Specifying Properties of Dynamic Architectures Using Configuration Traces

Model-Based Engineering of Collaborative Embedded Systems

2020

Self Cite

Collaborative embedded systems form groups in which individual systems collaborate to achieve an overall goal. To this end, new systems may join a group and participating systems can leave the group. Classical techniques for the formal modeling and analysis of distributed systems, however, are mainly based on a static notion of systems and thus are often not well suited for the modeling and analysis of collaborative embedded systems. In this chapter, we propose an alternative approach that allows for the verification of dynamically evolving systems and we demonstrate it in terms of a running example: a simple version of an adaptable and flexible factory.

Section: Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

Compositional Verification using Model Checking and Theorem Proving

Model-Based Engineering of Collaborative Embedded Systems

2020

Self Cite

“…In FACTum, an architecture is modeled in terms of sets of so-called architecture traces [15,22], i.e., streams [6] of architecture snapshots. Thereby, an architecture snapshot consists of a set of (active) components with their ports valuated by messages and connections between the ports of the components.…”

Section: System Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Blockchain architectures are an instance of a more general class of architectures called dynamic architectures [22]. In such architectures, components may join or leave the architecture and connections between components can change over time.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards Verified Blockchain Architectures: A Case Study on Interactive Architecture Verification

Formal Techniques for Distributed Objects, Components, and Systems

2019

Self Cite

With the emergence of cryptocurrencies, Blockchain architectures have become more and more important. In such architectures, components maintain and exchange a list of records in a way which makes the entries persistent, i.e., resistant to modifications. Thereby, the architecture is dynamic in the sense that components may join or leave the network and connections between them may change over time. The dynamic nature of Blockchain architectures makes their verification a challenge, since it involves reasoning about potentially unbounded number of components. To this end, we developed FACTUM, an approach for the specification and interactive verification of dynamic architectures based on the interactive theorem prover Isabelle. In this paper we report on the outcome of applying the approach to formally specify a version of Blockchain architectures and verify that the list entries of such architectures are indeed persistent.

“…Around the same time, some approaches emerged to formalize architectural styles and patterns [1,30,32,22,5,29]. Only recently, however, formal models of dynamic architectures emerged [35,15,8] and specification techniques for properties of such architectures were developed [27,28].…”

Section: Datatype Specificationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Verifying Patterns of Dynamic Architectures using Model Checking

Electron. Proc. Theor. Comput. Sci.

Degenhardt

2017

Self Cite

Architecture patterns capture architectural design experience and provide abstract solutions to recurring architectural design problems. They consist of a description of component types and restrict component connection and activation. Therefore, they guarantee some desired properties for architectures employing the pattern. Unfortunately, most documented patterns do not provide a formal guarantee of whether their specification indeed leads to the desired guarantee. Failure in doing so, however, might lead to wrong architectures, i.e., architectures wrongly supposed to show certain desired properties. Since architectures, in general, have a high impact on the quality of the resulting system and architectural flaws are only difficult, if not to say impossible, to repair, this may lead to badly reparable quality issues in the resulting system. To address this problem, we propose an approach based on model checking to verify pattern specifications w.r.t. their guarantees. In the following we apply the approach to three well-known patterns for dynamic architectures: the Singleton, the Model-View-Controller, and the Broker pattern. Thereby, we discovered ambiguities and missing constraints for all three specifications. Thus, we conclude that verifying patterns of dynamic architectures using model checking is feasible and useful to discover ambiguities and flaws in pattern specifications.Comment: In Proceedings FESCA 2017, arXiv:1703.0659