Advertisement

A Tool for IMA System Configuration Verification and Case Study

  • Lisong WangEmail author
  • Ying Zhou
  • Mingming Wang
  • Jun Hu
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 686)

Abstract

It is of a great importance for ensuring the correctness of system reconfiguration information and the satisfiability of partition time requirement in safety and reliability of critical systems such as integrated modular avionics (IMA). This paper considers a configuration information model transformation and verification approach and scheduling validation of IMA systems in the model-driven architecture with ARINC653 specification. Considering the features of IMA systems such as time or space multi-partition, this paper firstly defines a semantic mapping from the core elements of reconfiguration information (e.g. modules, partitions, memory, process and correspondence, etc.) to the MARTE model elements, and proposes a transformation approach between system configuration information and MARTE models. Then, design a scheduling validation framework of IMA partition system and then use MAST tool to make simulation for the MARTE model to verify the schedulability. Finally, a case study is illustrated to show the effectiveness of above proposed approach.

Keywords

Verification of system configuration information MARTE Model Driven Engineering ARINC653 Integrated Modular Avionics (IMA) 

Notes

Acknowledgment

Supported by: The National Basic Research Program of China (973 Program) (2014CB744904 and No. 2014CB744901); Funding of Jiangsu Innovation Program for Graduate Education (SJZZ16_0062), the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities.

References

  1. 1.
    Watkins, C.B., Walter, R.: Transitioning from federated avionics architectures to Integrated Modular Avionics. In: Digital Avionics Systems Conference, DASC’07. IEEE/AIAA 26th (2007)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Prisaznuk, P.J.: ARINC 653 role in Integrated Modular Avionics (IMA). In: Digital Avionics Systems Conference, DASC 2008. IEEE/AIAA 27th. 1. E. 5-1-1. E. 5-10 (2008)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Rutle, A., et al.: A formal approach to the specification and transformation of constraints in MDE. J. Logic Algebraic Program. 81(4), 422–457 (2012)CrossRefMathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Rierson, L.: Developing Safety-Critical Software: A Practical Guide for Aviation Software and DO-178c Compliance. CRC Press, Boca Raton (2013)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Rushby, J.: New challenges in certification for aircraft software. In: Proceedings of the ninth ACM international conference on Embedded software. ACM, New York (2011)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Moy, Y., et al.: Testing or formal verification: Do-178c alternatives and industrial experience. IEEE Softw 30(3), 50–57 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Graf, S., et al.: Modeling and analysis of real-time and embedded systems. In: Satellite Events at the MoDELS 2005 Conference. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Object Management Group (OMG): Modeling and Analysis of Real-time and Embedded Systems Specification version 1.1 formal-11-06-02 (2011)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ott, A.: System Testing in the Avionics Domain (2007)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hu, J., Ma, J., et al.: Model-driven reconfiguration information verification for safety-critical systems. J. Frontiers Comput. Sci. Technol. 9(4), 385–402 (2015)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Computer Science and Technology UniversityNanjing University of Aeronautics and AstronauticsNanjingChina

Personalised recommendations