Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
research-article
Open access

A formal semantics of extended hierarchical state transition matrices using CSP#

Published: 01 September 2014 Publication History

Abstract

The extended hierarchical state transition matrices (EHSTMs) are a table-based modelling language frequently used in industry for specifying behaviours of systems. However, assuring correctness, i.e., having a design satisfy certain desired properties, is a non-trivial task. To address this problem, a model checker dedicated to EHSTMs called Garakabu2 has been developed. However, there is no formal justification for Garakabu2, since its semantics has never been fully formalised. In this paper, we give a formal semantics to EHSTMs by translating them into CSP, Communicating Sequential Processes. Among the variants of CSP, we use CSP#, which is the modelling language used by PAT model checker, as a target of translation. Our semantics covers most of the features supported by Garakabu2. We manually translate the small examples of EHSTMs to CSP#, and verify them by PAT. We also verify the examples directly using Garakabu2 and show that the results are same. The experiments also indicate that verification using our translation and PAT is much faster than that of Garakabu2 in some cases.

References

References

[1]
Japan Embedded System Technology Association. A tentative report on questionnaires of spread of design methods 2011 (Japanese). et2010_questionnaire.pdf file on JASA web site, 2012.
[2]
Biere A, Cimatti A, Clarke E, Zhu Y (1999) Symbolic model checking without BDDs. In: 5th TACAS. Springer, Berlin, pp 193–207
[3]
Burch JR, Clarke EM, McMillan KL, Dill DL, and Hwang LJ Symbolic model checking: 1020 states and beyond Inf Comput 1992 98 2 142-170
[4]
Bhaduri P, Ramesh S (2004) Model checking of statechart models: survey and research directions. CoRR, cs.SE/0407038
[5]
Barrett C, Sebastiani R, Seshia S, Tinelli C (2011) Handbook of Satisfiability, chapter 26. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 825–885
[6]
Barrett C, Tinelli C (2007) CVC3. In: 19th CAV. Springer, Berlin, pp 298–302
[7]
Katoen J-P and Baier C Principle of model checking 2008 London The MIT Press
[8]
Clarke E, Grumberg O, and Peled D Model Checking 1999 London MIT Press
[9]
Groote JF, Mathijssen A, ReniersHelle MA, Usenko YS, van Weerdenburg M (2007) The formal specification language mCRL2. In: Proceedings of methods for modelling software systems, volume 06351 of Dagstuhkl Seminar
[10]
Hansen HH, Ketema J, Luttik B, Mousavi MR, and Pol J Towards model checking executable UML specifications in mCRL2 ISSE 2010 6 1–2 83-90
[11]
Harel D and Naamad A The STATEMATE semantics of statecharts ACM Trans Softw Eng Methodol 1996 5 4 293-333
[12]
Hoare CAR (2004) Communicating sequential processes, vol 9, viii+256 p. By C.A.R. Hoare, Prentice-Hall International, London, 1985
[13]
Holzmann GJ The model checker SPIN IEEE Trans Softw Eng 1997 23 5 279-295
[14]
Holzmann GJ The SPIN model checker: primer and reference manual 2008 Reading Addison-Wesley
[15]
Kong W, Katahira N, Qian W, Watanabe M, Katayama T, Fukuda A (2011) An SMT-based approach to bounded model checking of designs in communicating state transition matrix. In: IEEE CS, 11th ICCSA, pp 159–167.
[16]
Kong W, Liu L, Yamagata Y, Taguchi K, Ohsaki H, Fukuda A (2012) On accelerating SMT-based bounded model checking of HSTM designs. In: IEEE CS, 19th APSEC, pp 614–623
[17]
Koike T (2008) Model checking support environment based on state transition matrix. IPSJ SIG Technical Report
[18]
Kong W, Shiraishi T, Katahira N, Watanabe M, Katayama T, and Fukuda A An SMT-based approach to bounded model checking of design in state transition matrix IEICE Trans Inform Syst E 2011 94 D(5 946-957
[19]
Liu Y, Sun J, Dong J (2011) PAT3: An extensible architecture for building multi-domain model checkers. In: IEEE, 22th ISSRE, pp 190–199
[20]
Mellor SJ and Balcer MJ Executable UML: a foundation for model-driven architecture 2002 Reading Addison Wesley
[21]
Ng MY, Butler M (2003) Towards formalizing UML state diagrams in CSP. In: IEEE CS, 1st SEFM, pp 138–147
[22]
Nomura T (2009) Trial of model checking by spreadsheet. In: SQiP Symposium, pp 1–4
[23]
Roscoe AW, Hoare CAR, Bird (1998) The theory and practice of concurrency, volume 216. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River
[24]
Sun J, Liu Y, Dong JS (2009) Model checking CSP revisited: introducing a process analysis toolkit. Leveraging Applications of Formal Methods, Verification and Validation. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos, pp 307–322
[25]
Sun J, Liu Y, Dong JS, Pang J (2009) PAT: towards flexible verification under fairness. In: 21th CAV, volume 5643 of LNCS. Springer, Berlin, pp 709–714
[26]
Sekerinski E, Zurob R (2002) Translating Statecharts to B. In: 3rd IFM, volume 2335 of LNCS. Springer, Berlin, pp 128–144
[27]
Uselton A, Smolka SA (1994) A compositional semantics for statecharts using labeled transition systems. CONCUR’94: concurrency Theory
[28]
Watanabe M (1998) Extended hierarchy state transition matrix design method-version 2.0. Technical report, CATS Technical Report
[29]
Zhang SJ, Liu Y (2010) An automatic approach to model checking UML state machines. In: IEEE, 4th SSIRI, pp 1–6

Cited By

View all
  • (2021)EHSTM: a formal model of embedded software and research on several key issuesCCF Transactions on High Performance Computing10.1007/s42514-021-00082-93:4(365-382)Online publication date: 24-Nov-2021
  • (2018)Toward Sustainable Smart Mobility Information Infrastructure Platform - Current Status -2018 7th International Congress on Advanced Applied Informatics (IIAI-AAI)10.1109/IIAI-AAI.2018.00025(81-85)Online publication date: Jul-2018
  • (2018)Toward Sustainable Smart Mobility Information Infrastructure Platform: Project OverviewNew Trends in E-service and Smart Computing10.1007/978-3-319-70636-8_3(35-46)Online publication date: 2-Feb-2018
  • Show More Cited By

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image Formal Aspects of Computing
Formal Aspects of Computing  Volume 26, Issue 5
Sep 2014
213 pages
ISSN:0934-5043
EISSN:1433-299X
Issue’s Table of Contents

Publisher

Springer-Verlag

Berlin, Heidelberg

Publication History

Published: 01 September 2014
Accepted: 17 April 2013
Revision received: 16 February 2013
Received: 01 October 2012
Published in FAC Volume 26, Issue 5

Author Tags

  1. Embedded systems
  2. Software modelling
  3. Formal semantics
  4. Model checking
  5. CSP

Qualifiers

  • Research-article

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)50
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)10
Reflects downloads up to 15 Feb 2025

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2021)EHSTM: a formal model of embedded software and research on several key issuesCCF Transactions on High Performance Computing10.1007/s42514-021-00082-93:4(365-382)Online publication date: 24-Nov-2021
  • (2018)Toward Sustainable Smart Mobility Information Infrastructure Platform - Current Status -2018 7th International Congress on Advanced Applied Informatics (IIAI-AAI)10.1109/IIAI-AAI.2018.00025(81-85)Online publication date: Jul-2018
  • (2018)Toward Sustainable Smart Mobility Information Infrastructure Platform: Project OverviewNew Trends in E-service and Smart Computing10.1007/978-3-319-70636-8_3(35-46)Online publication date: 2-Feb-2018
  • (2016)Towards Sustainable Information Infrastructure Platform for Smart Mobility - Project Overview2016 5th IIAI International Congress on Advanced Applied Informatics (IIAI-AAI)10.1109/IIAI-AAI.2016.110(211-214)Online publication date: Jul-2016
  • (2016)Garakabu2Journal of Information Security and Applications10.1016/j.jisa.2016.08.00131:C(61-74)Online publication date: 1-Dec-2016

View Options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Login options

Full Access

Figures

Tables

Media

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media