Automatic Checking of Component Protocols in Component-Based Systems

On More Predictable Implementations of Reliable Workflows in Service-oriented Architectures

“…The reason is that the implementation of services might use recursive procedure calls and concurrent threads. Both can stem from the integration of services into a business process [9]. Since Petri nets cannot model unbounded recursion, they cannot be used for an integrated behavioral model.…”

“…This abstraction is then used for validating compliance of the full application to external and internal requirements, if these can be modeled as protocols. As shown in [9], an isolated consideration of services and the business process is not sufficient for performing the above checks.…”

“…In accordance with other works [9], [13], [14] we use finite state machines (short: FSM) to represent the protocol P . The finite state machine P=(Q P , Σ P , → P , I P , F P ) is defined as usual, i. e., Q P is a finite set of states, Σ P is a finite set of atomic actions, → P ⊆ Q P × Σ P × Q P is a finite set of transition rules, I P ∈ Q P is the initial state, F P ⊆ Q P is the set of final states.…”

“…In [9] recursion is modeled by CFG, so only sequential behavior is considered. Moreover recursive callbacks are already respected.…”

“…This is important if we can not exclude, that (recursive) callbacks or reference calls are contained in the source code [9]. Moreover we do not reduce the model checking problem to finite state model checking [23].…”