research-article

A comprehensive framework for the analysis of automotive systems

Authors:

Alessandro Cimatti,

Luca Cristoforetti,

Marco Di Natale,

Alberto Griggio,

Stefano TonettaAuthors Info & Claims

MODELS '22: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems

Pages 379 - 389

https://doi.org/10.1145/3550355.3552408

Published: 24 October 2022 Publication History

Abstract

Analysis models, technologies and tools are extensively used in the automotive domain to validate and optimize the design and implementation of SW systems. This is especially true for modern systems including advanced autonomous (and complex) features. The range of analysis methods that can be applied is extremely wide and goes from functional correctness to functional safety to timing (and schedulability), security, and possibly even more. The AUTOSAR automotive standard has been defined with the purpose of standardizing the SW architecture of automotive systems and enable the construction of systems by composing SW components that are portable and abstract with respect to the underlying HW/SW platform. However, AUTOSAR was originally developed with portability of code in mind, and even if it quickly evolved to include a system-level modeling language (with its metamodel) and later extensions to deal with the needs of analysis methods (and tools), it is hardly comprehensive and still affected by several omissions and limitations. To fix the limitations with respect to timing and schedulability analysis Bosch developed the Amalthea (later App4MC) metamodel and tools. In Huawei, a more general (and ambitious) approach was undertaken to support not only timing analysis, but also model checking (or other types of formal verification), safety analysis and even design optimization. The approach is based on the concepts of a unified (modular) metamodel and a framework based on Eclipse to integrate analysis methods and tools. In this paper we describe the framework and the results obtained with respect to the objectives of functional verification and timing analysis.

References

[1]

App4MC project web page. https://www.eclipse.org/app4mc/.

[2]

Embedded Validator product suite web page. https://www.btc-es.de/en/products/btc-embeddedvalidator.html.

[3]

Inchron product web page. https://www.inchron.com/.

[4]

The AUTOSAR Tool Platform (Artop). http://www.artop.org.

[5]

Timing Architect (TA) product suite web page. https://www.vector.com/int/en/products/products-a-z/software/ta-tool-suite/.

[6]

Thomas Arts and Stefano Tonetta. 2015. Safely Using the AUTOSAR End-to-End Protection Library. In Computer Safety, Reliability, and Security. SAFECOMP 2014. (LNCS, Vol. 9337), Floor Koornneef and Coen van Gulijk (Eds.). Springer, 74--89.

[7]

Laura Baracchi, Alessandro Cimatti, Gérald Garcia, Silvia Mazzini, Stefano Puri, and Stefano Tonetta. 2014. Requirements Refinement and Component Reuse: The FoReVer Contract-Based Approach. In Handbook of Research on Embedded Systems Design. IGI Global, 209--241.

[8]

Sanjoy Baruah, Deji Chen, Sergey Gorinsky, and Aloysius Mok. 2000. Generalized Multiframe Tasks. Real-Time Systems 17 (2000).

[9]

Yosab Bebawy, Houssem Guissouma, Sebastian Vander Maelen, Janis Kröger, Georg Hake, Ingo Stierand, Martin Fränzle, Eric Sax, and Axel Hahn. 2020. Incremental Contract-based Verification of Software Updates for Safety-Critical Cyber-Physical Systems. 2020 International Conference on Computational Science and Computational Intelligence (CSCI) (2020), 1708--1714.

[10]

Cinzia Bernardeschi, Marco Di Natale, Gianluca Dini, and Maurizio Palmieri. 2018. Verifying data secure flow in AUTOSAR models. J. Comput. Virol. Hacking Tech. 14, 4 (2018), 269--289.

[11]

Manfred Broy and Ketil Stølen. 2001. Specification and Development of Interactive Systems - Focus on Streams, Interfaces, and Refinement. Springer.

[12]

Alessandro Cimatti, Michele Dorigatti, and Stefano Tonetta. 2013. OCRA: A tool for checking the refinement of temporal contracts. In 2013 28th IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASE), Ewen Denney, Tevfik Bultan, and Andreas Zeller (Eds.). IEEE, 702--705.

Digital Library

[13]

Alessandro Cimatti, Alberto Griggio, Andrea Micheli, Iman Narasamdya, and Marco Roveri. 2011. Kratos - A Software Model Checker for SystemC. In 23rd International Conference on Computer Aided Verification (CAV) (LNCS, Vol. 6806), Ganesh Gopalakrishnan and Shaz Qadeer (Eds.). Springer, 310--316.

[14]

Alessandro Cimatti, Alberto Griggio, Sergio Mover, and Stefano Tonetta. 2016. Infinite-state invariant checking with IC3 and predicate abstraction. Formal Methods Syst. Des. 49, 3 (2016), 190--218.

Digital Library

[15]

Koen Claessen, Niklas Eén, and Baruch Sterin. 2013. A circuit approach to LTL model checking. In Formal Methods in Computer-Aided Design (FMCAD). IEEE.

[16]

Edmund M. Clarke, Orna Grumberg, and Kiyoharu Hamaguchi. 1997. Another Look at LTL Model Checking. Formal Methods Syst. Des. 10, 1 (1997), 47--71.

Digital Library

[17]

Jakub Daniel, Alessandro Cimatti, Alberto Griggio, Stefano Tonetta, and Sergio Mover. 2016. Infinite-State Liveness-to-Safety via Implicit Abstraction and Well-Founded Relations. In 28th International Conference on Computer Aided Verification (CAV) (LNCS, Vol. 9779), Swarat Chaudhuri and Azadeh Farzan (Eds.). Springer, 271--291.

[18]

Timothee Durand, Katalin Fazekas, Georg Weissenbacher, and Jakob Zwirchmayr. 2021. Model Checking AUTOSAR Components with CBMC. In 2021 Formal Methods in Computer Aided Design (FMCAD). IEEE, 96--101.

[19]

Johan Eker, Jorn Janneck, Edward A. Lee, Jie Liu, Xiaojun Liu, Jozsef Ludvig, Sonia Sachs, and Yuhong Xiong. 2003. Taming heterogeneity - the Ptolemy approach. Proc. IEEE 91, 1 (2003), 127--144.

[20]

Alberto Griggio and Marco Roveri. 2016. Comparing Different Variants of the ic3 Algorithm for Hardware Model Checking. IEEE Trans. Comput. Aided Des. Integr. Circuits Syst. 35, 6 (2016), 1026--1039.

Digital Library

[21]

Alberto Griggio, Marco Roveri, and Stefano Tonetta. 2018. Certifying Proofs for LTL Model Checking. In 2018 Formal Methods in Computer Aided Design (FMCAD), Nikolaj S. Bjørner and Arie Gurfinkel (Eds.). IEEE, 1--9.

[22]

Arne Hamann, Dakshina Dasari, Simon Kramer, Michael Pressler, Falk Wurst, and Dirk Ziegenbein. 2017. WATERS industrial challenge 2017. In 8th International Workshop on Analysis Tools and Methodologies for Embedded and Real-time Systems (WATERS).

[23]

Michael González Harbour, J. J. Gutiérrez García, José C. Palencia Gutiérrez, and J. M. Drake Moyano. 2001. MAST: Modeling and Analysis Suite for Real Time Applications. In 13th Euromicro Conference on Real-Time Systems (ECRTS). IEEE Computer Society, 125--134.

[24]

K. Rustan M. Leino. 2012. Program proving using intermediate verification languages (IVLs) like boogie and why3. In Proceedings of the 2012 ACM Conference on High Integrity Language Technology (HILT), Ben Brosgol, Jeff Boleng, and S. Tucker Taft (Eds.). ACM, 25--26.

Digital Library

[25]

Christophe Limbrée, Quentin Cappart, Charles Pecheur, and Stefano Tonetta. 2016. Verification of Railway Interlocking - Compositional Approach with OCRA. In 1st International Conference on Reliability, Safety, and Security of Railway Systems (RSSRail) (LNCS, Vol. 9707), Thierry Lecomte, Ralf Pinger, and Alexander B. Romanovsky (Eds.). Springer, 134--149.

[26]

Marco Di Natale and Haibo Zeng. 2010. System identification and extraction of timing properties from controller area network (CAN) message traces. In 15th IEEE International Conference on Emerging Technologies and Factory Automation (ETFA). IEEE, 1--8.

[27]

Paolo Pazzaglia, Alessandro Biondi, and Marco Di Natale. 2019. Optimizing the Functional Deployment on Multicore Platforms with Logical Execution Time. In IEEE Real-Time Systems Symposium (RTSS). IEEE, 207--219.

[28]

Amir Pnueli. 1977. The Temporal Logic of Programs. In 18th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS). IEEE Computer Society, 46--57.

[29]

Bernhard Schätz, Andreas Fleischmann, Eva Geisberger, and Markus Pister. 2005. Model-Based Requirements Engineering with AutoRAID. In Informatik (LNI, Vol. P-68), Armin B. Cremers, Rainer Manthey, Peter Martini, and Volker Steinhage (Eds.). GI, 511--515.

[30]

Frank Singhoff, Jérôme Legrand, Laurent Nana, and Lionel Marcé. 2004. Cheddar: a Flexible Real Time Scheduling Framework. Ada Letters XXIV, 4 (2004), 1--8.

Digital Library

[31]

Stefano Tonetta. 2017. Linear-time Temporal Logic with Event Freezing Functions. In 8th International Symposium on Games, Automata, Logics and Formal Verification (GandALF) (EPTCS, Vol. 256), Patricia Bouyer, Andrea Orlandini, and Pierluigi San Pietro (Eds.). 195--209.

[32]

Wei Zheng, Qi Zhu, Marco Di Natale, and Alberto L. Sangiovanni-Vincentelli. 2007. Definition of Task Allocation and Priority Assignment in Hard Real-Time Distributed Systems. In 28th IEEE Real-Time Systems Symposium (RTSS). IEEE Computer Society, 161--170.

Cited By

Cucinotta TAmory AAra GPaladino FNatale M(2024)Multi-criteria Optimization of Real-time DAGs on Heterogeneous Platforms under P-EDFACM Transactions on Embedded Computing Systems10.1145/359260923:1(1-35)Online publication date: 10-Jan-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3592609
Zafar AAzam FLatif AAnwar MSafdar A(2024)Exploring the Effectiveness and Trends of Domain-Specific Model Driven Engineering: A Systematic Literature Review (SLR)IEEE Access10.1109/ACCESS.2024.341450312(86809-86830)Online publication date: 2024
https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2024.3414503
Griggio AJonáš M(2023)Kratos2: An SMT-Based Model Checker for Imperative ProgramsComputer Aided Verification10.1007/978-3-031-37709-9_20(423-436)Online publication date: 17-Jul-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/978-3-031-37709-9_20

Index Terms

A comprehensive framework for the analysis of automotive systems

Recommendations

Tools for secure systems development with UML

For model-based development to be a success in practice, it needs to have a convincing added-value associated with its use. Our goal is to provide such added-value by developing tool-support for the analysis of UML models against difficult system ...
Modeling and Verification for Timing Satisfaction of Fault-Tolerant Systems with Finiteness
DS-RT '09: Proceedings of the 2009 13th IEEE/ACM International Symposium on Distributed Simulation and Real Time Applications

The increasing use of model-based tools enables further use of formal verification techniques in the context of distributed real-time systems. To avoid state explosion, it is necessary to construct verification models that focus on the aspects under ...
A semantic framework for metamodel-based languages

In the model-based development context, metamodel-based languages are increasingly being defined and adopted either for general purposes or for specific domains of interest. However, meta-languages such as the MOF (Meta Object Facility)--combined with ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences

MODELS '22: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems

October 2022

412 pages

ISBN:9781450394666

DOI:10.1145/3550355

General Chairs:
Eugene Syriani
Université de Montréal, Canada
,
Houari Sahraoui
Université de Montréal, Canada

Copyright © 2022 ACM.

Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Sponsors

SIGSOFT: ACM Special Interest Group on Software Engineering

In-Cooperation

Univ. of Montreal: University of Montreal
IEEE CS

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 24 October 2022

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Conference

MODELS '22

Sponsor:

SIGSOFT

MODELS '22: ACM/IEEE 25th International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems

October 23 - 28, 2022

Quebec, Montreal, Canada

Acceptance Rates

MODELS '22 Paper Acceptance Rate 35 of 125 submissions, 28%;

Overall Acceptance Rate 118 of 382 submissions, 31%

Upcoming Conference

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

3
Total Citations
View Citations
269
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)87
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)15

Reflects downloads up to 18 Aug 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Cucinotta TAmory AAra GPaladino FNatale M(2024)Multi-criteria Optimization of Real-time DAGs on Heterogeneous Platforms under P-EDFACM Transactions on Embedded Computing Systems10.1145/359260923:1(1-35)Online publication date: 10-Jan-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3592609
Zafar AAzam FLatif AAnwar MSafdar A(2024)Exploring the Effectiveness and Trends of Domain-Specific Model Driven Engineering: A Systematic Literature Review (SLR)IEEE Access10.1109/ACCESS.2024.341450312(86809-86830)Online publication date: 2024
https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2024.3414503
Griggio AJonáš M(2023)Kratos2: An SMT-Based Model Checker for Imperative ProgramsComputer Aided Verification10.1007/978-3-031-37709-9_20(423-436)Online publication date: 17-Jul-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/978-3-031-37709-9_20

View Options

Get Access

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Table of Contents