Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Formal Modeling and Verification of Cyber-Physical Systems pp 151–189Cite as

Specification of Parametric Monitors

Quantified Event Automata versus Rule Systems

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

Abstract

Specification-based runtime verification is a technique for monitoring program executions against specifications formalized in formal logic. Such logics are usually temporal in nature, capturing the relation between events occurring at different time points. A particular challenge in runtime verification is the elegant specification and efficient monitoring of streams of events that carry data, also referred to as parametric monitoring. This paper presents two parametric runtime verification systems representing two quite different approaches to the problem. qea (Quantified Event Automata) is a state machine approach based on trace-slicing, while LogFire is a rule-based approach based on the Rete algorithm, known from AI as being the basis for many rule systems. The presentation focuses on how easy it is to specify properties in the two approaches by specifying a collection of properties gathered during the 1st International Competition of Software for Runtime Verification (CSRV 2014), affiliated with RV 2014 in Toronto, Canada.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. RuleR website. http://www.CB.man.ac.uk/~howard/LPA.html.

  2. CSRV 2of4. http://rv2014.imag.fr/monitoring-competition.

  3. C. Allan, P. Avgustinov, A. S. Christensen, L. Hendren, S. Kuzins, O. Lhot8.k, O. de Moor, D. Sereni, G. Sittamplao, aod J. Tibble. Adding trace matching with free variables to AspectJ. In OOPSLA '05. ACM Press, 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  4. H. Barringer, Y. Faleone, K. Havelund, G. Reger, and D. Rydeheard. Quaotified Event Automata – towards expressive and efficient runtime monitors. In 18 th International Symposium on Formal Methoos (FM'12), Paris, F'rance, August 27- 91, 2offt. Proceedings, volume 7436 of LNCS. Springer, 2of2.

    Google Scholar 

  5. H. Barringer, M. Fisher, D. M. Gabbay, G. Gough, and R. Owens. Metatem: An introduction. Formal Asp. Comput., 7(5):533–549, 1995.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  6. H. Barringer, A. Goldberg, K. Havelund, and K. Sen. Program monitoring with LTL in Eagle. In Parallel and Distributed Systems: Testing and Debugging (PAD TAD' 04), Santa Fee, New Mexico , USA, volume 17 of IEEE Computer Society , April 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  7. H. Barringer, A. Goldberg, K. Havelund, and K. Sen. Rule-based runtbne verifieation. In VMCAI, volume 2937 of LNCS, pages 44–57. Springer, 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  8. H. Barringer, A. Groce, K. Havelund, and M. Srnitb. Formal analysis of log files. Journal of Aerospace Computing, Information, and Communication, 7(11):365- 390,2of0.

    Google Scholar 

  9. H. Barringer and K. Havelund. TraceContract: A Scala DSL far trace analysis. In 17th International Symposium on Formal Methods (FM'l1), Limerick, Ireland, June 20-24, 2011. Proceedings, volume 6664 of LNCS, pages 57-72. Springer, 2ofl.

    Google Scholar 

  10. H. Barringer, K. Havelund, D. Rydeheard, and A. Grace. Rule systems far runtime verification: A short tutorial. In Proc . of the 9th Int. Workshop on Runtime Verificotion (RV'09), volume 5779 of LNCS, pages 1-24. Springer, 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  11. H. Barringer, D. Rydeheard, and K. Havelund. Rule systems for run-time monitoring: from Eagle to RuleR. In Proc . of the 7th Int. Workshop on Runtime Verificotion (RV'07), volume 4839 of LNCS, pages 111-125, Vaneouver, Canada, 2007. Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  12. H. Barringer, D. E. Rydeheard, and K. Havelund. Rule systems for run-time monitoring: from Eagle to RuleR. J. Log. Comput., 20(3):675-706, 2of0.

    Google Scholar 

  13. D. A. Basin, F. K1aedtke, and S. Müller. Poliey monitoring in first-order temporal logic. In T. Touili, B. Cook, and P. Jackson, editors, Computer Aided Verification , 22nd International Con/erence, CA V 2of0, Edinburgh, UK, July 15-19, Proceedings, volume 6174 of LNCS, pages 1-18. Springer, 2of0.

    Google Scholar 

  14. A. Bauer, J.-C. Küster, and G. Vegliach. From propositional to first-order monitoring. In Runtime Verification - 4th Int. Conference, RV'19, Rennes, France , September 24-27, 2013. Proeeedings, volume 8174 of LNCS, pages 59-75. Springer, 2013.

    Google Scholar 

  15. A. Bauer, M. Leucker, and C. Scba1lhart. The good, the bad, and the ugly, but how ngly is ngly? In Proe. of the 7th Int. Workshop on Runtime Verificotion (RV'07), volume 4839 of LNCS, pages 126–138, Vancouver, Canada, 2007. Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  16. A. Bauer, M. Leucker, and J. Streit. SALT – struetured assertion language for temporallogic. In Z. Liu and J. He, editors, Formal Methods and Software Engineering , volume 4260 of Lecture Notes in Computer Seieneo, pages 757–775. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  17. E. Bodden. MOPBox: A library approach to runtime verifieation. In Runtime Verification - 2nd Int. Conference, RV'll, San Francisco, USA, September 27-90 , 2011. Proceedings, volume 7186 of LNCS, pages 36 & -369. Springer, 201l.

    Google Scholar 

  18. F. Chen and G. Ro§u. Parametrie trace slicing and monitoring. In Proceedings of the 15th International Con/erenee on Tools and Algorithms /or the Construetion and Analysis of Systems (TACAS'09), volume 5505 of LNCS, pages 246–261, 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Clips website: http://clipsrules.sourceforge.net.

  20. H. C. Cruz. Optimisation techniques for runtime verification. Master's thesis, University of Manchester, 2of4.

    Google Scholar 

  21. M. D' Amorim and K. Havelund. Event-based runtime verification of Java programs. In Workshop on Dynamie Program Analysis (WODA '05), volume 30(4) of ACM Sigsoft Software Engineering Notes, pages 1–7, 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  22. N. Decker, M. Leucker, and D. Thoma. Monitoring modulo theories. In E. Abraham and K. Havelund, editors, Tools and Algorithms /or the Constmetion and Analysis of Systems – 20th International Con/erenee, TACAS 2of4, Grenoble, F'rnnce, April 7-11, 2of4. Proceedings, volume 8413 of LNCS, pages 341-356. Springer, 2of4.

    Google Scholar 

  23. R. B. Doorenbos. Production Matching for Large Leaming Systems. PhD thesis, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Droola website: http://www.jboss.org/droola.

  25. Droola functional programming extensions website: https://eommurdty.jboss.org/wiki/FunctionaiProgrammingInDrools.

  26. D. Drusinsky. The temporal rover and the ATG rover. In SPIN Model Checking and Software Verijiootion, volume 1885 of LNCS, pages 323-330. Springer, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  27. D. Drusinsky. Modeling and Verijiootion using UML Statecharts. Elsevier, 2006. ISBN-13: 978-0-7506-7949-7, 400 pages.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Y. Falcone, J.-C. Fernandez, and L. Mounier. Runtime verification of safetyprogress properties. In Proc. of the 9th Int. Workshop on Runtime Verijication (RV'09), volume 5779 of LNCS, pages 40-59. Springer, 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Y. Falcone, J.-C. Fernandez, and L. Mounier. What can you verify and enforce at runtime? J Software Tools for Technology Transfer, 14(3):349-382, 2of2.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Y. Falcone, K. Havelund, and G. Reger. A tutorial on runtime verification. In M. Broy and D. Peled, editors, Summer School Marktoberdorf 2of2 – Engineering Dependable Software Systems, to appear . lOS Press, 2013.

    Google Scholar 

  31. C. Forgy. R.ete: A fast algorithm for the many pattern/many object pattern match problem. Artijiciallntelligence, 19:17–37, 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  32. M. Fusco. Hammurabi – a Scala rule engine. In Scala Days 2011, Stanford University, California, 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  33. R. Gerth, D. Peled, M. Y. Vardi, and P. Wolper. Simple on-th … fly automatie verification of linear temporallogic. fu P. Dembinski and M. Sredniawa, editors, In Protocol Specijication Testing and Verijication (PSTV), volume 38, pages 3–18. Chapman & Hall, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  34. J. Goubault-Larrecq and J. Olivain. A smell of ORCHIDS. In Proc. of the 8th Int. Workshop on Runtime Verijiootion (RV'08), volume 5289 of LNCS, pages 1-20, Budapest, Hungary, 2008. Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  35. A. Groce, K. Havelund, and M. H. Smith. From scripts to specifications: the evolution of a ßight software testing effort. In 92nd Int. Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE'10), Cape Town, South Ajrioo, ACM SIG, pages 129-138, 2of0.

    Google Scholar 

  36. S. Halle and R. Villemaire. Runtime enforcem.ent of web service message contracts with data. IEEE Transactions on Services Computing, 5(2):192-206, 2of2.

    Google Scholar 

  37. K. Havelund. Runtime verifieation of C programs. In Proc. of the 1st TestCom/FATES conference, volume 5047 of LNCS, 'Ibkyo, Japan, 2008. Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  38. K. Havelund. Data automata in Scala. In M. Leucker and J. Wang, editors, 8th International Symposium on Theoretiool Aspects of Software Engineering, TASE 2of.1" Changsha, China, September 1-3. Proceedings. IEEE Computer Society Press, 2of4.

    Google Scholar 

  39. K. Havelund. Monitoring with data automata. In T. Margaria and B. Steffen, editors, 6th International Symposium On Levemging Applications of Formal Methods, Verijication and Validation. Track: Statistical Model Ghecking, Past Present and Puture (organized by Kim Larsen and Axel Legay), Corfu, Greece, October 8-11. Proceedings, volume 8803 of LNCS, pages 254-273. Springer, 2of4.

    Google Scholar 

  40. K. Havelund. Rule-based runtime verification revisited. Software Tools for Tech nology Transfer (STTT), April 2of4. Published online.

    Google Scholar 

  41. K. Havelund and A. Goldberg. Verify your runs. In Verijied Software: Theories, Tools, Experiments, VSTTE 2005, pages 374-383, 2008.

    Google Scholar 

  42. K. Havelund and G. R.o§u. Eflieient monitoring of safety properties. Software Tools for Technology Transfer, 6(2):158–173, 2004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. K. Havelund and G. Rosu. Monitoring programs using rewriting. In 16th ASE conferenee, San Diego, CA , USA, pages 135-143, 20of.

    Google Scholar 

  44. G. J. Holzmann. The Spin Model Checker – Primer and Re/erence Manual. Addison-Wesley, 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Jess website: http://www.jessrules.comfjess.

  46. G. Kiczales, E. Hilsdale, J. Hugunin, M. Kersten, J. Palm, and W. G. Griswold. An overview of AspectJ. In J. L. Knudsen, editor, Proc. of the 15th European Con/erence on Object-Oriented Programming, volume 2072 of LNCS, pages 327- 353. Springer, 20of.

    Google Scholar 

  47. C. Lee, D. Jin, P. O. Meredith, and G. Ro§u. Towards categorizing and formalizing the JDK API. Tecbnical Report http://hdl.handle.net/2142/30006, Department of Computer Science, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, March 2of2.

  48. I. Lee, S. Kannan, M. Kim, O. Sokolsky, and M. Viswanathan. Runtime assurance based on formal specifications. In PDPTA, pages 279–287. CSREA Press, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  49. M. Leucker and C. Schallhart. Abrief account of runtime verification. Journal of Logic and Algebraic Programming, 78(5):293-303, may /june 2008.

    Google Scholar 

  50. D. Luckham, editor. The Power of Events: An Introduction to Gomplex Event Processing in Distributed Enterprise Systems. Addison-Wesley, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  51. P. Meredith, D. Jin, D. Griffith, F. Chen, and G. Ro§u. An overview of the MOP runtime verification framework. Software Tools /or Technology Trans/er (STTT), 14(3):249-289, 2of2.

    Google Scholar 

  52. A. Pnueli. The temporallogic of programs. In 18th Annual Symposium on Foun dations of Computer Science, pages 46–57. IEEE Computer Society, 1977.

    Google Scholar 

  53. G. Reger. Automata Based Monitoring and Mining of Execution 'lTaces . PhD thesis, University of Manchester, 2014.

    Google Scholar 

  54. G. Reger, H. C. Cruz, and D. Rydeheard. MARQ: monitoring at runtime with QEA. In Proceedings of the 21st International Con/erence on Tools and Algorithms /or the Constmction and Analysis of Systems (TACAS'15), 2o15.

    Google Scholar 

  55. Rooscaloo website: http://code.google.com/p/rooscaloo.

  56. M. Smith, G. Holzmann, and K. Ettessami. Events and constraints: a graphical editor for capturing logic properties of programs. In 5th [nt Sym . on Requirements Engineering, Toronto, Canada , volume 55(2), pages 14-22. 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  57. V. Stolz. Temporal assertians with parameterized propositions. In Proc. of the 7th Int. Workshop on Runtime Verijication (RV'07), volume 4839 of LNCS, pages 176-187, Vancouver, Canada, 2007. Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  58. V. Stolz and E. Bodden. Temporal assertians using AspectJ. In Proc. of the 5 th Int. Workshop on Runtime Verijication (RV'05), volume 144(4) of ENTCS, pages 109–124. Elsevier, 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  59. V. Stolz and F. Huch. Runtime verification of concurrent Haskell programs. In Proc. of the 4th Int. Workshop on Runtime Verijication (RV'04), volume 113 of ENTCS, pages 2of-216. Elsevier, 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  60. M. Vardi. From Church and Prior to PSL. In O. Grumberg and H. Veith, editors, 25 Years of Model Checking , volume 5000 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science , pages 150–171. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2008.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. California Inst. of Technology, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, USA

    Klaus Havelund & Giles Reger

Authors
  1. Klaus Havelund
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Giles Reger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Klaus Havelund .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of Bremen, Bremen, Germany

    Rolf Drechsler

  2. University of Bremen, Bremen, Germany

    Ulrich Kühne

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Havelund, K., Reger, G. (2015). Specification of Parametric Monitors. In: Drechsler, R., Kühne, U. (eds) Formal Modeling and Verification of Cyber-Physical Systems. Springer Vieweg, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-09994-7_6

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-09994-7_6

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer Vieweg, Wiesbaden

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-658-09993-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-658-09994-7

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation