Advertisement

Monitoring Systems with Extended Live Sequence Charts

  • Ming Chai
  • Bernd-Holger Schlingloff
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8734)

Abstract

A problem with most runtime verification techniques is that the monitoring specification formalisms are often complex. In this paper, we propose an extension of live sequence charts (LSCs) which avoids this problem. We extend the standard LSCs as proposed by Damm and Harel by introducing the notion of “sufficient prechart”, and by adding concatenation and iteration of charts. With these extended LSCs, necessary and sufficient conditions of certain statements can be intuitively specified. Moreover, similar as for message sequence charts, sequencing and iteration allow to express multiple scenarios. We give a translation of extended LSCs into linear temporal logic formulae, and develop online monitoring algorithms for traces with respect to extended LSCs. We use our algorithm to test a concrete example from the European Train Control System (ETCS) standard, and evaluate it on several benchmarks. The results show the feasibility of our approach.

Keywords

Model Check Linear Temporal Logic Handover Process Model Check Problem Linear Temporal Logic Formula 
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.
    Alur, R., Yannakakis, M.: Model Checking of Message Sequence Charts. In: Baeten, J.C.M., Mauw, S. (eds.) CONCUR 1999. LNCS, vol. 1664, pp. 114–129. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bauer, A., Küster, J.-C., Vegliach, G.: From Propositional to First-order Monitoring. In: Legay, A., Bensalem, S. (eds.) RV 2013. LNCS, vol. 8174, pp. 59–75. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ben-abdallah, H., Leue, S.: Timing Constraints in Message Sequence Chart Specifications. In: Mizuno, T., Shiratori, N., Higashino, T., Togashi, A. (eds.) Formal Description Techniques and Protocol Specification, Testing and Verification. IFIP, pp. 91–106. Springer, Boston (1997)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bohn, J., Damm, W., Klose, J., Moik, A., Wittke, H., Ehrig, H., Kramer, B., Ertas, A.: Modeling and Validating Train System Applications Using Statemate and Live Sequence Charts. In: Proc. IDPT. Citeseer (2002)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bontemps, Y.: Relating Inter-Agent and Intra-Agent Specifications. PhD thesis, PhD thesis, University of Namur, Belgium (2005)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bontemps, Y., Schobbens, P.-Y.: The Computational Complexity of Scenario-based Agent Verification and Design. Journal of Applied Logic 5(2), 252–276 (2007)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chai, M., Schlingloff, H.: A Rewriting Based Monitoring Algorithm for TPTL. In: CS&P 2013, pp. 61–72. Citeseer (2013)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chen, F., Roşu, G.: Java-MOP: A Monitoring Oriented Programming Environment for Java. In: Halbwachs, N., Zuck, L.D. (eds.) TACAS 2005. LNCS, vol. 3440, pp. 546–550. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ciraci, S., Malakuti, S., Katz, S., Aksit, M.: Checking the Correspondence between UML Models and Implementation. In: Barringer, H., et al. (eds.) RV 2010. LNCS, vol. 6418, pp. 198–213. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Clavel, M., Durán, F., Eker, S., Lincoln, P., Martı-Oliet, N., Meseguer, J., Talcott, C.: Maude Manual (version 2.6). University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign 1(3), 4–6 (2011)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Combes, P., Harel, D., Kugler, H.: Modeling and Verification of a Telecommunication Application Using Live Sequence Charts and the Play-engine Tool. Software & Systems Modeling 7(2), 157–175 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Damm, W., Harel, D.: LSCs: Breathing Life into Message Sequence Charts. Formal Methods in System Design 19(1), 45–80 (2001)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Fisher, J., Harel, D., Hubbard, E.J.A., Piterman, N., Stern, M.J., Swerdlin, N.: Combining State-based and Scenario-based Approaches in Modeling Biological Systems. In: Danos, V., Schachter, V. (eds.) CMSB 2004. LNCS (LNBI), vol. 3082, pp. 236–241. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Harel, D., Kugler, H., Marelly, R., Pnueli, A.: Smart Play-out of Behavioral Requirements. In: Aagaard, M.D., O’Leary, J.W. (eds.) FMCAD 2002. LNCS, vol. 2517, pp. 378–398. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Harel, D., Maoz, S.: Assert and Negate Revisited: Modal Semantics for UML Sequence Diagrams. Software & Systems Modeling 7(2), 237–252 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Harel, D., Maoz, S., Segall, I.: Some Results on the Expressive Power and Complexity of LSCs. In: Avron, A., Dershowitz, N., Rabinovich, A. (eds.) Trakhtenbrot/Festschrift. LNCS, vol. 4800, pp. 351–366. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Havelund, K., Roşu, G.: Monitoring Java Programs with Java PathExplorer. Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science 55(2), 200–217 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kugler, H.-J., Harel, D., Pnueli, A., Lu, Y., Bontemps, Y.: Temporal Logic for Scenario-based Specifications. In: Halbwachs, N., Zuck, L.D. (eds.) TACAS 2005. LNCS, vol. 3440, pp. 445–460. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kumar, R., Mercer, E.G.: Verifying Communication Protocols Using Live Sequence Chart Specifications. Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science 250(2), 33–48 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Leucker, M., Schallhart, C.: A Brief Account of Runtime Verification. The Journal of Logic and Algebraic Programming 78(5), 293–303 (2009)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Meredith, P.O., Jin, D., Chen, F., Roşu, G.: Efficient Monitoring of Parametric Context-free Patterns. Automated Software Engineering 17(2), 149–180 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Roşu, G., Havelund, K.: Rewriting-based Techniques for Runtime Verification. Automated Software Engineering 12(2), 151–197 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Simmonds, J., Chechik, M., Nejati, S., Litani, E., O’Farrell, B.: Property Patterns for Runtime Monitoring of Web Service Conversations. In: Leucker, M. (ed.) RV 2008. LNCS, vol. 5289, pp. 137–157. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Thati, P., Roşu, G.: Monitoring Algorithms for Metric Temporal Logic Specifications. Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science 113, 145–162 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ming Chai
    • 1
  • Bernd-Holger Schlingloff
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Humboldt Universität zu BerlinGermany
  2. 2.Fraunhofer FOKUSGermany

Personalised recommendations