Abstract
Design and verification of modern systems requires diverse models, which often come from a variety of disciplines, and it is challenging to manage their heterogeneity – especially in the case of cyber-physical systems. To check consistency between models, recent approaches map these models to flexible static abstractions, such as architectural views. This model integration approach, however, comes at a cost of reduced expressiveness because complex behaviors of the models are abstracted away. As a result, it may be impossible to automatically verify important behavioral properties across multiple models, leaving systems vulnerable to subtle bugs. This paper introduces the Integration Property Language (IPL) that improves integration expressiveness using modular verification of properties that depend on detailed behavioral semantics while retaining the ability for static system-wide reasoning. We prove that the verification algorithm is sound and analyze its termination conditions. Furthermore, we perform a case study on a mobile robot to demonstrate IPL is practically useful and evaluate its performance.
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
Notes
- 1.
The planner’s own power consumption is not modeled, contributing to its inaccuracy.
- 2.
As we detail later, we use \(\overline{\text {overlines}}\) to mark static entities (not changing over time), and \(\underline{\text {underlines}}\) to mark behavioral entities (changing over time in model states).
- 3.
Properties are only applicable to architectural elements, references to which can be accessed in a variable or a function. We assume all expressions are well-typed.
References
Mosterman, P.J., Zander, J.: Cyber-physical systems challenges: a needs analysis for collaborating embedded software systems. Softw. Syst. Model. 15(1), 5–16 (2016)
Fitzgerald, J., Larsen, P.G., Pierce, K., Verhoef, M., Wolff, S.: Collaborative modelling and co-simulation in the development of dependable embedded systems. In: Méry, D., Merz, S. (eds.) IFM 2010. LNCS, vol. 6396, pp. 12–26. Springer, Heidelberg (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-16265-7_2
Valukas, A.: Report to board of directors of general motors company regarding ignition switch recalls. Jenner & Block, Technical report (2014)
Sztipanovits, J., Koutsoukos, X., Karsai, G., Kottenstette, N., Antsaklis, P., Gupta, V., Goodwine, B., Baras, J., Wang, S.: Toward a science of cyber-physical system integration. In: Proceedings of the IEEE (2011)
Alur, R.: Principles of Cyber-Physical Systems. The MIT Press, Cambridge (2015)
Dijkman, R.M.: Consistency in multi-viewpoint architectural design. Ph.D. thesis, Telematica Instituut, Enschede, The Netherlands (2006)
Maoz, S., Ringert, J.O., Rumpe, B.: Synthesis of component and connector models from crosscutting structural views. In: Proceedings of the 2013 9th Joint Meeting on Foundations of Software Engineering, ESEC/FSE 2013, New York, NY, USA, pp. 444–454. ACM (2013)
Reineke, J., Tripakis, S.: Basic problems in multi-view modeling. In: Ábrahám, E., Havelund, K. (eds.) TACAS 2014. LNCS, vol. 8413, pp. 217–232. Springer, Heidelberg (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-54862-8_15
Bhave, A.: Multi-view consistency in architectures for cyber-physical systems. Ph.D. thesis, Carnegie Mellon University, December 2011
Howard, R.A.: Dynamic Programming and Markov Processes. Technology Press of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge (1960)
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). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-72522-0_6
Bhave, A., Krogh, B., Garlan, D., Schmerl, B.: View consistency in architectures for cyber-physical systems. In: IEEE/ACM International Conference on Cyber-Physical Systems (ICCPS) (2011)
Nuseibeh, B., Kramer, J., Finkelstein, A.: A framework for expressing the relationships between multiple views in requirements specification. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 20(10), 760–773 (1994)
Egyed, A.F.: Heterogeneous view integration and its automation. Ph.D. thesis, University of Southern California (2000)
Hoare, C.A.R.: Communicating sequential processes. Commun. ACM 21(8), 666–677 (1978)
Smith, G.: The Object-Z Specification Language. Advances in Formal Methods, vol. 1. Springer, New York (2000). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-5265-9
Abrial, J.R.: Modeling in Event-B: System and Software Engineering, 1st edn. Cambridge University Press, New York (2010)
Karsai, G., Sztipanovits, J.: Model-integrated development of cyber-physical systems. In: Brinkschulte, U., Givargis, T., Russo, S. (eds.) SEUS 2008. LNCS, vol. 5287, pp. 46–54. Springer, Heidelberg (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-87785-1_5
Ruchkin, I.: Integration beyond components and models: research challenges and directions. In: Proceedings of the Third Workshop on Architecture Centric Virtual Integration (ACVI), Venice, Italy, pp. 8–11 (2016)
Kruchten, P.: The 4+1 view model of architecture. IEEE Softw. 12, 42–50 (1995)
Rajhans, A., Bhave, A., Loos, S., Krogh, B., Platzer, A., Garlan, D.: Using parameters in architectural views to support heterogeneous design and verification. In: Proceedings of the 50th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control and European Control Conference (CDC) (2011)
Marinescu, R.: Model-driven analysis and verification of automotive embedded systems. Ph.D. thesis, Maladaren University (2016)
Vanherpen, K., Denil, J., David, I., De Meulenaere, P., Mosterman, P.J., Torngren, M., Qamar, A., Vangheluwe, H.: Ontological reasoning for consistency in the design of cyber-physical systems, pp. 1–8. IEEE, April 2016
Torngren, M., Qamar, A., Biehl, M., Loiret, F., El-khoury, J.: Integrating viewpoints in the development of mechatronic products. Mechatronics 24, 745–762 (2013)
Rajhans, A., Krogh, B.H.: Heterogeneous verification of cyber-physical systems using behavior relations. In: Proceedings of the 15th ACM Conference on Hybrid Systems: Computation and Control (HSCC), New York, NY, USA, pp. 35–44. ACM (2012)
Lee, E.A., Neuendorffer, S., Zhou, G.: System Design, Modeling, and Simulation using Ptolemy II. Ptolemy.org, Berkeley (2014)
Combemale, B., Deantoni, J., Baudry, B., France, R., Jezequel, J.M., Gray, J.: Globalizing modeling languages. Computer 47(6), 68–71 (2014)
Sztipanovits, J., Bapty, T., Neema, S., Howard, L., Jackson, E.: OpenMETA: a model- and component-based design tool chain for cyber-physical systems. In: Bensalem, S., Lakhneck, Y., Legay, A. (eds.) ETAPS 2014. LNCS, vol. 8415, pp. 235–248. Springer, Heidelberg (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-54848-2_16
Simko, G., Lindecker, D., Levendovszky, T., Neema, S., Sztipanovits, J.: Specification of cyber-physical components with formal semantics – integration and composition. In: Moreira, A., Schätz, B., Gray, J., Vallecillo, A., Clarke, P. (eds.) MODELS 2013. LNCS, vol. 8107, pp. 471–487. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-41533-3_29
Ruchkin, I., de Niz, D., Chaki, S., Garlan, D.: Contract-based integration of cyber-physical analyses. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Embedded Software (EMSOFT), New York, NY, USA, pp. 23:1–23:10. ACM (2014)
Da Costa, A., Laroussinie, F., Markey, N.: Quantified CTL: expressiveness and model checking. In: Koutny, M., Ulidowski, I. (eds.) CONCUR 2012. LNCS, vol. 7454, pp. 177–192. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-32940-1_14
Borger, E., Gradel, E., Gurevich, Y.: The Classical Decision Problem. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)
Pnueli, A.: The temporal logic of programs. In: 18th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, pp. 46–57, October 1977
Manna, Z., Pnueli, A.: The Temporal Logic of Reactive and Concurrent Systems. Springer, Heidelberg (1992). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-0931-7
Ghilardi, S., Nicolini, E., Ranise, S., Zucchelli, D.: Combination methods for satisfiability and model-checking of infinite-state systems. In: Pfenning, F. (ed.) CADE 2007. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 4603, pp. 362–378. Springer, Heidelberg (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-73595-3_25
Cimatti, A., Roveri, M., Susi, A., Tonetta, S.: Formalizing requirements with object models and temporal constraints. Softw. Syst. Model. 10(2), 147–160 (2009)
Gabbay, D.M.: Fibred semantics and the weaving of logics part 1: modal and intuitionistic logics. J. Symb. Log. 61(4), 1057–1120 (1996)
Konur, S., Fisher, M., Schewe, S.: Combined model checking for temporal, probabilistic, and real-time logics. Theor. Comput. Sci. 503, 61–88 (2013)
Nieuwenhuis, R., Oliveras, A., Tinelli, C.: Solving SAT and SAT modulo theories: from an abstract Davis-Putnam-Logemann-Loveland procedure to DPLL(T). J. ACM 53(6), 937–977 (2006)
Clarke, E.M., Emerson, E.A., Sistla, A.P.: Automatic verification of finite-state concurrent systems using temporal logic specifications. ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst. 8(2), 244–263 (1986)
Nelson, G., Oppen, D.C.: Simplification by cooperating decision procedures. ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst. 1(2), 245–257 (1979)
de Moura, L., Bjørner, N.: Z3: an efficient SMT solver. In: Ramakrishnan, C.R., Rehof, J. (eds.) TACAS 2008. LNCS, vol. 4963, pp. 337–340. Springer, Heidelberg (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-78800-3_24
Baier, C., Katoen, J.P.: Principles of Model Checking. The MIT Press, Cambridge (2008)
Clements, P., Bachmann, F., Bass, L., Garlan, D., Ivers, J., Little, R., Merson, P., Nord, R., Stafford, J.: Documenting Software Architectures: Views and Beyond, 2nd edn. Addison-Wesley Professional, Boston (2010)
Gurfinkel, A., Shoham, S., Meshman, Y.: SMT-based Verification of Parameterized Systems. In: Proceedings of the 2016 24th ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Foundations of Software Engineering, FSE 2016, New York, NY, USA, pp. 338–348. ACM (2016)
Kroening, D., Strichman, O.: Decision Procedures - An Algorithmic Point of View. Texts in Theoretical Computer Science. An EATCS Series. Springer, Heidelberg (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-74105-3
Ruchkin, I., Sunshine, J., Iraci, G., Schmerl, B., Garlan, D.: Appendix for IPL: an integration property language for multi-model cyber-physical systems (2018). http://acme.able.cs.cmu.edu/pubs/uploads/pdf/fm2018-appendix.pdf
Yin, R.K.: Case Study Research: Design and Methods, 4th edn. Sage Publications Inc., Thousand Oaks (2008)
Quigley, M., Gerkey, B., Smart, W.D.: Programming Robots with ROS: A Practical Introduction to the Robot Operating System, 1st edn. O’Reilly Media, Sebastopol (2015)
Feiler, P.H., Gluch, D.P., Hudak, J.J.: The architecture analysis & design language (AADL): an introduction. Technical report CMU/SEI-2006-TN-011, Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University (2006)
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
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature
About this paper
Cite this paper
Ruchkin, I., Sunshine, J., Iraci, G., Schmerl, B., Garlan, D. (2018). IPL: An Integration Property Language for Multi-model Cyber-physical Systems. In: Havelund, K., Peleska, J., Roscoe, B., de Vink, E. (eds) Formal Methods. FM 2018. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 10951. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-95582-7_10
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-95582-7_10
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-95581-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-95582-7
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)