Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Probabilistic contracts: a compositional reasoning methodology for the design of systems with stochastic and/or non-deterministic aspects

  • Published:
Formal Methods in System Design Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A contract allows to distinguish hypotheses made on a system (the guarantees) from those made on its environment (the assumptions). In this paper, we focus on models of Assume/Guarantee contracts for (stochastic) systems. We consider contracts capable of capturing reliability and availability properties of such systems. We also show that classical notions of Satisfaction and Refinement can be checked by effective methods thanks to a reduction to classical verification problems. Finally, theorems supporting compositional reasoning and enabling the scalable analysis of complex systems are also studied.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Alur R, Henzinger TA, Kupferman O (2002) Alternating-time temporal logic. J ACM 49(5):672–713

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  2. Andova S (1999) Process algebra with probabilistic choice. In: ARTS. LNCS, vol 1601. Springer, Berlin, pp 111–129

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bensalem S, Bozga M, Nguyen T, Sifakis J (2009) D-finder: A tool for compositional deadlock detection and verification. In: CAV. Lecture notes in computer science, vol 5643. Springer, Berlin, pp 614–619

    Google Scholar 

  4. Benveniste A, Caillaud B, Ferrari A, Mangeruca L, Passerone R, Sofronis C (2008) Multiple viewpoint contract-based specification and design. In: FMCO’07. LNCS, vol 5382. Springer, Berlin, pp 200–225

    Google Scholar 

  5. Benveniste A, Caillaud B, Passerone R (2007) A generic model of contracts for embedded systems. CoRR, abs/0706.1456

  6. Bip—incremental component-based construction of real-time systems. http://www-verimag.imag.fr/async/bip.php

  7. Bertrand N, Legay A, Pinchinat S, Raclet J-B (2009) A compositional approach on modal specifications for timed systems. In: ICFEM. LNCS, vol 679–697. Springer, Berlin, p 5885

    Google Scholar 

  8. Bertrand N, Pinchinat S, Raclet J-B (2009) Refinement and consistency of timed modal specifications. In: Proc of the 3rd international conference on language and automata theory and applications (LATA’09), Tarragona, Spain, 2009. LNCS, vol 5457. Springer, Berlin, pp 152–163

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  9. Bustan D, Rubin S, Vardi MY (2004) Verifying omega-regular properties of Markov chains. In: CAV. LNCS, vol 3114. Springer, Berlin, pp 189–201

    Google Scholar 

  10. Bertsekas DP, Tsitsiklis JN (2002) Introduction to probability. Scientific, Athena

    Google Scholar 

  11. Bertsekas DP, Tsitsiklis JN (2008) Introduction to probability. MIT Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  12. Büchi JR (1960) Weak second-order arithmetic and finite automata. Z Math Log Grundl Math 6:66–92

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. Cobleigh JM, Avrunin GS, Clarke LA (2008) Breaking up is hard to do: An evaluation of automated assume-guarantee reasoning. ACM Trans Softw Eng Methodol 17(2):1–52

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Ciesinski F, Baier C (2006) Liquor: A tool for qualitative and quantitative linear time analysis of reactive systems. In: QEST. IEEE Computer Society, New York, pp 131–132

    Google Scholar 

  15. Clarke EM, Donzé A, Legay A (2010) On simulation-based probabilistic model checking of mixed-analog circuits. Formal Methods Syst Des 36(2):97–113

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  16. Caillaud B, Delahaye B, Larsen KG, Legay A, Pedersen ML, Wasowski A (2010) Compositional design methodology with constraint Markov chains. In: QEST. IEEE, New York

    Google Scholar 

  17. Clarke EM, Emerson EA (1981) Design and synthesis of synchronization skeletons using branching-time temporal logic. In: Logic of programs. LNCS, vol 131. Springer, Berlin, pp 52–71

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  18. Clarke E, Grumberg O, Peled D (1999) Model checking. MIT Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  19. Cox DR, Miller HD (1965) The theory of stochastic processes / d r cox, h d miller

  20. Combest http://www.combest.eu.com

  21. de Alfaro L (1997) Formal verification of probabilistic systems. PhD thesis, Stanford University

  22. de Alfaro L, da Silva LD, Faella M, Legay A, Roy P, Sorea M (2005) Sociable interfaces. In: FroCos. LNCS, vol 3717. Springer, Berlin, pp 81–105

    Google Scholar 

  23. de Alfaro L, Faella M, Henzinger TA, Majumdar R, Stoelinga M (2004) Model checking discounted temporal properties. In: TACAS. LNCS, vol 2988. Springer, Berlin, pp 77–92

    Google Scholar 

  24. de Alfaro L, Henzinger TA (2001) Interface automata. In: FSE. ACM Press, New York, pp 109–120

    Google Scholar 

  25. de Alfaro L, Henzinger TA (2005) Interface-based design. In: Engineering theories of software-intensive systems. NATO science series: mathematics, physics, and chemistry, vol 195. Springer, Berlin, pp 83–104

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  26. de Alfaro L, Henzinger TA, Jhala R (2001) Compositional methods for probabilistic systems. In: CONCUR. LNCS, vol 2154. Springer, Berlin, pp 351–365

    Google Scholar 

  27. Eisner C, Fisman D (2006) A practical introduction to PSL. Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  28. Feuillade G, Pinchinat S (2007) Modal specifications for the control theory of discrete-event systems. Discrete Event Dyn Syst 17(2):181–205

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  29. Fenech S, Pace GJ, Schneider G (2009) Automatic conflict detection on contracts. In: ICTAC. Lecture notes in computer science, vol 5684. Springer, Berlin, pp 200–214

    Google Scholar 

  30. Fenech S, Pace GJ, Schneider G (2009) Clan: A tool for contract analysis and conflict discovery. In: ATVA. LNCS, vol 5799. Springer, Berlin, pp 90–96

    Google Scholar 

  31. Finkel A, Willems B, Wolper P (1997) A direct symbolic approach to model checking pushdown systems. In: ENTCS, vol 9

    Google Scholar 

  32. Glouche Y, Le Guernic P, Talpin J-P, Gautier T (2009) A boolean algebra of contracts for logical assume-guarantee reasoning. CoRR, inria-00292870

  33. Goessler G, Raclet J-B (2009) Modal contracts for component-based design. In: SEFM. IEEE Computer Society, New York, pp 295–303

    Google Scholar 

  34. Hermanns H (2002) Interactive Markov chains: the quest for quantified quality. LNCS, vol 2428. Springer, Berlin

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  35. Hansson H, Jonsson B (1994) A logic for reasoning about time and reliability. Formal Asp Comput 6(5):512–535

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  36. Kwiatkowska MZ, Norman G, Parker D, Qu H (2010) Assume-guarantee verification for probabilistic systems. In: TACAS. LNCS, vol 6015. Springer, Berlin, pp 23–37

    Google Scholar 

  37. Larsen KG (1989) Modal specifications. In: Automatic verification methods for finite state systems. Lecture notes in computer science, vol 407. Springer, Berlin, pp 232–246

    Google Scholar 

  38. López N, Núñez M (2004) An overview of probabilistic process algebras and their equivalences. In: Validation of stochastic systems. LNCS, vol 2925. Springer, Berlin, pp 89–123

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  39. Lynch N, Tuttle MR (1989) An introduction to Input/Output automata. CWI Q 2(3):219–246

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  40. Milner R (1989) Communication and concurrency. Prentice Hall, New York

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  41. Pavese E, Braberman VA, Uchitel S (2009) Probabilistic environments in the quantitative analysis of (non-probabilistic) behaviour models. In: Proceedings of the 7th joint meeting of the European software engineering conference and the ACM SIGSOFT international symposium on foundations of software engineering, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, August 24–28, 2009. ACM Press, New York, pp 335–344

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  42. Pace GJ, Schneider G (2009) Challenges in the specification of full contracts. In: IFM. Lecture notes in computer science, vol 5423. Springer, Berlin, pp 292–306

    Google Scholar 

  43. Pnueli A (1977) The temporal logic of programs. In: FOCS. IEEE, New York, pp 46–57

    Google Scholar 

  44. Quinton S, Graf S (2008) Contract-based verification of hierarchical systems of components. In: SEFM. IEEE Computer Society, New York, pp 377–381

    Google Scholar 

  45. Raclet J-B (2007) Residual for component specifications. In: FACS

    Google Scholar 

  46. Rutten JJMM, Kwiatkowska M, Norman G, Parker D (2004) Mathematical techniques for analyzing concurrent and probabilistic systems, vol 23. American Mathematical Society, Providence

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  47. Rabin MO, Scott D (1959) Finite automata and their decision problems. IBM J Res Dev 115–125

  48. Speeds. http://www.speeds.eu.com

  49. The spin tool (spin). Available at http://spinroot.com/spin/whatispin.html

  50. Sen K, Viswanathan M, Agha G (2005) On statistical model checking of stochastic systems. In: CAV. LNCS, vol 3576. Springer, Berlin, pp 266–280

    Google Scholar 

  51. Vardi MY (1985) Automatic verification of probabilistic concurrent finite-state programs. In: FOCS. IEEE, New York, pp 327–338

    Google Scholar 

  52. Vardi MY (2007) From church and prior to psl. Available at http://www.cs.rice.edu/~vardi/papers/index.html

  53. Vardi MY, Wolper P (1986) An automata-theoretic approach to automatic program verification (preliminary report). In: LICS. IEEE Computer Society, New York, pp 332–344

    Google Scholar 

  54. Vardi MY, Wolper P (1994) Reasoning about infinite computations. Inf Comput 115(1):1–37

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  55. Wolper P (1983) Temporal logic can be more expressive. Inf Control 56(1/2):72–99

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  56. Xu DN, Gößler G, Girault A (2010) In: ATVA. LNCS, vol 6252. Springer, Berlin, pp 325–340

    Google Scholar 

  57. Younes HLS (2005) Verification and planning for stochastic processes with asynchronous events. PhD thesis, Carnegie Mellon

  58. Younes HLS (2006) Error control for probabilistic model checking. In: VMCAI. LNCS, vol 3855. Springer, Berlin, pp 142–156

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Université de Rennes 1/IRISA, Rennes, France

    Benoît Delahaye

  2. INRIA/IRISA, Rennes, France

    Benoît Caillaud & Axel Legay

Authors
  1. Benoît Delahaye
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Benoît Caillaud
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Axel Legay
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Axel Legay.

Additional information

A preliminary version of this paper appeared in the 10th International Conference on Application of Concurrency to System Design.

This work was supported by the European STREP-COMBEST project no. 215543 and by an “Action de Recherche Collaborative” ARC (TP)I.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Delahaye, B., Caillaud, B. & Legay, A. Probabilistic contracts: a compositional reasoning methodology for the design of systems with stochastic and/or non-deterministic aspects. Form Methods Syst Des 38, 1–32 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10703-010-0107-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10703-010-0107-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation