International Conference on Model-Driven Engineering and Software Development

Model-Driven Engineering and Software Development pp 375-389 | Cite as

Model-in-the-Loop Testing of a Railway Interlocking System

  • Fabio Scippacercola
  • Roberto Pietrantuono
  • Stefano Russo
  • András Zentai
Conference paper
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 580)

Abstract

Model-driven techniques offer new solutions to support development and verification and validation (V&V) activities of software-intensive systems. As they can reduce costs, and ease the certification process as well, they are attractive also in safety-critical domains. We present an approach for Model-in-the-loop testing within an OMG-based model-driven process, aimed at supporting system V&V activities. The approach is based on the definition of a model of the system environment, named Computation Independent Test (CIT) model. The CIT enables various forms of system test, allowing early detection of design faults. We show the benefits of the approach with reference to a pilot project that is part of a railway interlocking system. The system, required to be CENELEC SIL-4 compliant, has been provided by the Hungarian company Prolan Co. in the context of an industrial-academic partnership.

Keywords

Model-Driven Engineering Safety-critical systems Model-Driven Testing 

References

  1. 1.
    Brambilla, M., Cabot, J., Wimmer, M.: Model-Driven Software Engineering in Practice, 1st edn. Morgan & Claypool Publishers, USA (2012)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    OMG: MDA Guide (2003) Version 1.0.1. http://www.omg.org/cgi-bin/doc?omg/03-06-01
  3. 3.
    Baker, P., Dai, Z.R., Grabowski, J., Haugen, Ø., Schieferdecker, I., Williams, C.: Model-Driven Testing: Using the UML Testing Profile, 1st edn. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Scippacercola, F., Pietrantuono, R., Russo, S., Zentai, A.: Model-driven engineering of a railway interlocking system. In: Proceedings of MODELSWARD 2015, 3rd International Conference on Model-Driven Engineering and Software Development, SCITEPRESS, pp. 509–519 (2015)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Mohagheghi, P., Dehlen, V.: Where is the proof? - a review of experiences from applying MDE in industry. In: Schieferdecker, I., Hartman, A. (eds.) ECMDA-FA 2008. LNCS, vol. 5095, pp. 432–443. Springer, Heidelberg (2008) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ferrari, A., Fantechi, A., Magnani, G., Grasso, D., Tempestini, M.: The Metrô Rio case study. Sci. Comput. Program. 78(7), 828–842 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Svendsen, A., Olsen, G.K., Endresen, J., Moen, T., Carlson, E.J., Alme, K.-J., Haugen, Ø.: The future of train signaling. In: Czarnecki, K., Ober, I., Bruel, J.-M., Uhl, A., Völter, M. (eds.) MODELS 2008. LNCS, vol. 5301, pp. 128–142. Springer, Heidelberg (2008) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Marrone, S., Flammini, F., Mazzocca, N., Nardone, R., Vittorini, V.: Towards Model-Driven V&V assessment of railway control systems. Int. J. Softw. Tools Technol. Transf. 16(6), 669–683 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Miller, S.P., Whalen, M.W., Cofer, D.D.: Software model checking takes off. Commun. ACM 53(2), 58–64 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Esterel Technologies: SCADE Suite Product Description (2014). http://www.esterel-technologies.com
  11. 11.
    Lawrence, A., Seisenberger, M.: Verification of railway interlockings in SCADE. MRes Thesis, Swansea University (2011)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Invensys Rail: Invensys Rail Discovers Agile Development Process with SCADE Suite (2014). http://www.esterel-technologies.com/success-stories/invensys-rail/
  13. 13.
    Nejati, S., Sabetzadeh, M., Falessi, D., Briand, L., Coq, T.: A SysML-based approach to traceability management and design slicing in support of safety certification: framework, tool support, and case studies. Inf. Softw. Technol. 54(6), 569–590 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Panesar-Walawege, R., Sabetzadeh, M., Briand, L.: A model-driven engineering approach to support the verification of compliance to safety standards. In: Proceedings of ISSRE 2011, IEEE 22nd International Symposium on Software Reliability Engineering, pp. 30–39 (2011)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Shokry, H., Hinchey, M.: Model-based verification of embedded software. Computer 42(4), 53–59 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Amalfitano, D., Fasolino, A.R., Scala, S., Tramontana, P.: Towards automatic model-in-the-loop testing of electronic vehicle information centers. In: Proceedings of WISE ’14, International Workshop on Long-term Industrial Collaboration on Software Engineering, pp. 9–12. ACM (2014)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Matinnejad, R., Nejati, S., Briand, L., Bruckmann, T., Poull, C.: Automated model-in-the-loop testing of continuous controllers using search. In: Ruhe, G., Zhang, Y. (eds.) SSBSE 2013. LNCS, vol. 8084, pp. 141–157. Springer, Heidelberg (2013) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    IBM Corp.: Rational Rhapsody Developer (2014). http://www-03.ibm.com/software/products/it/ratirhap

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Fabio Scippacercola
    • 1
  • Roberto Pietrantuono
    • 1
  • Stefano Russo
    • 1
  • András Zentai
    • 2
  1. 1.DIETIUniversità degli Studi di Napoli Federico IINapoliItaly
  2. 2.Prolan Process Control Co.BudakalászHungary

Personalised recommendations