Safer asynchronous runtime monitoring using compensations

Colombo, Christian; Pace, Gordon J.; Abela, Patrick

doi:10.1007/s10703-012-0142-8

Cited by 23 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Over the years, a set of tools have been built to support and augment Larva including conversion from other specification languages (such as duration calculus [29]) to Larva specification language, and extensions to support event extraction from databases as well as saving the monitor state to a database when it is not feasible to keep it in memory [31].…”

Section: Larvamentioning

confidence: 99%

First international Competition on Runtime Verification: rules, benchmarks, tools, and final results of CRV 2014

Bartocci

Falcone

Bonakdarpour

et al. 2017

Int J Softw Tools Technol Transfer

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The first international Competition on Runtime Verification (CRV) was held in September 2014, in Toronto, Canada, as a satellite event of the 14th international conference on Runtime Verification (RV'14). The event was organized in three tracks: (1) offline monitoring, (2) online monitoring of C programs, and (3) online monitoring of Java programs. In this paper, we report on the phases and rules, a description of the participating teams and their submitted benchmark, the (full) results, as well as the lessons learned from the competition.

show abstract

Section: Larvamentioning

confidence: 99%

First international Competition on Runtime Verification: rules, benchmarks, tools, and final results of CRV 2014

Bartocci

Falcone

Bonakdarpour

et al. 2017

Int J Softw Tools Technol Transfer

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A major hurdle for the adoption of this technique (based on industrial experience of the authors [4,3]), is to reformulate the specification into a form accepted by the monitoring tool.…”

Section: Runtime Monitoringmentioning

confidence: 99%

Using gherkin to extract tests and monitors for safer medical device interaction design

Cauchi

Colombo

Francalanza

et al. 2016

Proceedings of the 8th ACM SIGCHI Symposium on Engineering Interactive Computing Systems

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Number entry systems on medical devices are safety critical and it is important to get them right. Interaction design teams can be multidisciplinary, and in this work we present a process where the requirements of the system are drawn up using a Controlled Natural Language (CNL) that is understandable by non-technical experts or clients. These CNL requirements can also be directly used by the Quality Assurance (QA) team to test the system and monitor whether or not the system runs as it should once deployed. Since commonly, systems are too complex to test all possible execution paths before deployment, monitoring the system at runtime is useful in order to check that the system is running correctly. If at runtime, it is discovered that an anomaly is detected, the relevant personnel is notified through a report in natural language.

show abstract

“…Although in-between solutions have been proposed (e.g., see [24]), they are far from being universally applicable, and thus, if one wants to have a guarantee that the system does not proceed beyond a violation, one has no choice but to pay the cost in terms of overheads induced by synchronous monitoring.…”

Section: Runtime Verification Of Software Principlesmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Unified Approach for Static and Runtime Verification: Framework and Applications

Ahrendt

Pace

Schneider

2012

Leveraging Applications of Formal Methods, Verification and Validation. Technologies for Mastering Change

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Static verification of software is becoming ever more effective and efficient. Still, static techniques either have high precision, in which case powerful judgements are hard to achieve automatically, or they use abstractions supporting increased automation, but possibly losing important aspects of the concrete system in the process. Runtime verification has complementary strengths and weaknesses. It combines full precision of the model (including the real deployment environment) with full automation, but cannot judge future and alternative runs. Another drawback of runtime verification can be the computational overhead of monitoring the running system which, although typically not very high, can still be prohibitive in certain settings. In this paper we propose a framework to combine static analysis techniques and runtime verification with the aim of getting the best of both techniques. In particular, we discuss an instantiation of our framework for the deductive theorem prover KeY, and the runtime verification tool Larva. Apart from combining static and dynamic verification, this approach also combines the data centric analysis of KeY with the control centric analysis of Larva. An advantage of the approach is that, through the use of a single specification which can be used by both analysis techniques, expensive parts of the analysis could be moved to the static phase, allowing the runtime monitor to make significant assumptions, dropping parts of expensive checks at runtime. We also discuss specific applications of our approach.

show abstract

Safer asynchronous runtime monitoring using compensations

Cited by 23 publications

References 11 publications

First international Competition on Runtime Verification: rules, benchmarks, tools, and final results of CRV 2014

First international Competition on Runtime Verification: rules, benchmarks, tools, and final results of CRV 2014

Using gherkin to extract tests and monitors for safer medical device interaction design

A Unified Approach for Static and Runtime Verification: Framework and Applications

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About