Reformulation: a Way to Combine Dynamic Properties and B Refinement
We are interested in verifying dynamic properties of reactive systems. The reactive systems are specified by B event systems in a refinement development. The refinement allows us to combine proof and model-checking verification techniques in a novel way. Most of the PLTL dynamic properties are preserved by refinement, but in our approach, the user can also express how a property evolves during the refinement. The preservation of the abstract property, expressed by a PLTL formula F 1, is used as an assumption for proving a PLTL formula F 2 which expresses an enriched property in the refined system. Formula F 1 is verified by model-checking on the abstract system. So, to verify the enriched formula F 2, it is enough to prove some propositions depending on the respective patterns followed by F 1 and F 2. In this paper, we show how to obtain these sufficient propositions from the refinement relation and the semantics of the PLTL formulae. The main advantage is that the user does not need to express a variant or a loop invariant to obtain automatic proofs of dynamic properties, at least for finite state event systems. Another advantage is that the model-checking is done on an abstraction with few states.
KeywordsVerification of PLTL properties Combination of proof and model-checking Refinement development
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.J.-R. Abrial. The B Book. Cambridge University Press-ISBN 0521-496195, 1996.Google Scholar
- 2.J.-R. Abrial and L. Mussat. Introducing dynamic constraints in B. In Second Conference on the B method, France, volume 1393 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 83–128. Springer Verlag, April 1998.Google Scholar
- 3.F. Bellegarde, C. Darlot, J. Julliand, and O. Kouchnarenko. Reformulate dynamic properties during B refinement and forget variants and loop invariants. In Proc. Int. Conf. ZB’2000, York, Angleterre. Springer-Verlag, August 2000. LNCS to appear.Google Scholar
- 4.F. Bellegarde, J. Julliand, and O. Kouchnarenko. Ready-simulation is not ready to express a modular refinement relation. In Proc. Int. Conf. on Fundamental Aspects of Software Engineering, FASE’2000, volume 1783 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 266–283. Springer-Verlag, April 2000.Google Scholar
- 5.G. Holzmann. Design and validation of protocols. Prentice Hall software series, 1991.Google Scholar
- 6.J. Julliand, F. Bellegarde, and B. Parreaux. De l’expression des besoins à l’expression formelle des propriétés dynamiques. Technique et Science Informatiques, 18(7), 1999.Google Scholar
- 8.Z. Manna and A. Pnueli. The Temporal Logic of Reactive and Concurrent Systems: Specification. Springer-Verlag-ISBN 0-387-97664-7, 1992.Google Scholar