Synthesis of Parametric Programs using Genetic Programming and Model Checking

Formal methods apply algorithms based on mathematical principles to enhance the reliability of systems. It would only be natural to try to progress from verification, model checking or testing a system against its formal specification into constructing it automatically. Classical algorithmic synthesis theory provides interesting algorithms but also alarming high complexity and undecidability results. The use of genetic programming, in combination with model checking and testing, provides a powerful heuristic to synthesize programs. The method is not completely automatic, as it is fine tuned by a user that sets up the specification and parameters. It also does not guarantee to always succeed and converge towards a solution that satisfies all the required properties. However, we applied it successfully on quite nontrivial examples and managed to find solutions to hard programming challenges, as well as to improve and to correct code. We describe here several versions of our method for synthesizing sequential and concurrent systems.Comment: In Proceedings INFINITY 2013, arXiv:1402.661

Practical Distributed Control Synthesis

Classic distributed control problems have an interesting dichotomy: they are either trivial or undecidable. If we allow the controllers to fully synchronize, then synthesis is trivial. In this case, controllers can effectively act as a single controller with complete information, resulting in a trivial control problem. But when we eliminate communication and restrict the supervisors to locally available information, the problem becomes undecidable. In this paper we argue in favor of a middle way. Communication is, in most applications, expensive, and should hence be minimized. We therefore study a solution that tries to communicate only scarcely and, while allowing communication in order to make joint decision, favors local decisions over joint decisions that require communication.Comment: In Proceedings INFINITY 2011, arXiv:1111.267

Rapid Recovery for Systems with Scarce Faults

Our goal is to achieve a high degree of fault tolerance through the control of a safety critical systems. This reduces to solving a game between a malicious environment that injects failures and a controller who tries to establish a correct behavior. We suggest a new control objective for such systems that offers a better balance between complexity and precision: we seek systems that are k-resilient. In order to be k-resilient, a system needs to be able to rapidly recover from a small number, up to k, of local faults infinitely many times, provided that blocks of up to k faults are separated by short recovery periods in which no fault occurs. k-resilience is a simple but powerful abstraction from the precise distribution of local faults, but much more refined than the traditional objective to maximize the number of local faults. We argue why we believe this to be the right level of abstraction for safety critical systems when local faults are few and far between. We show that the computational complexity of constructing optimal control with respect to resilience is low and demonstrate the feasibility through an implementation and experimental results.Comment: In Proceedings GandALF 2012, arXiv:1210.202

07241 Abstracts Collection -- Tools for the Model-based Development of Certifiable, Dependable Systems

From June 10th to June 15th 2007, the Dagstuhl Seminar 07241 ``Tools for the Model-based Development of Certifiable, Dependable Systems\u27\u27 was held in the International Conference and Research Center (IBFI), Schloss Dagstuhl. During the seminar, several participants presented their current research, and ongoing work and open problems were discussed. Abstracts of the presentations given during the seminar as well as abstracts of seminar results and ideas are put together in this paper. The first section describes the seminar topics and goals in general. Links to extended abstracts or full papers are provided, if available

07241 Summary -- Tools for the Model-based Development of Certifiable, Dependable Systems

This paper summarizes the objectives and structure of a seminar with the same title, held from June 10th to June 15th, 2007 at Schloss Dagstuhl, Germany

Knowledge based scheduling of distributed systems

Priorities are used to control the execution of systems to meet given requirements for optimal use of resources, e.g., by using scheduling policies. For distributed systems it is hard to find efficient implementations for priorities; because they express constraints on global states, their implementation may incur considerable overhead. Our method is based on performing model checking for knowledge properties. It allows identifying where the local information of a process is sufficient to schedule the execution of a high priority transition. As a result of the model checking, the program is transformed to react upon the knowledge it has at each point. The transformed version has no priorities, and uses the gathered information and its knowledge to limit the enabledness of transitions so that it matches or approximates the original specification of priorities. © 2010 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

Priority scheduling of distributed systems based on model checking

Priorities are used to control the execution of systems to meet given requirements for optimal use of resources, e.g., by using scheduling policies. For distributed systems, it is hard to find efficient implementations for priorities; because they express constraints on global states, their implementation may incur considerable overhead. Our method is based on performing model checking for knowledge properties. It allows identifying where the local information of a process is sufficient to schedule the execution of a high priority transition. As a result of the model checking, the program is transformed to react upon the knowledge it has at each point. The transformed version has no priorities, and uses the gathered information and its knowledge to limit the enabledness of transitions so that it matches or approximates the original specification of priorities. © 2009 Springer Berlin Heidelberg