From EU Projects to a Family of Model Checkers

Beek, Maurice H. ter; Gnesi, Stefania; Mazzanti, Franco

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-15545-6_20

Cited by 17 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…[12] Hubert Garavel, Frédéric Lang & Wendelin Serwe (2017) LA, LB : int, T0, T1, T2, T3, T4, T5, T6, T7 : Train_Mission, A0, A1, A2, A3, A4, A5, A6, A7 : Train_Constraint, B0, B1, B2, B3, B4, B5, B6, B7 : Train_Constraint in P0 := 0; P1 := 0; P2 := 0; P3 := 0; P4 := 0; P5 := 0; P6 := 0; P7 := 0; RA := 1; RB := 1; LA := 7; --limit for region A LB := 7; --limit for region B ( 1,9,10,13,15,20,23); T1 := Train_Mission ( 3,9,10,13,15,20,24); T2 := Train_Mission ( 5,27,11,13,16,20,25); T3 := Train_Mission ( 7,27,11,13,16,20,26); T4 := Train_Mission (23,22,17,18,11,9,2); T5 := Train_Mission (24,22,17,18,11,9,4); T6 := Train_Mission (25,22,17,18,…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…-ctt checks totatlity of transition relation function ---r prints actual number of reachable states -- B7[14]; [ 1,9,10,13,15,20,23,22]; --G1 // T1 := [ 3,9,10,13,15,20,24,22]; --R1 // T2 := [ 5,27,11,13,16,20,25,22]; --Y1 // T3 := [ 7,27,11,13,16,20,26,22]; --B1 // T4 := [23,22,17,18,11,9,2,1]; --G2 // T5 := [24,22,17,18,11,9,4,3]; --R2 // T6 := [25,22,17,18,<...>…”

Section: Cadp-lntmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the context of the project, we applied formal methods to design and verify a scheduling algorithm that addresses the deadlock avoidance problem [25]. The application of the algorithm to the TRACE-IT case study was initially modelled and verified by means of the UMC tool [30,4,20]. Then, the design of the case study was replicated with other six different formal frameworks -i.e., SPIN [16,29], NuSMV/nuXmv [5,18], mCRL2 [14,9], CPN Tools [17,31], FDR4 [13,27] and CADP [11,6] -to explore the potential of formal methods diversity [24].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Ten Diverse Formal Models for a CBTC Automatic Train Supervision System

Mazzanti

Ferrari

2018

Electron. Proc. Theor. Comput. Sci.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Communications-based Train Control (CBTC) systems are metro signalling platforms, which coordinate and protect the movements of trains within the tracks of a station, and between different stations. In CBTC platforms, a prominent role is played by the Automatic Train Supervision (ATS) system, which automatically dispatches and routes trains within the metro network. Among the various functions, an ATS needs to avoid deadlock situations, i.e., cases in which a group of trains block each other. In the context of a technology transfer study, we designed an algorithm for deadlock avoidance in train scheduling. In this paper, we present a case study in which the algorithm has been applied. The case study has been encoded using ten different formal verification environments, namely UMC, SPIN, NuSMV/nuXmv, mCRL2, CPN Tools, FDR4, CADP, TLA+, UPPAAL and ProB. Based on our experience, we observe commonalities and differences among the modelling languages considered, and we highlight the impact of the specific characteristics of each language on the presented models.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Cadp-lntmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Ten Diverse Formal Models for a CBTC Automatic Train Supervision System

Mazzanti

Ferrari

2018

Electron. Proc. Theor. Comput. Sci.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…VMC is a product of the KandISTI family of model checkers developed at ISTI-CNR in Pisa [7,19]. This modelling and verification framework is publicly accessible online at the URL http://fmt.isti.cnr.it/kandisti.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

From Featured Transition Systems to Modal Transition Systems with Variability Constraints

Beek

Damiani

Gnesi

et al. 2015

Software Engineering and Formal Methods

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. We present an automatic technique to transform a subclass of featured transition systems into modal transition systems with additional sets of variability constraints in the specific format accepted by the variability model checker VMC. Both formal models are widely used in the field of software product line engineering and both come with a dedicated model checker. The transformation serves two purposes. First, it contributes to a better understanding of the fundamental differences between the two approaches, basically concerning the way in which variability constraints are represented (in terms of features and actions, respectively). Second, it paves the way to compare the modelling and analysis of product line behaviour in two different settings.

show abstract

“…FMC is a product of the KandISTI family of model checkers [13,33] (http://fmt.isti.cnr.it/kandisti) we developed at ISTI-CNR over the past two decades, which includes also UMC [11,18], CMC [18,30] and VMC [17,19]. Each of them allows the efficient verification, by means of explicit-state onthe-fly model checking, of functional properties expressed in the action-based and state-based branching-time temporal logic KTL (defined in Sec.…”

Section: Fmc: On-the-fly Model Checkermentioning

confidence: 99%

Using FMC for family-based analysis of software product lines

Beek

Gnesi

Mazzanti

2015

Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Software Product Line

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We show how the FMC model checker can successfully be used to model and analyze behavioural variability in Software Product Lines. FMC accepts parameterized specifications in a process-algebraic input language and allows the verification of properties of such models by means of efficient on-the-fly model checking. The properties can be expressed in a logic that allows to correlate the parameters of different actions within the same formula. We show how this feature can be used to tailor formulas to the verification of only a specific subset of products of a Software Product Line, thus allowing for scalable family-based analyses with FMC. We present a proof-of-concept that shows the application of FMC to an illustrative Featured Transition System from the literature.

show abstract

From EU Projects to a Family of Model Checkers

Cited by 17 publications

References 40 publications

Ten Diverse Formal Models for a CBTC Automatic Train Supervision System

Ten Diverse Formal Models for a CBTC Automatic Train Supervision System

From Featured Transition Systems to Modal Transition Systems with Variability Constraints

Using FMC for family-based analysis of software product lines

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About