2009
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-04368-0_10
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Safe Runtime Verification of Real-Time Properties

Abstract: Abstract. Introducing a monitor on a system typically changes the system's behaviour by slowing the system down and increasing memory consumption. This may possibly result in creating new bugs, or possibly even 'fixing' bugs, only to reappear as the monitor is removed. Properties written in a real-time logic, such as duration calculus, can be particularly sensitive to such changes induced through monitoring. The same problem occurs in other scenarios such as when a system is ported to a faster machine. In this… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
20
0

Year Published

2009
2009
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
5
1
1

Relationship

2
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(20 citation statements)
references
References 21 publications
0
20
0
Order By: Relevance
“…If this is the case the accuracy limitation should not be a problem. The full account of this work is soon to be submitted for publication [5].…”
Section: A Key Features Of the Toolmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…If this is the case the accuracy limitation should not be a problem. The full account of this work is soon to be submitted for publication [5].…”
Section: A Key Features Of the Toolmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A fragment of the duration calculus [6] called counterexample traces [4] has been identified, for which, as long as the events of the underlying system do not change their order (but the intervals between them become longer or shorter) the validity of the properties remains unchanged [7]. These checks have been implemented in LARVA, thus providing guarantees on real-time properties.…”
Section: Observer-matters Propertiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…RT-Mac (Sammapun et al, 2005) permits to verify at runtime timeliness and reliability correctness. LARVA (Colombo et al, 2009a;Colombo et al, 2009b) takes as input safety properties expressed with DATEs (Dynamic Automata with Events and Timers), a timed model similar to timed automata.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It was thus decided that we adopt a standard runtime verification tool, Larva [CPS09], to process the data efficiently, using techniques from [CP13,CPA09]. Larva allows for specifications to be written in a guarded command language format, possibly structured using automata -although for the sake of encoding the semantics of our CNL, the guarded command rules sufficed.…”
Section: Monitoring Fraud Rulesmentioning
confidence: 99%