Using parameters in architectural views to support heterogeneous design and verification

Current methods for designing cyber-physical systems lack a unifying framework due to the heterogeneous nature of the constituent models and their respective analysis and verification tools. There is a need for a formal representation of the relationships between the different models. Our approach is to define these relationships at the architectural level, associating with each model a particular view of the overall system base architecture. This architectural framework captures critical structural and semantic information without including all the details of the various modeling formalisms. This paper introduces the use of logical constraints over parameters in the architectural views to represent the conditions under which the specifications verified for each model are true and imply the system-level specification. Interdependencies and connections between the constraints in the architectural views are managed in the base architecture using first-order logic of real arithmetic to ensure consistency and correct reasoning. The approach is illustrated in the context of heterogeneous verification of a leader-follower vehicle scenario.

[1]  James Davis,et al.  GME: the generic modeling environment , 2003, OOPSLA '03.

[2]  Sandeep Neema,et al.  Toward a semantic anchoring infrastructure for domain-specific modeling languages , 2005, EMSOFT.

[3]  Ajinkya Bhave,et al.  Augmenting Software Architectures with Physical Components , 2010 .

[4]  Gabor Karsai,et al.  The Generic Modeling Environment , 2001 .

[5]  Christiaan J. J. Paredis,et al.  Integrating Models and Simulations of Continuous Dynamics Into SysML , 2012, J. Comput. Inf. Sci. Eng..

[6]  Luciano Lavagno,et al.  Metropolis: An Integrated Electronic System Design Environment , 2003, Computer.

[7]  Edward A. Lee,et al.  Ptolemy II, Heterogeneous Concurrent Modeling and Design in JAVA , 2001 .

[8]  Sandeep Neema,et al.  Modeling methodology for integrated simulation of embedded systems , 2003, TOMC.

[9]  H. Vangheluwe DEVS as a common denominator for multi-formalism hybrid systems modelling , 2000, CACSD. Conference Proceedings. IEEE International Symposium on Computer-Aided Control System Design (Cat. No.00TH8537).

[10]  Gabor Karsai,et al.  An Experimental Model-Based Rapid Prototyping Environment for High-Confidence Embedded Software , 2009, 2009 IEEE/IFIP International Symposium on Rapid System Prototyping.

[11]  Kang G. Shin,et al.  A model-based approach to system-level dependency and real-time analysis of embedded software , 2003, The 9th IEEE Real-Time and Embedded Technology and Applications Symposium, 2003. Proceedings..

[12]  Luca P. Carloni,et al.  INTERCHANGE SEMANTICS FOR HYBRID SYSTEM MODELS , 2006 .

[13]  Bruce H. Krogh,et al.  An Ontology-Based Approach to Heterogeneous Verification of Embedded Control Systems , 2005, HSCC.

[14]  G. Sacks A DECISION METHOD FOR ELEMENTARY ALGEBRA AND GEOMETRY , 2003 .

[15]  Huirong Fu,et al.  Measuring the performance of IEEE 802.11p using ns-2 simulator for vehicular networks , 2008, 2008 IEEE International Conference on Electro/Information Technology.

[16]  Ajinkya Bhave,et al.  An Architectural Approach to the Design and Analysis of Cyber-Physical Systems , 2009, Electron. Commun. Eur. Assoc. Softw. Sci. Technol..

[17]  André Platzer,et al.  Logical Analysis of Hybrid Systems - Proving Theorems for Complex Dynamics , 2010 .

[18]  David Garlan,et al.  Documenting software architectures: views and beyond , 2002, 25th International Conference on Software Engineering, 2003. Proceedings..

[19]  André Platzer,et al.  Adaptive Cruise Control: Hybrid, Distributed, and Now Formally Verified , 2011, FM.

[20]  Edward A. Lee,et al.  Scalable Semantic Annotation Using Lattice-Based Ontologies , 2009, MoDELS.

[21]  Bradley R. Schmerl,et al.  View Consistency in Architectures for Cyber-Physical Systems , 2011, 2011 IEEE/ACM Second International Conference on Cyber-Physical Systems.