Increasing Dependability by Means of Model-Based Acceptance Test inside RTOS
Component-based self-optimizing systems can adjust themselves over time to dynamic environments by means of exchanging components. In case that such systems are safety-critical, the dependability issue becomes paramountly significant. This paper presents a novel model-based runtime verification to increase dependability for the self-optimizing systems of this kind. The proposed verification approach plays a role of an alternative acceptance test transparently integrated in RTOS, named model-based acceptance test. The verification is performed at the level of (RT-UML) models representing the systems under consideration. The properties to be checked are expressed by RT-OCL where the underlying temporal logic is restricted to either time-annotated ACTL or LTL formulae. The applied technique is based on the on-the-fly model checking, which runs interleaved with the execution of the checked system in a pipelined manner. More specifically, for ACTL formulae this means an on-the-fly solution to the NHORNSAT problem, while in the case of LTL formulae, the emptiness checking method is applied.
KeywordsModel Check Linear Temporal Logic Acceptance Test Kripke Structure Computation Tree Logic
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.Kopetz, H.: Real Time Systems, design principles for distributed embedded applications (1997)Google Scholar
- 2.Maehle, E., Markus, F.J.: Fault tolerant dynamic task scheduling based on dataflow diagram. In: International Paralell and Distributed Processing Symposium (1997)Google Scholar
- 3.Buttazzo, G.: Hard Real-Time Computing Systems (2000)Google Scholar
- 4.Barnett, M., Schulte, W.: Spying on components: A runtime verification technique. In: Leavens, G.T., Sitaraman, M., Giannakopoulou, D. (eds.) Workshop on Specification and Verification of Component-Based Systems (2001)Google Scholar
- 5.Chen, F., Rosu, G.: Towards Monitoring-Oriented Programming: A Paradigm Combining Specification and Implementation. In: Proceedings of the 2003 Workshop on Runtime Verification (RV 2003), Boulder, Colorado, USA (2003)Google Scholar
- 6.Havelund, K., Rosu, G.: Java PathExplorer — a runtime verification tool. In: Proceedings 6th International Symposium on Artificial Intelligence, Robotics and Automation in Space (ISAIRAS 2001), Montreal, Canada (2001)Google Scholar
- 7.Giese, H., Tichy, M., Burmester, S., Schäfer, W., Flake, S.: Towards the Compositional Verification of Real-time UML Designs. In: Proceedings of the European Software Engineering Conference (ESEC), Helsinki, Finland (2003)Google Scholar
- 8.Giese, H., Burmester, S.: Real-time Statechart Semantics. Technical Report tr-ri- 03-239, Computer Science Department, Paderborn University (2003)Google Scholar
- 10.Gurevich, Y., Schulte, W., Campbell, C., Grieskamp, W.: AsmL: The Abstract State Machine Language Version 2.0, http://research.microsoft.com/foundations/AsmL/
- 12.Shukla, S., Rosenkrantz, D.J., Hunt III, H.B., Stearns, R.E.: A HORNSAT Based Approach to the Polynomial Time Decidability of Simulation Relations for Finite State Processes. In: DIMACS Series in Discrete Mathematics and Theoretical Computer Science, American Mathematical Society, vol. 35 (1997)Google Scholar
- 15.Zhao, Y., Oberthür, S., Kardos, M., Rammig, F.J.: Model-based runtime verification framework for self-optimizing systems. In: Proceedings of the 2005 Workshop on Runtime Verification (RV 2005), Edinburgh, Scotland, UK (2005)Google Scholar