Formalization and Validation of Safety-Critical Requirements

The validation of requirements is a fundamental step in the development process of safety-critical systems. In safety critical applications such as aerospace, avionics and railways, the use of formal methods is of paramount importance both for requirements and for design validation. Nevertheless, while for the verification of the design, many formal techniques have been conceived and applied, the research on formal methods for requirements validation is not yet mature. The main obstacles are that, on the one hand, the correctness of requirements is not formally defined; on the other hand that the formalization and the validation of the requirements usually demands a strong involvement of domain experts. We report on a methodology and a series of techniques that we developed for the formalization and validation of high-level requirements for safety-critical applications. The main ingredients are a very expressive formal language and automatic satisfiability procedures. The language combines first-order, temporal, and hybrid logic. The satisfiability procedures are based on model checking and satisfiability modulo theory. We applied this technology within an industrial project to the validation of railways requirements

Development of a framework for automated systematic testing of safety-critical embedded systems

“This material is presented to ensure timely dissemination of scholarly and technical work. Copyright and all rights therein are retained by authors or by other copyright holders. All persons copying this information are expected to adhere to the terms and constraints invoked by each author's copyright. In most cases, these works may not be reposted without the explicit permission of the copyright holder." “Copyright IEEE. Personal use of this material is permitted. However, permission to reprint/republish this material for advertising or promotional purposes or for creating new collective works for resale or redistribution to servers or lists, or to reuse any copyrighted component of this work in other works must be obtained from the IEEE.”In this paper we introduce the development of a framework for testing safety-critical embedded systems based on the concepts of model-based testing. In model-based testing the test cases are derived from a model of the system under test. In our approach the model is an automaton model that is automatically extracted from the C-source code of the system under test. Beside random test data generation the test case generation uses formal methods, in detail model checking techniques. To find appropriate test cases we use the requirements defined in the system specification. To cover further execution paths we developed an additional, to our best knowledge, novel method based on special structural coverage criteria. We present preliminary results on the model extraction using a concrete industrial case study from the automotive domain

Software safety : a definition and some preliminary thoughts

Software safety is the subject of a research project in its initial stages at the University of California Irvine. This research deals with critical real-time software where the cost of an error is high, e.g. human life. In this paper software techniques having a bearing on safety are described and evaluated. Initial definitions of software safety concepts are presented along with some preliminary thoughts and research questions

Monitoring-Oriented Programming: A Tool-Supported Methodology for Higher Quality Object-Oriented Software

This paper presents a tool-supported methodological paradigm for object-oriented software development, called monitoring-oriented programming and abbreviated MOP, in which runtime monitoring is a basic software design principle. The general idea underlying MOP is that software developers insert specifications in their code via annotations. Actual monitoring code is automatically synthesized from these annotations before compilation and integrated at appropriate places in the program, according to user-defined configuration attributes. This way, the specification is checked at runtime against the implementation. Moreover, violations and/or validations of specifications can trigger user-defined code at any points in the program, in particular recovery code, outputting or sending messages, or raising exceptions. The MOP paradigm does not promote or enforce any specific formalism to specify requirements: it allows the users to plug-in their favorite or domain-specific specification formalisms via logic plug-in modules. There are two major technical challenges that MOP supporting tools unavoidably face: monitor synthesis and monitor integration. The former is heavily dependent on the specification formalism and comes as part of the corresponding logic plug-in, while the latter is uniform for all specification formalisms and depends only on the target programming language. An experimental prototype tool, called Java-MOP, is also discussed, which currently supports most but not all of the desired MOP features. MOP aims at reducing the gap between formal specification and implementation, by integrating the two and allowing them together to form a system

Towards a methodology for rigorous development of generic requirements patterns

We present work in progress on a methodology for the engineering, validation and verification of generic requirements using domain engineering and formal methods. The need to develop a generic requirement set for subsequent system instantiation is complicated by the addition of the high levels of verification demanded by safety-critical domains such as avionics. We consider the failure detection and management function for engine control systems as an application domain where product line engineering is useful. The methodology produces a generic requirement set in our, UML based, formal notation, UML-B. The formal verification both of the generic requirement set, and of a particular application, is achieved via translation to the formal specification language, B, using our U2B and ProB tools

Combining SysML and AADL for the design, validation and implementation of critical systems

The realization of critical systems goes through multiple phases of specification, design, integration, validation, and testing. It starts from high-level sketches down to the final product. Model-Based Design has been acknowledged as a good conveyor to capture these steps. Yet, there is no universal solution to represent all activities. Two candidates are the OMG-based SysML to perform high-level modeling tasks, and the SAE AADL to perform lower-level ones, down to the implementation. The paper shares an experience on the seamless use of SysML and the AADL to model, validate/verify and implement a flight management system

Researching Across Two Cultures: Shifting Positionality

Embodied and creative research methods provoke honesty, emotion, and vulnerability in participants, which add to the richness of the stories they tell and are willing to share. The positionality of the researcher is less of “interviewer” and more “co-producer” or participant in a dialogue. Visual and creative approaches invite participants to share in ways in which they are not able or willing through words alone. The data and outputs they produce, with film, art, or objects, can in turn affect those who see it more than written text and need to be analysed and disseminated along with more traditional transcripts, articles, and presentations. In the context of investigating sensitive issues such as those around embodied identity, these methods, which use embodied methods to explore embodied research questions, may feel the most appropriate. These approaches lie along the boundary of therapy and research, asking much of researchers who are unlikely to have received therapeutic training or ongoing support. Due to this deficit, the researched may find that their experience is not held or contained in a way that the content would demand. Similarly, the data themselves lie on the boundary of art and research, in that they can be seen as more than a tool to facilitate reflection, but as artifacts in their own right. What are the implications in this scenario? Where should we position ourselves and our work along these boundaries? Who holds the space for the researcher and the researched if both are made vulnerable

Automatic instantiation of abstract tests on specific configurations for large critical control systems

Computer-based control systems have grown in size, complexity, distribution and criticality. In this paper a methodology is presented to perform an abstract testing of such large control systems in an efficient way: an abstract test is specified directly from system functional requirements and has to be instantiated in more test runs to cover a specific configuration, comprising any number of control entities (sensors, actuators and logic processes). Such a process is usually performed by hand for each installation of the control system, requiring a considerable time effort and being an error prone verification activity. To automate a safe passage from abstract tests, related to the so called generic software application, to any specific installation, an algorithm is provided, starting from a reference architecture and a state-based behavioural model of the control software. The presented approach has been applied to a railway interlocking system, demonstrating its feasibility and effectiveness in several years of testing experience

COST Action IC 1402 ArVI: Runtime Verification Beyond Monitoring -- Activity Report of Working Group 1

This report presents the activities of the first working group of the COST Action ArVI, Runtime Verification beyond Monitoring. The report aims to provide an overview of some of the major core aspects involved in Runtime Verification. Runtime Verification is the field of research dedicated to the analysis of system executions. It is often seen as a discipline that studies how a system run satisfies or violates correctness properties. The report exposes a taxonomy of Runtime Verification (RV) presenting the terminology involved with the main concepts of the field. The report also develops the concept of instrumentation, the various ways to instrument systems, and the fundamental role of instrumentation in designing an RV framework. We also discuss how RV interplays with other verification techniques such as model-checking, deductive verification, model learning, testing, and runtime assertion checking. Finally, we propose challenges in monitoring quantitative and statistical data beyond detecting property violation