Decomposition tool for Event-B

Two methods have been identified for Event-B model decomposition: shared variable and shared event. The purpose of this paper is to introduce the two approaches and the respective tool support in the Rodin platform. Besides alleviating the complexity for large systems and respective proofs, decomposition allows team development in parallel over the same model which is very attractive in the industrial environment

Event-B model decomposition

Two methods have been identified in the DEPLOY project for Event-B model decomposition: the shared variable decomposition (called A-style decomposition), and the shared event decomposition (or B-style decomposition). Both allow the decomposition of a (concrete) model into several independent sub-models which may then be refined separately. The purpose of this paper is to introduce the Event-B model decomposition, from theory (A-style vs. B-style, differences and similarities) to practice (decomposition plug-in of the Rodin [1] platform)

From Event-B models to code: sensing, actuating, and the environment

The Event-B method is a formal approach for modelling systems in safety-, and business-critical, domains. We focus, in this paper, on multi-tasking, embedded control systems. Initially, system specification takes place at a high level of abstraction; detail is added in refinement steps as the development proceeds toward implementation. In previous work, we presented an approach for generating code, for concurrent programs, from Event-B. Translators generate program code for tasks that access data in a safe way, using shared objects. We did not distinguish between tasks of the environment and those of the controller. The work described in this paper offers improved modelling and code generation support, where we separate the environment from the controller. The events in the system can participate in actuating or sensing roles. In the resulting code, sensing and actuation can be simulated using a form of subroutine call; or additional information can be provided to allow a task to read/write directly from/to a specfied memory location

Decomposition Tool for Event-B

Two methods have been identified for Event-B model decomposition: shared variable and shared event. The purpose of this paper is to introduce the two approaches and the respective tool support in the Rodin platform. Besides alleviating the complexity for large systems and respective proofs, decomposition allows team development in parallel over the same model which is very attractive in the industrial environment

A systematic approach to atomicity decomposition in Event-B

Event-B is a state-based formal method that supports a refinement process in which an abstract model is elaborated towards an implementation in a step-wise manner. One weakness of Event-B is that control flow between events is typically modelled implicitly via variables and event guards. While this fits well with Event-B refinement, it can make models involving sequencing of events more difficult to specify and understand than if control flow was explicitly specified. New events may be introduced in Event-B refinement and these are often used to decompose the atomicity of an abstract event into a series of steps. A second weakness of Event-B is that there is no explicit link between such new events that represent a step in the decomposition of atomicity and the abstract event to which they contribute. To address these weaknesses, atomicity decomposition diagrams support the explicit modelling of control flow and refinement relationships for new events. In previous work,the atomicity decomposition approach has been evaluated manually in the development of two large case studies, a multi media protocol and a spacecraft sub-system. The evaluation results helped us to develop a systematic definition of the atomicity decomposition approach, and to develop a tool supporting the approach. In this paper we outline this systematic definition of the approach, the tool that supports it and evaluate the contribution that the tool makes

Formal modelling for Ada implementations: tasking Event-B

This paper describes a formal modelling approach, where Ada code is automatically generated from the modelling artefacts. We introduce an implementation-level specification, Tasking Event-B, which is an extension to Event-B. Event-B is a formal method, that can be used to model safety-, and business-critical systems. The work may be of interest to a section of the Ada community who are interested in applying formal modelling techniques in their development process, and automatically generating Ada code from the model. We describe a streamlined process, where the abstract modelling artefacts map easily to Ada language constructs. Initial modelling takes place at a high level of abstraction. We then use refinement, decomposition, and finally implementation-level annotations, to generate Ada code. We provide a brief introduction to Event-B, before illustrating the new approach using small examples taken from a larger case study

Evaluation of graphical control flow management approaches for Event-B modelling

Integrating graphical representations with formal methods can help bridge the gap between requirements and formal modelling. In this paper, we compare and evaluate two graphical approaches aiming at describing control flows and refinement in Event-B, and we use a fire dispatch system case study to perform this evaluation. The fire dispatch system case study provides a good example of a complex workflow through which we try to identify a process that facilitates defining the structural and the behavioural parts of the Event-B model. In our case study, we focus on building the dynamic part of the model to evaluate the two diagrammatic notations: UML Activity Diagrams and Atomicity Decomposition Diagrams. Based on our evaluation, we try to identify the advantages and limitations of both approaches. Finally, we try to compare how both graphical notations can affect the Event-B formal modelling of our case study

Tasking Event-B: An Extension to Event-B for Generating Concurrent Code

The Event-B method is a formal approach for modelling systems in safety-, and business-critical, domains. Initially, system specification takes place at a high level of abstraction; detail is added in refinement steps as the development proceeds toward implementation. Our aim has been to develop a novel approach for generating code, for concurrent programs, from Event-B. We formulated the approach so that it integrates well with the existing Event-B methodology and tools. In this paper we introduce a tasking extension for Event-B, with Tasking and Shared Machines. We make use of refinement, decomposition, and the extension, to structure projects for code generation for multitasking implementations. During the modelling phase decomposition is performed; decomposition reduces modelling complexity and makes proof more tractable. The decomposed models are then extended with sufficient information to enable generation of code. A task body describes a task’s behaviour, mainly using imperative, programming-like constructs. Task priority and life-cycle (periodic, triggered, etc.) are also specified, but timing aspects are not modelled formally. We provide tool support in order to validate the practical aspects of the approach

Refining SCJ Mission Specifications into Parallel Handler Designs

Safety-Critical Java (SCJ) is a recent technology that restricts the execution and memory model of Java in such a way that applications can be statically analysed and certified for their real-time properties and safe use of memory. Our interest is in the development of comprehensive and sound techniques for the formal specification, refinement, design, and implementation of SCJ programs, using a correct-by-construction approach. As part of this work, we present here an account of laws and patterns that are of general use for the refinement of SCJ mission specifications into designs of parallel handlers used in the SCJ programming paradigm. Our notation is a combination of languages from the Circus family, supporting state-rich reactive models with the addition of class objects and real-time properties. Our work is a first step to elicit laws of programming for SCJ and fits into a refinement strategy that we have developed previously to derive SCJ programs.Comment: In Proceedings Refine 2013, arXiv:1305.563