RATSY – A New Requirements Analysis Tool with Synthesis

Bloem, Roderick; Cimatti, Alessandro; Greimel, Karin; Hofferek, Georg; Könighofer, Robert; Roveri, Marco; Schuppan, Viktor; Seeber, Richard

doi:10.1007/978-3-642-14295-6_37

Cited by 82 publications

(103 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Details of the LTL specifications for each scenario can be found in the Appendices. Our algoritm is implemented on top of the GR(1) synthesis tool RATSY [2].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Synthesis for Human-in-the-Loop Control Systems

Sadigh

Sastry

et al. 2014

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract-Several control systems in safety-critical applications involve the interaction of an autonomous controller with one or more human operators. Examples include pilots interacting with an autopilot system in an aircraft, and a driver interacting with automated driver-assistance features in an automobile. The correctness of such systems depends not only on the autonomous controller, but also on the actions of the human controller. In this paper, we present a formalism for human-inthe-loop control systems. Particularly, we focus on the problem of synthesizing a semi-autonomous controller from high-level temporal specifications that expect occasional human intervention for correct operation. We present an algorithm for this problem, and demonstrate its operation on problems related to driver assistance in automobiles.

show abstract

“…Details of the LTL specifications for each scenario can be found in the Appendices. Our algoritm is implemented on top of the GR(1) synthesis tool RATSY [2].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Synthesis for Human-in-the-Loop Control Systems

Sadigh

Sastry

et al. 2014

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To list a few, D'Ippolito et al [5,6] used GR(1) to deal with fallible domains and non-anomalous eventbased behavior models; Kress-Gazit et al [11] used GR(1) in robotics; Maoz and Ringert showed GR(1) synthesis for speci cation pa erns [13]. Several tools support GR(1) synthesis, including RATSY [2], TuLiP [24], and Slugs [8]. We give an overview of existing approaches to dealing with unrealizable GR(1) speci cations.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

A symbolic justice violations transition system for unrealizable GR(1) specifications

Kuvent

Maoz

Ringert

2017

Proceedings of the 2017 11th Joint Meeting on Foundations of Software Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

One of the main challenges of reactive synthesis, an automated procedure to obtain a correct-by-construction reactive system, is to deal with unrealizable speci cations. Existing approaches to deal with unrealizability, in the context of GR(1), an expressive assumeguarantee fragment of LTL that enables e cient synthesis, include the generation of concrete counter-strategies and the computation of an unrealizable core. Although correct, such approaches produce large and complicated counter-strategies, o en containing thousands of states. is hinders their use by engineers.In this work we present the Justice Violations Transition System (JVTS), a novel symbolic representation of counter-strategies for GR(1). e JVTS is much smaller and simpler than its corresponding concrete counter-strategy. Moreover, it is annotated with invariants that explain how the counter-strategy forces the system to violate the speci cation. We compute the JVTS symbolically, and thus more e ciently, without the expensive enumeration of concrete states. Finally, we provide the JVTS with an on-demand interactive concrete and symbolic play.We implemented our work, validated its correctness, and evaluated it on 14 unrealizable speci cations of autonomous Lego robots as well as on benchmarks from the literature. e evaluation shows not only that the JVTS is in most cases much smaller than the corresponding concrete counter-strategy, but also that its computation is faster. CCS CONCEPTS•So ware and its engineering →Formal methods; So ware verication;

show abstract

“…However, notable progress on the problem is underway. RATSY [8] checks realizability of the class of Generalized Reactivity(1) (GR(1) [39]) specifications via an interactive game with the specifier. Acacia+ [9] also solves LTL realizability problems encoded as safety games.…”

Section: Specification Qualitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Specification: The Biggest Bottleneck in Formal Methods and Autonomy

Rozier

2016

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Advancement of AI-enhanced control in autonomous systems stands on the shoulders of formal methods, which make possible the rigorous safety analysis autonomous systems require. An aircraft cannot operate autonomously unless it has design-time reasoning to ensure correct operation of the autopilot and runtime reasoning to ensure system health management, or the ability to detect and respond to off-nominal situations. Formal methods are highly dependent on the specifications over which they reason; there is no escaping the "garbage in, garbage out" reality. Specification is difficult, unglamorous, and arguably the biggest bottleneck facing verification and validation of aerospace, and other, autonomous systems.This VSTTE invited talk and paper examines the outlook for the practice of formal specification, and highlights the on-going challenges of specification, from design-time to runtime system health management. We exemplify these challenges for specifications in Linear Temporal Logic (LTL) though the focus is not limited to that specification language. We pose challenge questions for specification that will shape both the future of formal methods, and our ability to more automatically verify and validate autonomous systems of greater variety and scale. We call for further research into LTL Genesis. Abstract. Advancement of AI-enhanced control in autonomous systems stands on the shoulders of formal methods, which make possible the rigorous safety analysis autonomous systems require. An aircraft cannot operate autonomously unless it has design-time reasoning to ensure correct operation of the autopilot and runtime reasoning to ensure system health management, or the ability to detect and respond to off-nominal situations. Formal methods are highly dependent on the specifications over which they reason; there is no escaping the "garbage in, garbage out" reality. Specification is difficult, unglamorous, and arguably the biggest bottleneck facing verification and validation of aerospace, and other, autonomous systems. This VSTTE invited talk and paper examines the outlook for the practice of formal specification, and highlights the on-going challenges of specification, from design-time to runtime system health management. We exemplify these challenges for specifications in Linear Temporal Logic (LTL) though the focus is not limited to that specification language. We pose challenge questions for specification that will shape both the future of formal methods, and our ability to more automatically verify and validate autonomous systems of greater variety and scale. We call for further research into LTL Genesis.

show abstract

RATSY – A New Requirements Analysis Tool with Synthesis

Cited by 82 publications

References 10 publications

Synthesis for Human-in-the-Loop Control Systems

Synthesis for Human-in-the-Loop Control Systems

A symbolic justice violations transition system for unrealizable GR(1) specifications

Specification: The Biggest Bottleneck in Formal Methods and Autonomy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About