A Proposal of an Example and Experiments Repository to Foster Industrial Adoption of Formal Methods

Schlick, Rupert; Felderer, Michael; Majzik, István; Nardone, Roberto; Raschke, Alexander; Snook, Colin; Vittorini, Valeria

doi:10.1007/978-3-030-03427-6_20

Cited by 8 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our research focuses on the railway domain, given the long history of applications of formal methods in this field, and the demand for a more widespread knowledge dissemination towards practitioners and system designers [17], [18].…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Here we summarise most evident trends, and contrast them with existing literature on desired features of formal tools in railway as indicated by recent surveys [11], [45], [46], and limitations and barriers for formal methods adoption (cf. [10], [15], [16], [18], [19], [85]- [87]).…”

Section: B Rq2 Feature Evaluationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A recent work by Ferrari et al [17] makes a step forward and performs a judgment study involving experts to provide a qualitative analysis of multiple formal tools, and, together with other authors [10], [19], recommends for more fine-grained and objective evaluations to guide practitioners in tool selection and answer the question "Does the tool fit my problem?" [18].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Systematic Evaluation and Usability Analysis of Formal Tools for Railway System Design

Ferrari,

Mazzanti,

Basile

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Formal methods and supporting tools have a long record of successes in the development of safety-critical systems. However, it cannot be said that a single tool has emerged as the dominant solution for system design. Each tool differs from the others in terms of modelling language used, verification capabilities and other complementary features, and each development context has peculiar needs that require different tools. This is particularly problematic for the railway industry, in which formal methods are highly recommended by the norms, but no actual guidance is provided for the selection of tools. To guide companies in the selection of the most appropriate formal tools to adopt for their contexts, a clear assessment of the features of the available tools is required. To address this goal, this paper considers a set of 14 formal tools for system design, and presents a systematic evaluation of the tools and a usability analysis with practitioners. Results are discussed considering the most desired aspects by industry and previous related work. The focus is on the railway domain, but the overall methodology can be applied to similar contexts. Our study contributes with a systematic evaluation of formal tools and shows that despite the poor graphical interfaces, usability and maturity of the tools are not major problems, as claimed by other works. Instead, process integration support is the most relevant pain point for the majority of the platforms.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: B Rq2 Feature Evaluationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Systematic Evaluation and Usability Analysis of Formal Tools for Railway System Design

Ferrari,

Mazzanti,

Basile

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Schlick et al [16] (A Proposal of an Example and Experiments Repository to Foster Industrial Adoption of Formal Methods) observe that formal methods have been around almost since the beginning of computer science. Nonetheless, the perception in the formal methods community is that pickup by industry is rather low, measured by the potential benefits.…”

Section: Session 4: a Repository Of Formal Methods Examples And Expermentioning

confidence: 99%

Formal Methods in Industrial Practice - Bridging the Gap (Track Summary)

Felderer

Gurov

Huisman

et al. 2018

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…In this sense, a major feature of FFORT is the diversity of its content, where FTs have different size (number of basic events and gates), type (static vs. dynamic, repairable or not), failure behavior (diverse gates and probability distributions in basic events), and RAMS metrics computed. Table 1 offers an overview of this. Furthermore, reproducibility has gained renewed interest in computer science, particularly in research on formal methods (Schlick et al (2018)). According to the ACM 2018, such reproducibility should be tested by a different team using a different experimental setup from the original research.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ffort: A Benchmark Suite for Fault Tree Analysis

Ruijters¹,

Budde²,

Nakhaee³

et al. 2019

Proceedings of the 29th European Safety and Reliability Conference (ESREL)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents FFORT (the Fault tree FOResT): A large, diverse, extendable, and open benchmark suite consisting of fault tree models, together with relevant metadata. Fault trees are a common formalism in reliability engineering, and the FFORT benchmark brings together a large and representative suite of fault tree models. The benchmark provides each fault tree model in standard Galileo format, together with references to its origin, and a textual and/or graphical description of the tree. This includes quantitative information such as failure rates, and the results of quantitative analyses of standard reliability metrics, such as the system reliability, availability and mean time to failure. Thus, the FFORT benchmark provides: (1) Examples of how fault trees are used in various domains; (2) A large class of tree models to evaluate fault tree methods and tools; (3) Results of analyses to compare newly developed methods with the benchmark results. Currently, the benchmark suite contains 202 fault tree models of great diversity in terms of size, type, and application domain. The benchmark offers statistics on several relevant model features, indicating e.g. how often such features occur in the benchmark, as well as search facilities for fault tree models with the desired features. In addition to the trees already collected, the website provides a user-friendly submission page, allowing the general public to contribute with more fault trees and/or analysis results with new methods. Thereby, we aim to provide an open-access, representative collection of fault trees at the state of the art in modeling and analysis.

show abstract

A Proposal of an Example and Experiments Repository to Foster Industrial Adoption of Formal Methods

Cited by 8 publications

References 31 publications

Systematic Evaluation and Usability Analysis of Formal Tools for Railway System Design

Systematic Evaluation and Usability Analysis of Formal Tools for Railway System Design

Formal Methods in Industrial Practice - Bridging the Gap (Track Summary)

Ffort: A Benchmark Suite for Fault Tree Analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About