Advertisement

Augmenting Formal Development with Use Case Reasoning

  • Alexei Iliasov
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7308)

Abstract

State-based methods for correct-by-construction software development rely on a combination of safety constraints and refinement obligations to demonstrate design correctness. One prominent challenge, especially in an industrial setting, is ensuring that a design is adequate: requirements compliant and fit for purpose. The paper presents a technique for augmenting state-based, refinement-driven formal developments with reasoning about use case scenarios; in particular, it discusses a way for the derivation of formal verification conditions from a high-level, diagrammatic language of use cases, and the methodological role of use cases in a formal modelling process.

Keywords

Formal Development Proof Obligation Case Diagram Event Node Case Reasoning 
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.: The B-Book. Cambridge University Press (1996)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Abrial, J.-R.: Modelling in Event-B. Cambridge University Press (2010)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Abrial, J.-R., Mussat, L.: Introducing Dynamic Constraints in B. In: Bert, D. (ed.) B 1998. LNCS, vol. 1393, pp. 83–128. Springer, Heidelberg (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    The door controller model. Event B/Use case specification (2011), http://iliasov.org/usecase/doorctr.zip
  5. 5.
    Event-B. Community web site (2011), http://event-b.org/
  6. 6.
    Fischer, C., Wehrheim, H.: Model-Checking CSP-OZ Specifications with FDR. In: Araki, K., Galloway, A., Taguchi, K. (eds.) IFM 1999: Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Integrated Formal Methods, London, UK, pp. 315–334. Springer (1999)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hallerstede, S.: On the Purpose of Event-B Proof Obligations. In: Börger, E., Butler, M., Bowen, J.P., Boca, P. (eds.) ABZ 2008. LNCS, vol. 5238, pp. 125–138. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hurlbut, R.R.: A survey of approaches for describing and formalizing use cases. Technical report, Expertech, Ltd. (1997)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Iliasov, A.: Augmenting Event-B Specifications with Control Flow Information. In: NODES 2010 (May 2010)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Iliasov, A.: Use Case Scenarios as Verification Conditions: Event-B/Flow Approach. In: Troubitsyna, E.A. (ed.) SERENE 2011. LNCS, vol. 6968, pp. 9–23. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Industrial deployment of system engineering methods providing high dependability and productivity (DEPLOY). IST FP7 project, http://www.deploy-project.eu/
  12. 12.
    Butler, M., Leuschel, M.: Combining CSP and B for Specification and Property Verification. In: Fitzgerald, J.S., Hayes, I.J., Tarlecki, A. (eds.) FM 2005. LNCS, vol. 3582, pp. 221–236. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
  14. 14.
    Treharne, H., Schneider, S., Bramble, M.: Composing Specifications Using Communication. In: Bert, D., Bowen, J.P., King, S., Waldén, M. (eds.) ZB 2003. LNCS, vol. 2651, pp. 58–78. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alexei Iliasov
    • 1
  1. 1.Newcastle UniversityUK

Personalised recommendations