamel, N., Ait Ameur, Y.: A Formal Model for CARE Usability Properties Verification in Multimodal HCI. In: Proceeding of IEEE International Conference on Pervasive Services, Istanbul, Turkey, July 15-20, pp. 341–348 (2007)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Mascheroni, M., Wagner, T., Wüstenberg, L.: Verifying reference nets by means of hypernets: A plugin for Renew. In: Proceedings of the International Workshop on Petri Nets and Software Engineering, PNSE 2010, Braga, Portugal, pp. 39–54 (2010)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    McMillan, K.L.: Symbolic Model Checking. Kluwer Academic Publishers (1993)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Navarre, D., Palanque, P., Ladry, J.-F., Barboni, E.: ICOs: a Model-Based User Interface Description Technique dedicated to Interactive Systems Addressing Usability, Reliability and Scalability. Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, ACM SIGCHI 16(4), 1–56 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Palanque, P., Bastide, R.: Verification of an Interactive Software by analysis of its formal specification. In: Proceedings of the IFIP TC13 Interact 1995 Conference, Lillehammer, Norway, June 27-29, pp. 191–197 (1995)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Palanque, P., Farenc, C.: Embedding Ergonomic Rules as Generic Requirements in a Formal Development Process of Interactive Software. In: Proceedings of IFIP TC 13 Interact 1999 Conference, Edinburg, Scotland, September 1-4 (1999)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Palanque, P., Ladry, J.-F., Navarre, D., Barboni, E.: High-Fidelity Prototyping of Interactive Systems Can Be Formal Too. In: Jacko, J.A. (ed.) HCI International 2009, Part I. LNCS, vol. 5610, pp. 667–676. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Paternó, F., Santoro, C.: Integrating model checking and HCI tools to help designers verify user interface properties. In: Paternó, F. (ed.) DSV-IS 2000. LNCS, vol. 1946, pp. 135–150. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Pnueli: The temporal logic of programs. In: Proceedings of the 18th IEEE Symposium on Foundation of Computer Science, pp. 46–57 (1977) Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Silva, J.L., Campos, J.C., Harrison, M.D.: Formal Analysis of Ubiquitous Computing Environments through the APEX Framework. In: EICS 2012: Proceedings of the 4th ACM SIGCHI Symposium on Engineering Interactive Computing Systems, pp. 131–140 (2012)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Visser, W., Havelund, K., Brat, G., Park, S.: Model Checking Programs. In: Proceedings of the 15th IEEE International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASE 2000). IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC (2000)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Mehlitz, P.C., Tkachuk, O., Ujma, M.: JPF-AWT: Model checking GUI applications. In: ASE 2011, pp. 584–587 (2011)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Guillaume Brat
    • 1
  • Célia Martinie
    • 2
  • Philippe Palanque
    • 2
  1. 1.NASA Ames Research CenterCaliforniaUSA
  2. 2.IRITUniversité Paul SabatierToulouse Cedex 9France

Personalised recommendations