Work-in-progress Assume-guarantee reasoning with ioco

This paper presents a combination between the assume-guarantee paradigm and the testing relation ioco. The assume-guarantee paradigm is a ”divide and conquer” technique that decomposes the verification of a system into smaller tasks that involve the verification of its components. The principal aspect of assume-guarantee reasoning is to consider each component separately, while taking into account assumptions about the context of the component. The testing relation ioco is a formal conformance relation for model-based testing that works on labeled transition systems. Our main result shows that, with certain restrictions, assume-guarantee reasoning can be applied in the context of ioco. This enables testing ioco-conformance of a system by testing its components separately

Compositional Verification for Autonomous Systems with Deep Learning Components

As autonomy becomes prevalent in many applications, ranging from recommendation systems to fully autonomous vehicles, there is an increased need to provide safety guarantees for such systems. The problem is difficult, as these are large, complex systems which operate in uncertain environments, requiring data-driven machine-learning components. However, learning techniques such as Deep Neural Networks, widely used today, are inherently unpredictable and lack the theoretical foundations to provide strong assurance guarantees. We present a compositional approach for the scalable, formal verification of autonomous systems that contain Deep Neural Network components. The approach uses assume-guarantee reasoning whereby {\em contracts}, encoding the input-output behavior of individual components, allow the designer to model and incorporate the behavior of the learning-enabled components working side-by-side with the other components. We illustrate the approach on an example taken from the autonomous vehicles domain

SOTER: A Runtime Assurance Framework for Programming Safe Robotics Systems

The recent drive towards achieving greater autonomy and intelligence in robotics has led to high levels of complexity. Autonomous robots increasingly depend on third party off-the-shelf components and complex machine-learning techniques. This trend makes it challenging to provide strong design-time certification of correct operation. To address these challenges, we present SOTER, a robotics programming framework with two key components: (1) a programming language for implementing and testing high-level reactive robotics software and (2) an integrated runtime assurance (RTA) system that helps enable the use of uncertified components, while still providing safety guarantees. SOTER provides language primitives to declaratively construct a RTA module consisting of an advanced, high-performance controller (uncertified), a safe, lower-performance controller (certified), and the desired safety specification. The framework provides a formal guarantee that a well-formed RTA module always satisfies the safety specification, without completely sacrificing performance by using higher performance uncertified components whenever safe. SOTER allows the complex robotics software stack to be constructed as a composition of RTA modules, where each uncertified component is protected using a RTA module. To demonstrate the efficacy of our framework, we consider a real-world case-study of building a safe drone surveillance system. Our experiments both in simulation and on actual drones show that the SOTER-enabled RTA ensures the safety of the system, including when untrusted third-party components have bugs or deviate from the desired behavior

Towards Realizability Checking of Contracts using Theories

Virtual integration techniques focus on building architectural models of systems that can be analyzed early in the design cycle to try to lower cost, reduce risk, and improve quality of complex embedded systems. Given appropriate architectural descriptions and compositional reasoning rules, these techniques can be used to prove important safety properties about the architecture prior to system construction. Such proofs build from "leaf-level" assume/guarantee component contracts through architectural layers towards top-level safety properties. The proofs are built upon the premise that each leaf-level component contract is realizable; i.e., it is possible to construct a component such that for any input allowed by the contract assumptions, there is some output value that the component can produce that satisfies the contract guarantees. Without engineering support it is all too easy to write leaf-level components that can't be realized. Realizability checking for propositional contracts has been well-studied for many years, both for component synthesis and checking correctness of temporal logic requirements. However, checking realizability for contracts involving infinite theories is still an open problem. In this paper, we describe a new approach for checking realizability of contracts involving theories and demonstrate its usefulness on several examples.Comment: 15 pages, to appear in NASA Formal Methods (NFM) 201