Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A generic conceptual framework based on formal representation for the design of continuous/discrete co-simulation tools

  • Published:
Design Automation for Embedded Systems Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Modern systems integrate components specific to different application domains. Frequently, these systems combine continuous and discrete sub-systems and therefore their design involves overcoming specific global modeling and validation challenges. In order to generate global simulation models of heterogeneous systems the designers need efficient tools for systems’ validation. Therefore, a new type of designers emerged, the designers of co-simulation tools. Their main objective is to provide coherent tools for the co-simulation models’ designers. Given the diversity of abstractions, languages and simulation tools, the design of co-simulation tools may be costly and time consuming. Thus, the key for the improvement of the validation process is to define a model-based generic approach before the implementation of these tools. This requires new skills on formalism and formal verification domain. This paper proposes a generic conceptual framework based on formal representation of the co-simulation interfaces for co-simulation tools design. The framework can be used to provide rigorous global formal co-simulation models for continuous/discrete heterogeneous systems. It allows the definition for implementation of the co-simulation interfaces starting with their formal definitions that are gradually refined and verified. The global formal model also provides the rules for the implementation and the generation of the interfaces. The framework is the skeleton on which the designers can build accurate tools for global execution models of continuous/discrete heterogeneous systems. The approach was used to design a co-simulation tool that is presented in this paper.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17
Fig. 18

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The product automaton is defined as multiple automata in a system, incorporated into a single one. The product automaton creates a new state for all possible states of each automaton [30].

References

  1. ITRS (2010) http://public.itrs.net/

  2. Nicolescu G, Sungjoo Y, Bouchhima A, Jerraya AA (2002) Validation in a component-based design flow for multicore SoCs. In: Proceedings of the 15th ISSS (ISSS’02) Kyoto

  3. Romitti S, Santoni C, Francois P (1997) A design methodology and a prototyping tool dedicated to adaptive interface generation. In: Proceedings of the 3rd ERCIM workshop on user interfaces for all

  4. Cadence http://www.cadence.com

  5. Mentor Graphics. Seamless CVE. http://www.mentorg.com/seamless

  6. Frey P, O’Riordan D (2000) Verilog-AMS: mixed-signal simulation and cross domain connect modules. In: Proceedings of the BMAS’00, Orlando

  7. IEEE Standard VHDL AMS Extensions, IEEE Std 1076.1-1999

  8. Marion C, Fanucci L, Iozze F, Forliti M, Rocchi A, Giambastiani A, De Marinis M (2005) VHDL-AMS modelling and system verification flow. Trans Energy Convers 28:189–196

    Google Scholar 

  9. Patel DH, Shukla SK (2004) SystemC Kernel-extensions for heterogeneous system modeling. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  10. Vachoux A, Grimm C, Einwich K (2003) Analog and mixed signal modeling with SystemC-AMS. In: Proceedings of the international symposium on circuits and systems

  11. Verilog AMS http://www.vhdl.org/verilog-ams/htmlpages/public-docs/lrm/2.3.1/VAMS-LRM-2-3-1.pdf

  12. Ptolemy http://ptolemy.eecs.berkeley.edu/

  13. Lee EA, Zheng H (2005) Operational semantics of hybrid systems. In: 8th international workshop: computation and control, HSCC, pp 25–53

  14. Lee EA (2010) Disciplined heterogeneous modeling. In: Proceedings of the ACM/IEEE 13th international conference on model driven engineering, languages, and systems (MODELS). Springer, New York, pp 273–287

  15. Functional Mock-up Intergace https://www.fmi-standard.org/

  16. Lee EA, Sangiovanni-Vincentelli A (1996) Comparing models of computation. In: IEEE proceedings of the international conferenceon computer aided design, pp 234–241

  17. Jantsch A, Sander I (2005) Models of computation and languages for embedded system design. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht

    Google Scholar 

  18. Jantsch A (2003) Modeling embedded systems and SoCs: concurrency and time in models of computation (systems on silicon). Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, San Francisco

    Google Scholar 

  19. Fitzgerald J, Larsen PG, Verhoef M (eds) (2014) Collaborative design for embedded systems: co-modelling and co-simulation. Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  20. Zeigler BP, Praehofer H, Kim TG (2000) Modeling and simulation - integrating discrete event and continuous complex dynamic systems. Academic Press, San Diego

  21. D’Abreu M, Wainer G (2005) M/CD++: modeling continuous systems using Modelica and DEVS. In: Proceedings of the IEEE international symposium of MASCOTS’05

  22. Kim YJ, Kim JH, Kim TG (2003) Heterogeneous simulation framework using DEVS-BUS. Simul Soci Model Simul Int 79(1):3–18

    Google Scholar 

  23. SH Attarzadeh Niaki SH, Jakobsen MK, Sulonen T, Sander I (2012) Formal heterogeneous system modeling with SystemC. In: Forum on specification and design languages (FDL 2012). Vienna, pp 160–167

  24. Herrera F, Villar E, Grimm C, Damm M, Haase J (2008) Heterogeneous specification with HetSC and systemC-AMS: widening the support of MoCs in SystemC. In: Embedded systems specification and design languagtes. Springer, New York

  25. Haase J, Damm M, Grimm C, Herrera F, Villar E (2008) Bridging MoCs in SystemC specifications of heterogeneous systems. EURASIP J Embed Syst 2008:371768

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Ghasemi HR (2005) An effective VHDL-AMS simulation algorithm with event. In: International conference on VLSI design

  27. Bouchhima F, Nicolescu G, Aboulhamid EM, Abdi M (2007) Generic discrete-continuous simulation model for accurate validation in heterogeneous systems design. Microelectr J 38:805–815

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Alur R, Dill D (1990) Automata for modeling real-time systems. In: Proceedings of the 17-th International CALP, vol 443, pp 322–335

  29. Bengtsson J, Yi W (1996) Timed automata: semantics, algorithms and tools. Uppsala University, Uppsala

    Google Scholar 

  30. Behrmann GF, Behrmann G, David A, Larsen K (2005) A tutorial on UPPAAL. In: Real-time systems symposium, Miami

  31. Behrmann G, Fehnker A, Hune T, Larsen K, Pettersson P, Romijn J, Vaandrager F (2001) Minimum-cost reachability for priced timed automata. In: Hybrid systems: computation and control, HSCC 2001

  32. Cassandras CG, Lafortune S (2007) Introduction to discrete event systems. Springer, New York

    Google Scholar 

  33. Cellier FE (1979) Combined continuous/discrete system simulation languages: usefulness, experiences and future development. In: Proceediings of methodology in systems modelling and simulation conference, Rehovot, pp 201–220

  34. Wang F (2004) Formal verification of timed systems: a survey and perspective. In: Proceedings of the IEEE, vol 92, pp 1283–1305

  35. Chane F, Giambiasi N, Paillet J-L (2004) From DEVS model to timed automata. In: Proceedings of the international conference on software engineering research and practice, SERP’04

  36. Monin J-F (2003) Understanding formal methods. Springer, New York

  37. Edwards S, Lavagno L, Lee EA, Sangiovanni-Vincentelli A (1997) Design of embedded systems: formal models, validation, and synthesis. In: Proceedings of the IEEE, vol 85, pp 366–390

  38. Claudius Ptolemaeus (2013) System design, modeling, and simulation using Ptolemy II. Ptolemy.org

  39. Cardelli L (1984) A semantics of multiple inheritance. Semantics of data types (International Symposium Sophia-Antipolis, June 27–29, 1984). Lecture Notes in Computer Science

  40. MathWorks, MATLAB/Simulink. http://www.mathworks.com

  41. SystemC LRM http://www.systemc.org

  42. Gheorghe L, Bouchhima F, Nicolescu G, Boucheneb H (2008) Semantics for model-based validation of continuous/discrete systems. In: Design automation and test in Europe (DATE’08)

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Ecole Polytechnique de Montréal, Montreal, Canada

    Luiza Gheorghe Iugan, Hanifa Boucheneb & Gabriela Nicolescu

Authors
  1. Luiza Gheorghe Iugan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Hanifa Boucheneb
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Gabriela Nicolescu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Luiza Gheorghe Iugan.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Iugan, L.G., Boucheneb, H. & Nicolescu, G. A generic conceptual framework based on formal representation for the design of continuous/discrete co-simulation tools. Des Autom Embed Syst 19, 243–275 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10617-014-9156-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10617-014-9156-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation