Fixed Points in the Ambient Logic

We present an extension of the ambient logic with fixed points operators in the style of the mu-calculus. We give a simple syntactic condition for the equivalence between minimal and maximal fixpoint formulas and show how to subsume spatial analogues of the usual box and diamond operators

A Bisimulation for the Blue Calculus

The Blue calculus is a direct extension of both the lambda and the pi calculi. In this report, we define an equivalence for this calculus based on barbed congruence, and we prove the validity of the replication laws. For example, we prove that a replicated resource, shared by many processes, can be safely copied and distributed

A Typed Calculus for Querying Distributed XML Documents

We study the problems related to querying large, distributed XML documents. Our proposal takes the form of a new process calculus in which XML data are processes that can be queried by means of concurrent pattern-matching expressions. What we achieve is a functional, strongly-typed programming model based on three main ingredients: an asynchronous process calculus in the style of Milner's pi-calculus and existing semantics for concurrent-ML; a model where documents and expressions are both represented as processes, and where evaluation is represented as a parallel composition of the two; a static type system based on regular expression types

Automated Polyhedral Abstraction Proving

We propose an automated procedure to prove polyhedral abstractions for Petri nets. Polyhedral abstraction is a new type of state-space equivalence based on the use of linear integer constraints. Our approach relies on an encoding into a set of SMT formulas whose satisfaction implies that the equivalence holds. The difficulty, in this context, arises from the fact that we need to handle infinite-state systems. For completeness, we exploit a connection with a class of Petri nets that have Presburger-definable reachability sets. We have implemented our procedure, and we illustrate its use on several examples

Langage intermédiaire et transformations de modèles pour le développement de systèmes temps-réel : retour d'expérience sur la chaîne de vérification formelle Fiacre

6 pagesInternational audienceWe discuss the results obtained during the development of a formal verification toolchain for AADL based on a model driven engineering approach. Our approach is characterized by the use of the pivot language FIACRE to facilitate verification activities and transformations between models. We quickly analyse the first return on experience and present ongoing work started in the scope of the Quarteft project to improve the verification chain.Nous présentons les résultats obtenus durant le développement d’une chaîne de vérifi-cation formelle pour le langage d’architecture AADL basé sur une approche ingénierie dirigéepar les modèles. Notre approche se caractérise par l’utilisation du langage pivot FIACRE pourfaciliter les activités de vérification et de transformations entre modèles. Nous commentonsles premiers retours d’expérience issus de la mise en oeuvre de cette chaîne de vérification etprésentons en conclusion les travaux en cours dans le cadre du projet Quarteft qui visent àl’améliore

Formal Verification of AADL models with Fiacre and Tina

9 pagesInternational audienceThis paper details works undertaken in the scope of the Spices project concerning the behavioral verification of AADL models. We give a high-level view of the tools involved and describe the successive transformations performed by our verification process. We also report on an experiment carried out in order to evaluate our framework and give the first experimental results obtained on real-size models. This demonstrator models a network protocol in charge of data communications between an airplane and ground stations. From this study we draw a set of conclusions about the integration of model-checking tools in an industrial development process

From FMTV to WATERS: Lessons Learned from the First Verification Challenge at ECRTS

We present here the main features and lessons learned from the first edition of what has now become the ECRTS industrial challenge, together with the final description of the challenge and a comparative overview of the proposed solutions. This verification challenge, proposed by Thales, was first discussed in 2014 as part of a dedicated workshop (FMTV, a satellite event of the FM 2014 conference), and solutions were discussed for the first time at the WATERS 2015 workshop. The use case for the verification challenge is an aerial video tracking system. A specificity of this system lies in the fact that periods are constant but known with a limited precision only. The first part of the challenge focuses on the video frame processing system. It consists in computing maximum values of the end-to-end latency of the frames sent by the camera to the display, for two different buffer sizes, and then the minimum duration between two consecutive frame losses. The second challenge is about computing end-to-end latencies on the tracking and camera control for two different values of jitter. Solutions based on five different tools - Fiacre/Tina, CPAL (simulation and analysis), IMITATOR, UPPAAL and MAST - were submitted for discussion at WATERS 2015. While none of these solutions provided a full answer to the challenge, a combination of several of them did allow to draw some conclusions

From FMTV to WATERS: Lessons Learned from the First Verification Challenge at ECRTS

We present here the main features and lessons learned from the first edition of what has now become the ECRTS industrial challenge, together with the final description of the challenge and a comparative overview of the proposed solutions. This verification challenge, proposed by Thales, was first discussed in 2014 as part of a dedicated workshop (FMTV, a satellite event of the FM 2014 conference), and solutions were discussed for the first time at the WATERS 2015 workshop. The use case for the verification challenge is an aerial video tracking system. A specificity of this system lies in the fact that periods are constant but known with a limited precision only. The first part of the challenge focuses on the video frame processing system. It consists in computing maximum values of the end-to-end latency of the frames sent by the camera to the display, for two different buffer sizes, and then the minimum duration between two consecutive frame losses. The second challenge is about computing end-to-end latencies on the tracking and camera control for two different values of jitter. Solutions based on five different tools - Fiacre/Tina, CPAL (simulation and analysis), IMITATOR, UPPAAL and MAST - were submitted for discussion at WATERS 2015. While none of these solutions provided a full answer to the challenge, a combination of several of them did allow to draw some conclusions