Formalization and Analysis of Real-Time Requirements: A Feasibility Study at BOSCH

  • Amalinda Post
  • Jochen Hoenicke
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7152)

Abstract

In this paper, we evaluate a tool chain to algorithmically analyze real-time requirements. According to this tool chain, one formalizes the requirements in a natural-language pattern system. The requirements can then be automatically compiled into formulas in a real-time logic. The formulas can be checked automatically for properties whose violation indicates an error in the requirements specification (the properties considered are: consistency, rt-consistency, vacuity). We report on a feasibility study in the context of several automotive projects at Bosch. The results of the study indicate that the effort for the formalization of real-time requirements is acceptable; the analysis algorithms are computationally feasible; the benefit (the detection of specification errors resp. the formal guarantee of their absence) seems significant.

Keywords

Requirement Engineer Computation Tree Logic Tool Chain Informal Requirement Duration Calculus 
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.
    Abrial, J.-R.: Formal methods in industry: achievements, problems, future. In: ICSE, pp. 761–768 (2006)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Behrmann, G., David, A., Larsen, K.G.: A Tutorial on Uppaal. In: Bernardo, M., Corradini, F. (eds.) SFM-RT 2004. LNCS, vol. 3185, pp. 200–236. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Dahlstedt, A.G., Persson, A.: Requirements interdependencies - moulding the state of research into a research agenda. In: REFSQ, pp. 71–80 (2003)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Dwyer, M.B., Avrunin, G.S., Corbett, J.C.: Patterns in property specifications for finite-state verification. In: ICSE, pp. 411–420. ACM, New York (1999)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Han, B., Gates, D., Levin, L.: From language to time: A temporal expression anchorer. In: TIME, pp. 196–203 (June 2006)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Heimdahl, M.P.E., Leveson, N.G.: Completeness and consistency analysis of state-based requirements. IEEE Trans. on SW Engineering, 3–14 (1995)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Heitmeyer, C.L., Jeffords, R.D., Labaw, B.G.: Automated consistency checking of requirements specifications. ACM Trans. SW Eng. and Meth. 5(3), 231–261 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hoenicke, J.: Combination of Processes, Data, and Time. PhD thesis, University of Oldenburg (July 2006)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Konrad, S., Cheng, B.H.C.: Real-time specification patterns. In:ICSE 2005: Proc. 27th Int. Conf. Softw. Eng., pp. 372–381. ACM, New York (2005)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kuhn, T.: Acerules: Executing Rules in Controlled Natural Language. In: Marchiori, M., Pan, J.Z., de Sainte Marie, C. (eds.) RR 2007. LNCS, vol. 4524, pp. 299–308. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Meyer, R., Faber, J., Hoenicke, J., Rybalchenko, A.: Model checking duration calculus: a practical approach. Formal Asp. Comput. 20(4-5), 481–505 (2008)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Post, A., Hoenicke, J., Podelski, A.: Vacuous of real-time requirements. In: RE 2011, pp. 153–162. IEEE (2011)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Post, A., Hoenicke, J., Podelski, A.: rt-inconsistency: A New Property for Real-Time Requirements. In: Giannakopoulou, D., Orejas, F. (eds.) FASE 2011. LNCS, vol. 6603, pp. 34–49. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Post, A., Menzel, I., Podelski, A.: Applying restricted english grammar on automotive requirements — does it work? a case study. In: REFSQ, pp. 166–180 (2011)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Skakkebæk, J.: Liveness and Fairness in Duration Calculus. In: Jonsson, B., Parrow, J. (eds.) CONCUR 1994. LNCS, vol. 836, pp. 283–298. Springer, Heidelberg (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Walia, G.S., Carver, J.C.: A systematic literature review to identify and classify software requirement errors. Inf. Softw. Technol. 51(7), 1087–1109 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Wohlin, C., Runeson, P., Höst, M., Ohlsson, M.C., Regnell, B., Wesslén, A.: Experimentation in software engineering: an introduction. Kluwer Acad. Pub., Norwell (2000)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Yu, L., Su, S., Luo, S., Su, Y.: Completeness and consistency analysis on requirements of distributed event-driven systems. In: TASE, Washington, pp. 241–244 (2008)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Zhou, C., Hansen, M.: Duration Calculus: A Formal Approach to Real-Time Systems. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)MATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Amalinda Post
    • 1
  • Jochen Hoenicke
    • 2
  1. 1.Robert Bosch GmbHStuttgartGermany
  2. 2.University of FreiburgGermany

Personalised recommendations