Abstract
Many of today’s software systems are built using distributed services, which evolve in different organizations. In order to facilitate their integration, it is necessary to provide a contract that the services participating in a composition should adhere to. A contract specifies interactions among a set of services from a global point of view. One important problem in a top-down development process is figuring out whether such a contract can be implemented by a set of services, obtained by projection and communicating via message passing. It was only recently shown, that this problem, known as realizability, is decidable if asynchronous communication (communication via FIFO buffers) is considered. It can be verified using the synchronizability property. If the system is not synchronizable, the system is not realizable either. In this paper, we propose a new, automatic approach, which enforces both synchronizability and realizability by generating local monitors through successive equivalence checks and refinement.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Alur, R., Etessami, K., Yannakakis, M.: Realizability and Verification of MSC Graphs. Theoretical Computer Science 331(1), 97–114 (2005)
Andrews, T.: et al. Business Process Execution Language for Web Services (WSBPEL). BEA Systems, IBM, Microsoft, SAP AG, and Siebel Systems (2005)
Basu, S., Bultan, T., Ouederni, M.: Deciding Choreography Realizability. In: Proc. of POPL 2012. ACM Press (2012)
Bultan, T., Fu, X.: Specification of Realizable Service Conversations using Collaboration Diagrams. Service Oriented Computing and Applications 2(1), 27–39 (2008)
Carbone, M., Honda, K., Yoshida, N.: Structured Communication-Centred Programming for Web Services. In: De Nicola, R. (ed.) ESOP 2007. LNCS, vol. 4421, pp. 2–17. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)
Champelovier, D., Clerc, X., Garavel, H., Guerte, Y., Powazny, V., Lang, F., Serwe, W., Smeding, G.: Reference Manual of the LOTOS NT to LOTOS Translator (Version 5.4). INRIA/VASY, 149 pages (2011)
Clarke, E., Grumberg, O., Jha, S., Lu, Y., Veith, H.: Counterexample-Guided Abstraction Refinement. In: Emerson, E.A., Sistla, A.P. (eds.) CAV 2000. LNCS, vol. 1855, pp. 154–169. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)
Crouzen, P., Lang, F.: Smart Reduction. In: Giannakopoulou, D., Orejas, F. (eds.) FASE 2011. LNCS, vol. 6603, pp. 111–126. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)
Decker, G., Weske, M.: Local Enforceability in Interaction Petri Nets. In: Alonso, G., Dadam, P., Rosemann, M. (eds.) BPM 2007. LNCS, vol. 4714, pp. 305–319. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)
Fu, X., Bultan, T., Su, J.: Conversation Protocols: A Formalism for Specification and Verification of Reactive Electronic Services. Theoretical Computer Science 328(1-2), 19–37 (2004)
Fu, X., Bultan, T., Su, J.: Synchronizability of Conversations among Web Services. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 31(12), 1042–1055 (2005)
Garavel, H., Lang, F., Mateescu, R., Serwe, W.: CADP 2010: A Toolbox for the Construction and Analysis of Distributed Processes. In: Abdulla, P.A., Leino, K.R.M. (eds.) TACAS 2011. LNCS, vol. 6605, pp. 372–387. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)
Garavel, H., Mateescu, R.: XTL: A Meta-Language and Tool for Temporal Logic Model-Checking. In: Proc. STTT 1998 (1998)
Hopcroft, J.E., Ullman, J.D.: Introduction to Automata Theory, Languages and Computation. Addison Wesley (1979)
Lohmann, N., Wolf, K.: Realizability Is Controllability. In: Laneve, C., Su, J. (eds.) WS-FM 2009. LNCS, vol. 6194, pp. 110–127. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)
Mateescu, R., Thivolle, D.: A Model Checking Language for Concurrent Value-Passing Systems. In: Cuellar, J., Sere, K. (eds.) FM 2008. LNCS, vol. 5014, pp. 148–164. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)
Milner, R.: Communication and Concurrency. International Series in Computer Science. Prentice-Hall (1989)
OMG. Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN) – Version 2.0 (2011)
Poizat, P., Salaün, G.: Checking the Realizability of BPMN 2.0 Choreographies. In: Proc. of SAC 2012. ACM Press (2012)
Qiu, Z., Zhao, X., Cai, C., Yang, H.: Towards the Theoretical Foundation of Choreography. In: Proc. of WWW 2007. ACM Press (2007)
Salaün, G., Bultan, T.: Realizability of Choreographies Using Process Algebra Encodings. In: Leuschel, M., Wehrheim, H. (eds.) IFM 2009. LNCS, vol. 5423, pp. 167–182. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)
Stengel, Z., Bultan, T.: Analyzing Singularity Channel Contracts. In: Proc. of ISSTA 2009. ACM (2009)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2012 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Güdemann, M., Salaün, G., Ouederni, M. (2012). Counterexample Guided Synthesis of Monitors for Realizability Enforcement. In: Chakraborty, S., Mukund, M. (eds) Automated Technology for Verification and Analysis. ATVA 2012. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 7561. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-33386-6_20
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-33386-6_20
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-33385-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-33386-6
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)