Adaptable transition systems

We present an essential model of adaptable transition systems inspired by white-box approaches to adaptation and based on foundational models of component based systems. The key feature of adaptable transition systems are control propositions, imposing a clear separation between ordinary, functional behaviours and adaptive ones. We instantiate our approach on interface automata yielding adaptable interface automata, but it may be instantiated on other foundational models of component-based systems as well. We discuss how control propositions can be exploited in the specification and analysis of adaptive systems, focusing on various notions proposed in the literature, like adaptability, control loops, and control synthesis

Adapting Components Behaviours using Interface Automata

International audienceOne of the principal goal of Component-Based Software Engineering (CBSE) is to allow the reuse of components in diverse situations without affecting their codes. To reach this goal, it is necessary to propose approaches to adapt a component with its environment when behavioural mismatches occur during their interactions. In this paper, we present a formal approach based on interface automata to adapt components in order to eliminate possible behavioural mismatches, and then insure more flexible interoperability between component

Adaptability Checking in Multi-Level Complex Systems

A hierarchical model for multi-level adaptive systems is built on two basic levels: a lower behavioural level B accounting for the actual behaviour of the system and an upper structural level S describing the adaptation dynamics of the system. The behavioural level is modelled as a state machine and the structural level as a higher-order system whose states have associated logical formulas (constraints) over observables of the behavioural level. S is used to capture the global and stable features of B, by a defining set of allowed behaviours. The adaptation semantics is such that the upper S level imposes constraints on the lower B level, which has to adapt whenever it no longer can satisfy them. In this context, we introduce weak and strong adaptabil- ity, i.e. the ability of a system to adapt for some evolution paths or for all possible evolutions, respectively. We provide a relational characterisation for these two notions and we show that adaptability checking, i.e. deciding if a system is weak or strong adaptable, can be reduced to a CTL model checking problem. We apply the model and the theoretical results to the case study of motion control of autonomous transport vehicles.Comment: 57 page, 10 figures, research papaer, submitte

Procedure-modular specification and verification of temporal safety properties

This paper describes ProMoVer, a tool for fully automated procedure-modular verification of Java programs equipped with method-local and global assertions that specify safety properties of sequences of method invocations. Modularity at the procedure-level is a natural instantiation of the modular verification paradigm, where correctness of global properties is relativized on the local properties of the methods rather than on their implementations. Here, it is based on the construction of maximal models for a program model that abstracts away from program data. This approach allows global properties to be verified in the presence of code evolution, multiple method implementations (as arising from software product lines), or even unknown method implementations (as in mobile code for open platforms). ProMoVer automates a typical verification scenario for a previously developed tool set for compositional verification of control flow safety properties, and provides appropriate pre- and post-processing. Both linear-time temporal logic and finite automata are supported as formalisms for expressing local and global safety properties, allowing the user to choose a suitable format for the property at hand. Modularity is exploited by a mechanism for proof reuse that detects and minimizes the verification tasks resulting from changes in the code and the specifications. The verification task is relatively light-weight due to support for abstraction from private methods and automatic extraction of candidate specifications from method implementations. We evaluate the tool on a number of applications from the domains of Java Card and web-based application

Modal Interface Automata

De Alfaro and Henzinger's Interface Automata (IA) and Nyman et al.'s recent combination IOMTS of IA and Larsen's Modal Transition Systems (MTS) are established frameworks for specifying interfaces of system components. However, neither IA nor IOMTS consider conjunction that is needed in practice when a component shall satisfy multiple interfaces, while Larsen's MTS-conjunction is not closed and Bene\v{s} et al.'s conjunction on disjunctive MTS does not treat internal transitions. In addition, IOMTS-parallel composition exhibits a compositionality defect. This article defines conjunction (and also disjunction) on IA and disjunctive MTS and proves the operators to be 'correct', i.e., the greatest lower bounds (least upper bounds) wrt. IA- and resp. MTS-refinement. As its main contribution, a novel interface theory called Modal Interface Automata (MIA) is introduced: MIA is a rich subset of IOMTS featuring explicit output-must-transitions while input-transitions are always allowed implicitly, is equipped with compositional parallel, conjunction and disjunction operators, and allows a simpler embedding of IA than Nyman's. Thus, it fixes the shortcomings of related work, without restricting designers to deterministic interfaces as Raclet et al.'s modal interface theory does.Comment: 28 page

Adapting Component-based Systems at Runtime via Policies with Temporal Patterns

International audienceDynamic reconfiguration allows adding or removing components of component-based systems without incurring any system downtime. To satisfy specific requirements, adaptation policies provide the means to dynamically reconfigure the systems in relation to (events in) their environment. This paper extends event-based adaptation policies by integrating temporal requirements into them. The challenge is to reconfigure component-based systems at runtime while considering both their functional and non-functional requirements. We illustrate our theoretical contributions with an example of an autonomous vehicle location system. An implementation using the Fractal component model constitutes a practical contribution. It enables dynamic reconfigurations guided by either enforcement or reflection adaptation policies

A Conceptual Framework for Adapation

This paper presents a white-box conceptual framework for adaptation that promotes a neat separation of the adaptation logic from the application logic through a clear identification of control data and their role in the adaptation logic. The framework provides an original perspective from which we survey archetypal approaches to (self-)adaptation ranging from programming languages and paradigms, to computational models, to engineering solutions

A Conceptual Framework for Adapation

This paper presents a white-box conceptual framework for adaptation that promotes a neat separation of the adaptation logic from the application logic through a clear identification of control data and their role in the adaptation logic. The framework provides an original perspective from which we survey archetypal approaches to (self-)adaptation ranging from programming languages and paradigms, to computational models, to engineering solutions

A Conceptual Framework for Adapation

We present a white-box conceptual framework for adaptation. We called it CODA, for COntrol Data Adaptation, since it is based on the notion of control data. CODA promotes a neat separation between application and adaptation logic through a clear identification of the set of data that is relevant for the latter. The framework provides an original perspective from which we survey a representative set of approaches to adaptation ranging from programming languages and paradigms, to computational models and architectural solutions

Combining centralised and distributed testing

Many systems interact with their environment at distributed interfaces (ports) and sometimes it is not possible to place synchronised local testers at the ports of the system under test (SUT). There are then two main approaches to testing: having independent local testers or a single centralised tester that interacts asynchronously with the SUT. The power of using independent testers has been captured using implementation relation \dioco. In this paper we define implementation relation \diococ for the centralised approach and prove that \dioco and \diococ are incomparable. This shows that the frameworks detect different types of faults and so we devise a hybrid framework and define an implementation relation \diocos for this. We prove that the hybrid framework is more powerful than the distributed and centralised approaches. We then prove that the Oracle problem is NP-complete for \diococ and \diocos but can be solved in polynomial time if we place an upper bound on the number of ports. Finally, we consider the problem of deciding whether there is a test case that is guaranteed to force a finite state model into a particular state or to distinguish two states, proving that both problems are undecidable for the centralised and hybrid frameworks