Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Skip to main content

How to Verify and Exploit a Refinement of Component-Based Systems

  • Conference paper
Perspectives of Systems Informatics (PSI 2006)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNTCS,volume 4378))

  • 557 Accesses

Abstract

In order to deal with the verification of large systems, compositional approaches postpone in part the problem of combinatorial explosion during model exploration. The purpose of the work we present in this paper is to establish a compositional framework in which the verification may proceed through a refinement-based specification and a component-based verification approaches.

First, a constraint synchronised product operator enables us an automated compositional verification of a component-based system refinement relation. Secondly, safety LTL properties of the whole system are checked from local safety LTL properties of its components. The main advantage of our specification and verification approaches is that LTL properties are preserved through composition and refinement.

Work partially funded by the French Research ACI Geccoo.

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

Access this chapter

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Alpern, B., Schneider, F.B.: Recognizing safety and liveness. Distributed Computing 2, 117–126 (1987)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. Alur, R., Henzinger, T.A.: Reactive modules. Formal Methods in System Design (FMSD) 15(1), 7–48 (1999)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  3. Arnold, A.: Systèmes de transitions finis et sémantique des processus communicants. In: Collection Etudes et Recherches en Informatiques, Masson, Paris (1992)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Arnold, A., Nivat, M.: Comportements de processus. In: Actes du Colloque AFCET - Les Mathématiques de l’Informatique, pp. 35–68 (1982)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Bellegarde, F., Julliand, J., Kouchnarenko, O.: Ready-simulation is not ready to express a modular refinement relation. In: Maibaum, T.S.E. (ed.) ETAPS 2000 and FASE 2000. LNCS, vol. 1783, pp. 266–283. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  6. Clarke, E.M., Grumberg, O., Peled, D.A.: Model Checking. MIT Press, Cambridge (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Cobleigh, J.-M., Giannakopoulou, D., Pasareanu, C.: Learning assumptions for compositional verification. In: Garavel, H., Hatcliff, J. (eds.) ETAPS 2003 and TACAS 2003. LNCS, vol. 2619, Springer, Heidelberg (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Darlot, C., Julliand, J., Kouchnarenko, O.: Refinement preserves PLTL properties. In: Bert, D., P. Bowen, J., King, S. (eds.) ZB 2003. LNCS, vol. 2651, Springer, Heidelberg (2003)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  9. Kouchnarenko, O., Lanoix, A.: SynCo: a refinement analysis tool for synchronized component-based systems. In: Tool Exhibition Notes, Formal Methods (FM’03) (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Kouchnarenko, O., Lanoix, A.: Refinement and verification of synchronized component-based systems. In: Araki, K., Gnesi, S., Mandrioli, D. (eds.) FME 2003. LNCS, vol. 2805, pp. 341–358. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Kouchnarenko, O., Lanoix, A.: Verifying invariants of component-based systems through refinement. In: Rattray, C., Maharaj, S., Shankland, C. (eds.) AMAST 2004. LNCS, vol. 3116, pp. 289–303. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Kupferman, O., Vardi, M.Y.: Module checking. In: Alur, R., Henzinger, T.A. (eds.) CAV 1996. LNCS, vol. 1102, pp. 75–86. Springer, Heidelberg (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Kupferman, O., Vardi, M.Y.: Module checking revisited. In: Grumberg, O. (ed.) CAV 1997. LNCS, vol. 1254, pp. 36–47. Springer, Heidelberg (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Lanoix, A.: Systèmes à composants synchronisés : contributions à la vérification compositionnelle du raffinement et des propriétés. PhD thesis, Université de Franche-comté, Septembre (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Manna, Z., Pnueli, A.: The Temporal Logic of Reactive and Concurrent Systems: Specifications. Springer, Heidelberg (1992)

    Google Scholar 

  16. McMillan, K.L.: A methodology for hardware verification using compositional model-checking. Science of Computer Programming 37, 279–309 (2000)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  17. Milner, R.: Communication and concurrency. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs (1989)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  18. Shankar, N.: Lazy compositional verification. In: de Roever, W.-P., Langmaack, H., Pnueli, A. (eds.) COMPOS 1997. LNCS, vol. 1536, pp. 541–564. Springer, Heidelberg (1998)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  19. van Glabbeek, R.J.: The linear time-branching time spectrum (extended abstract). In: Baeten, J.C.M., Klop, J.W. (eds.) CONCUR 1990. LNCS, vol. 458, pp. 278–297. Springer, Heidelberg (1990)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Irina Virbitskaite Andrei Voronkov

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2007 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Kouchnarenko, O., Lanoix, A. (2007). How to Verify and Exploit a Refinement of Component-Based Systems. In: Virbitskaite, I., Voronkov, A. (eds) Perspectives of Systems Informatics. PSI 2006. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 4378. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-70881-0_26

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-70881-0_26

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-70880-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-70881-0

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics