Abstract
In this chapter we propose a rule unifying circular and non-circular assume-guarantee reasoning and show its interest for contract-based design and verification. Our work was motivated by the need to combine, in the top-down methodology of the FP7 SPEEDS project, partial tool chains for two component frameworks derived from the HRC model and using different refinement relations. While the L0 framework is based on a simple trace-based representation of behaviors and uses set operations for defining refinement, the more elaborated L1 framework offers the possibility to build systems of components with complex interactions. Our approach in L1 is based on circular reasoning and results in a method for checking contract dominance which does not require the explicit composition of contracts. In order to formally relate results obtained in L0 and L1, we provide a definition of the minimal concepts required by a consistent contract theory and propose abstract definitions which smoothly encompass hierarchical components. Finally, using our relaxed rule for circular reasoning, we show how to use together the L0 and L1 refinement relations and as a result their respective tool chains.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
One may also need to ensure that the assumptions of the low-level contracts are indeed satisfied in the actual system. This is achieved by strengthening the definition with:
$$\begin{aligned} \forall E \text{ on } {\fancyscript{P}} _{A}\text{, } \text{ if } E \models (G^{\prime }, gl ^{\prime },A^{\prime }) \text{ then } E \models (G, gl ,A) \end{aligned}$$ - 2.
Note that non-determinism is another reason here for the non validity of circular reasoning.
References
Sangiovanni-Vincentelli, A., Damm, W., Passerone, R.: Taming Dr. Frankenstein: Contract-based design for cyber-physical systems. J. Control 18(3), 217–238 (2012). doi:10.3166/EJC.18.217-238
Damm, W.: Controlling speculative design processes using rich component models. In: Proceedings of ACSD’05, pp. 118–119. IEEE Computer Society (2005)
Basu, A., Bozga, M., Sifakis, J.: Modeling heterogeneous real-time components in BIP. In: Proceedings of SEFM’06, pp. 3–12. IEEE Computer Society (2006)
Benveniste, A., Caillaud, B., Ferrari, A., Mangeruca, L., Passerone, R., Sofronis, C.: Multiple viewpoint contract-based specification and design. In: F.S. de Boer, M.M. Bonsangue, S. Graf, Willem-Paul de Roever (eds.) Formal Methods for Components and Objects, 6th International Symposium (FMCO 2007), Amsterdam, The Netherlands, October 24–26, 2007, Revised Papers, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 5382, pp. 200–225. Springer (2008). 10.1007/978-3-540-92188-2
Benvenuti, L., Ferrari, A., Mangeruca, L., Mazzi, E., Passerone, R., Sofronis, C.: A contract-based formalism for the specification of heterogeneous systems. In: Proceedings of the Forum on Specification, Verification and Design Languages (FDL08), pp. 142–147. Stuttgart, Germany (2008). doi: 10.1109/FDL.2008.4641436
SPEEDS Consortium: Home page. http://www.speeds.eu.com
COMBEST Consortium: Home page. http://www.combest.eu
CESAR Consortium: Home page. http://www.cesarproject.eu/
Partners, S.: SPEEDS metamodel. SPEEDS project deliverable D2.1.5 (2009)
The Mathworks, Inc.: MATLAB simulink. http://www.mathworks.com
Alur, R., Henzinger, T.A.: Reactive modules. Formal Methods Syst. Des. 15(1), 7–48 (1999)
Maier, P.: A lattice-theoretic framework for circular assume-guarantee reasoning. Ph.D. thesis, Universität des Saarlandes (2003)
Cobleigh, J.M., Avrunin, G.S., Clarke, L.A.: Breaking up is hard to do: An evaluation of automated assume-guarantee reasoning. ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. 17(2) (2008)
Alfaro, L., Henzinger, T.A.: Interface automata. In: Proceedings of ESEC/SIGSOFT FSE’01, pp. 109–120. ACM Press (2001)
Larsen, K.G., Nyman, U., Wasowski, A.: Interface input/output automata. In: Proceedings of FM’06, LNCS, vol. 4085, pp. 82–97 (2006)
Tripakis, S., Lickly, B., Henzinger, T.A., Lee, E.A.: On relational interfaces. In: Proceedings of EMSOFT’09, pp. 67–76 (2009)
Delahaye, B., Caillaud, B., Legay, A.: Probabilistic contracts: A compositional reasoning methodology for the design of stochastic systems. In: Proceedings of ACSD’10, pp. 223–232 (2010)
Raclet, J.B., Badouel, E., Benveniste, A., Caillaud, B., Legay, A., Passerone, R.: Modal interfaces: Unifying interface automata and modal specifications. In: Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Embedded Software (EMSOFT09), pp. 87–96. Grenoble, France (2009)
Raclet, J.B., Badouel, E., Benveniste, A., Caillaud, B., Passerone, R.: Why are modalities good for Interface Theories? In: Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Application of Concurrency to System Design (ACSD09), pp. 119–127. Augsburg, Germany (2009)
Raclet, J.B., Badouel, E., Benveniste, A., Caillaud, B., Legay, A., Passerone, R.: A modal interface theory for component-based design. Fundamenta Informaticae 108(1–2), 119–149 (2011). 10.3233/FI-2011-416
Larsen, K.G., Nyman, U., Wasowski, A.: Modal I/O automata for interface and product line theories. In: Proceedings of ESOP’07, LNCS, vol. 4421, pp. 64–79 (2007)
Quinton, S., Graf, S.: Contract-based verification of hierarchical systems of components. In: Proceedings of SEFM’08, pp. 377–381. IEEE Computer Society (2008)
Hafaiedh, I.B., Graf, S., Quinton, S.: Reasoning about safety and progress using contracts. In: Proceedings of ICFEM’10, pp. 436–451 (2010)
Graf, S., Passerone, R., Quinton, S.: Contract-based reasoning for component systems with complex interactions. Research report TR-2010-12, VERIMAG (2010 updated 2013)
Sifakis, J.: A framework for component-based construction. In: Proceedings of SEFM’05, pp. 293–300. IEEE Computer Society (2005)
Benveniste, A., Caillaud, B., Passerone, R.: A generic model of contracts for embedded systems. Rapport de recherche 6214, Institut National de Recherche en Informatique et en Automatique (2007)
Pinto, A., Bonivento, A., Sangiovanni-Vincentelli, A.L., Passerone, R., Sgroi, M.: System level design paradigms: Platform-based design and communication synthesis. ACM Trans. Des. Autom. Electron. Syst. 11(3), 537–563 (2006). http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1142980.1142982
Acknowledgments
This work was supported in part by the EU projects COMBEST (n. 215543) and ArtistDesign (n. 214373).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer Science+Business Media New York
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Graf, S., Passerone, R., Quinton, S. (2014). Contract-Based Reasoning for Component Systems with Rich Interactions. In: Sangiovanni-Vincentelli, A., Zeng, H., Di Natale, M., Marwedel, P. (eds) Embedded Systems Development. Embedded Systems, vol 20. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-3879-3_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-3879-3_8
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY
Print ISBN: 978-1-4614-3878-6
Online ISBN: 978-1-4614-3879-3
eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)