Invariant-driven specifications in Maude

Abstract

a b s t r a c tThis work presents a general mechanism for executing specifications that comply with given invariants, which may be expressed in different formalisms and logics. We exploit Maude's reflective capabilities and its properties as a general semantic framework to provide a generic strategy that allows us to execute Maude specifications taking into account user-defined invariants. The strategy is parameterized by the invariants and by the logic in which such invariants are expressed. We experiment with different logics, providing examples for propositional logic, (finite future time) linear temporal logic and metric temporal logic.

Debugging Maude programs via runtime assertion checking and trace slicing

“…To the best of our knowledge, no general built-in support is provided in the MFE for runtime assertion checking or related disciplines such as contract enforcement in order to monitor contract fulfillment or enforce some penalty when a contract violation is observed. Related to our work, a generic strategy is defined in [32] to guarantee in Maude that a set of invariants (that can be expressed in different logics) are satisfied at every computed state. This is achieved by avoiding the execution of actions that otherwise would conduct the system to states that do not satisfy the constraints.…”

“…On the one hand, our assertions are external and evaluated at runtime, whereas driving the system's execution in such a way that every computation state complies with the constraints makes the assertions internal to the programmed strategy. On the other hand, the strategy of [32] never results in violated assertions, which is essential in our approach for automatic trace slicing to be fired. As another difference, we are able to check assertions that regard the normalizations carried out by using the equational part of the rewriting theory.…”

Combining Runtime Checking and Slicing to Improve Maude Error Diagnosis

“…Nevertheless, to the best of our knowledge, no general built-in support is provided in Maude or the MFE for the runtime checking of user-defined assertions. Related to our work, generic strategies are defined in [16,28] to guarantee that a set of invariants (that can be expressed in different logics) are satisfied at every computed state. This is achieved by avoiding the execution of actions that otherwise would conduct the system to states that do not satisfy the constraints.…”

“…On the one hand, our assertions are external and evaluated at runtime, whereas driving the system's execution in such a way that every computation state complies with the constraints makes the assertions internal to the programmed strategy. On the other hand, the strategy of [16,28] never results in violated assertions, which is essential for automatic trace slicing to be fired according to our approach. As another difference, we are able to check assertions that regard: 1) the normalizations carried out by using the equational part of the rewriting theory; and 2) system properties that are not necessarily global invariants but can only hold in those states that match a given state template.…”

Towards an inter-domain billing system to support dynamic service provisioning

“…LOTOS and Z have been proposed for the computational viewpoint [ITUX901-X904, Sinnot97]. Maude has been proposed as a formal notation for the enterprise viewpoint [Durán05,Roldán09]. System developers experience the formality of most proposed notations as difficult to learn.…”