Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Synthesis and Quantitative Verification of Tradeoff Spaces for Families of Software Systems

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Software Architecture (ECSA 2017)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNPSE,volume 10475))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

Designing software subject to uncertainty in a way that provides guarantees about its run-time behavior while achieving an acceptable balance between multiple extra-functional properties is still an open problem. Tools and techniques to inform engineers about poorly-understood design spaces in the presence of uncertainty are needed. To tackle this problem, we propose an approach that combines synthesis of spaces of system design alternatives from formal specifications of architectural styles with probabilistic formal verification. The main contribution of this paper is a formal framework for specification-driven synthesis and analysis of design spaces that provides formal guarantees about the correctness of system behaviors and satisfies quantitative properties (e.g., defined over system qualities) subject to uncertainty, which is factored as a first-class entity.

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

Access this chapter

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 EPUB and 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

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Although the notion of behavioral type is more general [21], we employ the term to refer to an abstract state machine specification capturing the behavior of an architectural abstract type.

  2. 2.

    The semantics of behavioral types are inspired by discrete-time Markov chains, so the original probability of the transition prob(t) is divided equally among transition instances.

References

  1. Aleti, A., Bjornander, S., Grunske, L., Meedeniya, I.: Archeopterix: an extendable tool for architecture optimization of AADL models. In: ICSE Workshop on Model-Based Methodologies for Pervasive and Embedded Software, MOMPES 2009 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bagheri, H., Malek, S.: Titanium: efficient analysis of evolving alloy specifications. In: Proceedings of the 24th Symposium on Foundations of Software Engineering, FSE 2016 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bagheri, H., Sullivan, K.J.: Model-driven synthesis of formally precise, stylized software architectures. Formal Asp. Comput. 28(3), 441–467 (2016)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  4. Bagheri, H., Tang, C., Sullivan, K.J.: Trademaker: automated dynamic analysis of synthesized tradespaces. In: 36th International Conference on Software Engineering. ACM (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Bondarev, E., Chaudron, M.R.V., de Kock, E.A.: Exploring performance trade-offs of a jpeg decoder using the deepcompass framework. In: 6th WS on Software and Performance, WOSP. ACM (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Cámara, J., Garlan, D., Schmerl, B., Pandey, A.: Optimal planning for architecture-based self-adaptation via model checking of stochastic games. In: 30th ACM Symposium on Applied Computing (SAC) (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Dwivedi, V., Garlan, D., Pfeffer, J., Schmerl, B.: Model-based assistance for making time/fidelity trade-offs in component compositions. In: 11th International Conference on Information Technology: New Generations, ITNG 2014. IEEE CS (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Garlan, D.: Software engineering in an uncertain world. In: Proceedings of the Workshop on Future of Software Engineering Research, FoSER (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Garlan, D., Monroe, R.T., Wile, D.: Acme: an architecture description interchange language. In: Proceedings of the 1997 Conference of the Centre for Advanced Studies on Collaborative Research, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, 10–13 November 1997. IBM (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Hahn, E.M., Hermanns, H., Wachter, B., Zhang, L.: PARAM: a model checker for parametric markov models. In: Touili, T., Cook, B., Jackson, P. (eds.) CAV 2010. LNCS, vol. 6174, pp. 660–664. Springer, Heidelberg (2010). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-14295-6_56

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  11. Jackson, D.: Alloy: a lightweight object modelling notation. ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. 11(2), 256–290 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Johnson, K., Calinescu, R., Kikuchi, S.: An incremental verification framework for component-based software systems. In: Proceedings of the 16th International ACM SIGSOFT Symposium on Component-based Software Engineering, CBSE 2013. ACM (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Kang, E., Milicevic, A., Jackson, D.: Multi-representational security analysis. In: Proceedings of the 24th Symposium on Foundations of Software Engineering, FSE (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Kim, J., Garlan, D.: Analyzing architectural styles. J. Syst. Softw. 83(7), 1216–1235 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Kwiatkowska, M., Norman, G., Parker, D.: Stochastic model checking. In: Bernardo, M., Hillston, J. (eds.) SFM 2007. LNCS, vol. 4486, pp. 220–270. Springer, Heidelberg (2007). doi:10.1007/978-3-540-72522-0_6

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  16. Kwiatkowska, M., Norman, G., Parker, D.: PRISM 4.0: verification of probabilistic real-time systems. In: Gopalakrishnan, G., Qadeer, S. (eds.) CAV 2011. LNCS, vol. 6806, pp. 585–591. Springer, Heidelberg (2011). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-22110-1_47

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  17. MacCalman, A.D., Beery, P.T., Paulo, E.P.: A systems design exploration approach that illuminates tradespaces using statistical experimental designs. Syst. Eng. 19(5), 409–421 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Mahdavi-Hezavehi, S., Galster, M., Avgeriou, P.: Variability in quality attributes of service-based software systems: a systematic literature review. Inf. Softw. Technol. 55(2), 320–343 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Maoz, S., Ringert, J.O., Rumpe, B.: Synthesis of component and connector models from crosscutting structural views. In: European Software Engineering Conference and Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering, ESEC/FSE 2013. ACM (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Martens, A., Koziolek, H., Becker, S., Reussner, R.: Automatically improve software architecture models for performance, reliability, and cost using evolutionary algorithms. In: International Conference on Performance Engineering, WOSP/SIPEW. ACM (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Maydl, W., Grunske, L.: Behavioral types for embedded software – a survey. In: Atkinson, C., Bunse, C., Gross, H.-G., Peper, C. (eds.) Component-Based Software Development for Embedded Systems. LNCS, vol. 3778, pp. 82–106. Springer, Heidelberg (2005). doi:10.1007/11591962_5

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  22. Quigley, M., Conley, K., Gerkey, B.P., Faust, J., Foote, T., Leibs, J., Wheeler, R., Ng, A.Y.: Ros: an open-source robot operating system. In: ICRA WS on Open Source Software (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Shaw, M., Garlan, D.: Software Architecture - Perspectives on an Emerging Discipline. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River (1996)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  24. Warmer, J., Kleppe, A.: The Object Constraint Language: Getting Your Models Ready for MDA. Addison-Wesley, Reading (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Weyns, D., Calinescu, R.: Tele assistance: a self-adaptive service-based system exemplar. In: 10th IEEE/ACM International Symposium on Software Engineering for Adaptive and Self-Managing Systems, SEAMS 2015. IEEE Computer Society (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Wong, S., Sun, J., Warren, I., Sun, J.: A scalable approach to multi-style architectural modeling and verification. In: 13th IEEE International Conference on Engineering of Complex Computer Systems (ICECCS 2008) (2008)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This material is based on research sponsored by AFRL and DARPA under agreement number FA8750-16-2-0042. The U.S. Government is authorized to reproduce and distribute reprints for Governmental purposes notwithstanding any copyright notation thereon. The views and conclusions contained herein are those of the authors and should not be interpreted as necessarily representing the official policies or endorsements, either expressed or implied, of the AFRL, DARPA or the U.S. Government.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, 15213, USA

    Javier Cámara, David Garlan & Bradley Schmerl

Authors
  1. Javier Cámara
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. David Garlan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Bradley Schmerl
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Javier Cámara .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Universidade de Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal

    Antónia Lopes

  2. University of Kent, Canterbury, United Kingdom

    Rogério de Lemos

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this paper

Cite this paper

Cámara, J., Garlan, D., Schmerl, B. (2017). Synthesis and Quantitative Verification of Tradeoff Spaces for Families of Software Systems. In: Lopes, A., de Lemos, R. (eds) Software Architecture. ECSA 2017. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 10475. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-65831-5_1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-65831-5_1

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-65830-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-65831-5

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation