Model checking object-Z using ASM

A major problem with creating tools for Object-Z is that its high-level abstractions are difficult to deal with directly. Integrating Object-Z with a more concrete notation is a sound strategy. With this in mind, in this paper we introduce an approach to model-checking Object-Z specifications based on first integrating Object-Z with the Abstract State Machine (ASM) notation to get the notation OZ-ASM. We show that this notation can be readily translated into the specification language ASM-SL, a language that can be automatically translated into the language of the temporal logic model checker SMV

Abstract State Machines 1988-1998: Commented ASM Bibliography

An annotated bibliography of papers which deal with or use Abstract State Machines (ASMs), as of January 1998.Comment: Also maintained as a BibTeX file at http://www.eecs.umich.edu/gasm

AsmetaF: A Flattener for the ASMETA Framework

Abstract State Machines (ASMs) have shown to be a suitable high-level specification method for complex, even industrial, systems; the ASMETA framework, supporting several validation and verification activities on ASM models, is an example of a formal integrated development environment. Although ASMs allow modeling complex systems in a rather concise way -and this is advantageous for specification purposes-, such concise notation is in general a problem for verification activities as model checking and theorem proving that rely on tools accepting simpler notations. In this paper, we propose a flattener tool integrated in the ASMETA framework that transforms a general ASM model in a flattened model constituted only of update, parallel, and conditional rules; such model is easier to map to notations of verification tools. Experiments show the effect of applying the tool to some representative case studies of the ASMETA repository.Comment: In Proceedings F-IDE 2018, arXiv:1811.09014. The first two authors are supported by ERATO HASUO Metamathematics for Systems Design Project (No. JPMJER1603), JST. Funding Reference number: 10.13039/501100009024 ERAT

SS 433: Results of a Recent Multi-wavelength Campaign

We conducted a multi-wavelength campaign in September-October, 2002, to observe SS 433. We used 45 meter sized 30 dishes of Giant Meter Radio Telescope (GMRT) for radio observation, 1.2 meter Physical Research Laboratory Infra-red telescope at Mt Abu for IR, 1 meter Telescope at the State Observatory, Nainital for Optical photometry, 2.3 meter optical telescope at the Vainu Bappu observatory for spectrum and Rossi X-ray Timing Explorer (RXTE) Target of Opportunity (TOO) observation for X-ray observations. We find sharp variations in intensity in time-scales of a few minutes in X-rays, IR and radio wavelengths. Differential photometry at the IR observation clearly indicated significant intrinsic variations in short time scales of minutes throughout the campaign. Combining results of these wavelengths, we find a signature of delay of about two days between IR and Radio. The X-ray spectrum yielded double Fe line profiles which corresponded to red and blue components of the relativistic jet. We also present the broadband spectrum averaged over the campaign duration.Comment: 17 pages 10 figures MNRAS (submitted

Towards a Formal Model of Privacy-Sensitive Dynamic Coalitions

The concept of dynamic coalitions (also virtual organizations) describes the temporary interconnection of autonomous agents, who share information or resources in order to achieve a common goal. Through modern technologies these coalitions may form across company, organization and system borders. Therefor questions of access control and security are of vital significance for the architectures supporting these coalitions. In this paper, we present our first steps to reach a formal framework for modeling and verifying the design of privacy-sensitive dynamic coalition infrastructures and their processes. In order to do so we extend existing dynamic coalition modeling approaches with an access-control-concept, which manages access to information through policies. Furthermore we regard the processes underlying these coalitions and present first works in formalizing these processes. As a result of the present paper we illustrate the usefulness of the Abstract State Machine (ASM) method for this task. We demonstrate a formal treatment of privacy-sensitive dynamic coalitions by two example ASMs which model certain access control situations. A logical consideration of these ASMs can lead to a better understanding and a verification of the ASMs according to the aspired specification.Comment: In Proceedings FAVO 2011, arXiv:1204.579

Formalising the Continuous/Discrete Modeling Step

Formally capturing the transition from a continuous model to a discrete model is investigated using model based refinement techniques. A very simple model for stopping (eg. of a train) is developed in both the continuous and discrete domains. The difference between the two is quantified using generic results from ODE theory, and these estimates can be compared with the exact solutions. Such results do not fit well into a conventional model based refinement framework; however they can be accommodated into a model based retrenchment. The retrenchment is described, and the way it can interface to refinement development on both the continuous and discrete sides is outlined. The approach is compared to what can be achieved using hybrid systems techniques.Comment: In Proceedings Refine 2011, arXiv:1106.348

An open extensible tool environment for Event-B

Abstract. We consider modelling indispensable for the development of complex systems. Modelling must be carried out in a formal notation to reason and make meaningful conjectures about a model. But formal modelling of complex systems is a difficult task. Even when theorem provers improve further and get more powerful, modelling will remain difficult. The reason for this that modelling is an exploratory activity that requires ingenuity in order to arrive at a meaningful model. We are aware that automated theorem provers can discharge most of the onerous trivial proof obligations that appear when modelling systems. In this article we present a modelling tool that seamlessly integrates modelling and proving similar to what is offered today in modern integrated development environments for programming. The tool is extensible and configurable so that it can be adapted more easily to different application domains and development methods.

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

A Toolset for Supporting UML Static and Dynamic Model Checking

The Unified Modeling Language has become widely accepted as a standard in software development. Several tools have been produced to support UML model validation. However, most of them support either static or dynamic model checking; and no tools support to check both static and dynamic aspects of a UML model . But a UML model should include the static and dynamic aspects of a software system. Furthermore, these UML tools translate a UML model into a validation language such as PROMELA. But they have some shortcomings: there is no proof of correctness (with respect to the UML semantics) for these tools. In order to overcome these shortcomings, we present a toolset which can validate both static and dynamic aspects of a model; and this toolset is based on the semantic model using Abstract State Machines. Since the toolset is derived from the semantic model, the toolset is correct with respect to the semantic model