14,434 research outputs found

    Verification of UML Model Elements Using B

    Get PDF
    International audienceThis paper describes the formal verification of UML model elements using B abstract machines. We study the UML metamodel of class diagrams, collaboration diagrams and state-chart diagrams as well as their well-formedness rules. Each element of UML models which is an instance of a metaclass, is transformed into a B abstract machine. The relationship between abstract machines is organised using the abstract syntax of UML class diagram of the UML metamodel. B specifications are proved by a B prover which generates automatically proof obligations, allowing UML model elements to be verified. The correctness of the UML model elements is ensured by the well-formedness rules which are transformed to B invariants. We illustrate our approach by a simple case study, the printing system

    Automated Mapping of UML Activity Diagrams to Formal Specifications for Supporting Containment Checking

    Full text link
    Business analysts and domain experts are often sketching the behaviors of a software system using high-level models that are technology- and platform-independent. The developers will refine and enrich these high-level models with technical details. As a consequence, the refined models can deviate from the original models over time, especially when the two kinds of models evolve independently. In this context, we focus on behavior models; that is, we aim to ensure that the refined, low-level behavior models conform to the corresponding high-level behavior models. Based on existing formal verification techniques, we propose containment checking as a means to assess whether the system's behaviors described by the low-level models satisfy what has been specified in the high-level counterparts. One of the major obstacles is how to lessen the burden of creating formal specifications of the behavior models as well as consistency constraints, which is a tedious and error-prone task when done manually. Our approach presented in this paper aims at alleviating the aforementioned challenges by considering the behavior models as verification inputs and devising automated mappings of behavior models onto formal properties and descriptions that can be directly used by model checkers. We discuss various challenges in our approach and show the applicability of our approach in illustrative scenarios.Comment: In Proceedings FESCA 2014, arXiv:1404.043

    IEEE Standard 1500 Compliance Verification for Embedded Cores

    Get PDF
    Core-based design and reuse are the two key elements for an efficient system-on-chip (SoC) development. Unfortunately, they also introduce new challenges in SoC testing, such as core test reuse and the need of a common test infrastructure working with cores originating from different vendors. The IEEE 1500 Standard for Embedded Core Testing addresses these issues by proposing a flexible hardware test wrapper architecture for embedded cores, together with a core test language (CTL) used to describe the implemented wrapper functionalities. Several intellectual property providers have already announced IEEE Standard 1500 compliance in both existing and future design blocks. In this paper, we address the problem of guaranteeing the compliance of a wrapper architecture and its CTL description to the IEEE Standard 1500. This step is mandatory to fully trust the wrapper functionalities in applying the test sequences to the core. We present a systematic methodology to build a verification framework for IEEE Standard 1500 compliant cores, allowing core providers and/or integrators to verify the compliance of their products (sold or purchased) to the standar

    A graph-based aspect interference detection approach for UML-based aspect-oriented models

    Get PDF
    Aspect Oriented Modeling (AOM) techniques facilitate separate modeling of concerns and allow for a more flexible composition of these than traditional modeling technique. While this improves the understandability of each submodel, in order to reason about the behavior of the composed system and to detect conflicts among submodels, automated tool support is required. Current techniques for conflict detection among aspects generally have at least one of the following weaknesses. They require to manually model the abstract semantics for each system; or they derive the system semantics from code assuming one specific aspect-oriented language. Defining an extra semantics model for verification bears the risk of inconsistencies between the actual and the verified design; verifying only at implementation level hinders fixng errors in earlier phases. We propose a technique for fully automatic detection of conflicts between aspects at the model level; more specifically, our approach works on UML models with an extension for modeling pointcuts and advice. As back-end we use a graph-based model checker, for which we have defined an operational semantics of UML diagrams, pointcuts and advice. In order to simulate the system, we automatically derive a graph model from the diagrams. The result is another graph, which represents all possible program executions, and which can be verified against a declarative specification of invariants.\ud To demonstrate our approach, we discuss a UML-based AOM model of the "Crisis Management System" and a possible design and evolution scenario. The complexity of the system makes con°icts among composed aspects hard to detect: already in the case of two simulated aspects, the state space contains 623 di®erent states and 9 different execution paths. Nevertheless, in case the right pruning methods are used, the state-space only grows linearly with the number of aspects; therefore, the automatic analysis scales

    UML-B and Event-B: an integration of languages and tools

    No full text
    UML-B is a graphical front end for Event-B. It adds support for class-oriented modelling but retains the Event-B concept of a closed system characterized by families of spontaneous events. UML-B is similar to UML but is essentially a new notation based on a separate meta-model. We provide tool support for UML-B, including drawing tools and a translator to generate Event-B models. The tools are closely integrated with the Event-B verification tools so that when a drawing is saved the translator automatically generates the corresponding Event-B model. The Event-B verification tools (syntax checker and prover) then run automatically providing an immediate display of problems. We introduce the UML-B notation its tool support and its integration with Event-B

    Property specification and static verification of UML models

    Get PDF
    We present a static verification tool (SVT), a system that performs static verification on UML models composed of UML class and state machine diagrams. Additionally, the SVT allows the user to add extra behavior specification in the form of guards and effects by defining a small action language. UML models are checked against properties written in a special-purpose property language that allows the user to specify linear temporal logic formulas that explicitly reason about UML components. Thus, the SVT provides a strong foundation for the design of reliable systems and a step towards model-driven security

    Collaborative Verification-Driven Engineering of Hybrid Systems

    Full text link
    Hybrid systems with both discrete and continuous dynamics are an important model for real-world cyber-physical systems. The key challenge is to ensure their correct functioning w.r.t. safety requirements. Promising techniques to ensure safety seem to be model-driven engineering to develop hybrid systems in a well-defined and traceable manner, and formal verification to prove their correctness. Their combination forms the vision of verification-driven engineering. Often, hybrid systems are rather complex in that they require expertise from many domains (e.g., robotics, control systems, computer science, software engineering, and mechanical engineering). Moreover, despite the remarkable progress in automating formal verification of hybrid systems, the construction of proofs of complex systems often requires nontrivial human guidance, since hybrid systems verification tools solve undecidable problems. It is, thus, not uncommon for development and verification teams to consist of many players with diverse expertise. This paper introduces a verification-driven engineering toolset that extends our previous work on hybrid and arithmetic verification with tools for (i) graphical (UML) and textual modeling of hybrid systems, (ii) exchanging and comparing models and proofs, and (iii) managing verification tasks. This toolset makes it easier to tackle large-scale verification tasks

    Testing M2T/T2M Transformations

    Get PDF
    Presentado en: 16th International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems (MODELS 2013). Del 29 de septiembre al 4 de octubre. Miami, EEUU.Testing model-to-model (M2M) transformations is becoming a prominent topic in the current Model-driven Engineering landscape. Current approaches for transformation testing, however, assume having explicit model representations for the input domain and for the output domain of the transformation. This excludes other important transformation kinds, such as model-to-text (M2T) and text-to-model (T2M) transformations, from being properly tested since adequate model representations are missing either for the input domain or for the output domain. The contribution of this paper to overcome this gap is extending Tracts, a M2M transformation testing approach, for M2T/T2M transformation testing. The main mechanism we employ for reusing Tracts is to represent text within a generic metamodel. By this, we transform the M2T/T2M transformation specification problems into equivalent M2M transformation specification problems. We demonstrate the applicability of the approach by two examples and present how the approach is implemented for the Eclipse Modeling Framework (EMF). Finally, we apply the approach to evaluate code generation capabilities of several existing UML tools.Universidad de Málaga. Campus de Excelencia Internacional Andalucía Tech. Proyecto TIN2011-2379
    corecore