Model-Based Verification Scope, Formalism, and Perspective Guidelines

Abstract : The goal of model-based verification (MBV) is to reduce the number of defects. Like any other quality assurance (QA) technique, it is not equally efficient in every situation. It is critical to determine where and how to use MBV to achieve the largest impact in terms of the number and criticality of defects found with a reasonable amount of effort. This document provides guidance for defining the scope, formalism (approach and tools), and perspective for applying MBV. The critical (important or risky) aspects of the system and its development, including both programmatic and technical issues, drive these choices and form the basis for these guidelines.

[1]  Edmund M. Clarke,et al.  Another Look at LTL Model Checking , 1994, Formal Methods Syst. Des..

[2]  Michael E. Fagan.  Design and Code Inspections to Reduce Errors in Program Development , 1976, IBM Syst. J..

[3]  S. Kowalewski,et al.  VERDICT-a tool for model-based verification of real-time logic process controllers , 1997, Proceedings of 5th International Workshop on Parallel and Distributed Real-Time Systems and 3rd Workshop on Object-Oriented Real-Time Systems.

[4]  A Holt.  Formal verification with natural language specifications: guidelines, experiments and lessons so far , 1999 .

[5]  Anna Philippou,et al.  Tools and Algorithms for the Construction and Analysis of Systems , 2018, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[6]  I. Hendry.  The Delphi method: Techniques and applications Edited by H. A. Linstone and M. Turoff. Pp. xx + 620. Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Advanced Book Program, Reading, Massachusetts. 1975. US $29.50; US $16.50 paper , 1976 .

[7]  Gerard J. Holzmann,et al.  The Model Checker SPIN , 1997, IEEE Trans. Software Eng..

[8]  Amir Pnueli,et al.  Checking that finite state concurrent programs satisfy their linear specification , 1985, POPL.

[9]  Robert G. Ebenau,et al.  Software Inspection Process , 1993 .

[10]  Somesh Jha,et al.  Verification of the Futurebus+ cache coherence protocol , 1993, Formal Methods Syst. Des..

[11]  James C. Corbett,et al.  A Language Framework for Expressing Checkable Properties of Dynamic Software , 2000, SPIN.

[12]  Moshe Y. Vardi.  Branching vs. Linear Time: Final Showdown , 2001, TACAS.

[13]  Audrey J. Dorofee,et al.  A Collaboration in Implementing Team Risk Management. , 1996 .

[14]  Barry Boehm,et al.  Top 10 list [software development] , 2001 .

[15]  Sriram K. Rajamani,et al.  Automatically validating temporal safety properties of interfaces , 2001, SPIN '01.

[16]  Sérgio Vale Aguiar Campos,et al.  Computing quantitative characteristics of finite-state real-time systems , 1994, 1994 Proceedings Real-Time Systems Symposium.

[17]  David P. Gluch,et al.  An Introduction to Software Engineering Practices Using Model-Based Verification. , 1999 .

[18]  David P. Gluch,et al.  Model-Based Verification: A Technology for Dependable System Upgrade , 1998 .

[19]  Barry W. Boehm,et al.  Software Defect Reduction Top 10 List , 2001, Computer.

[20]  Kenneth L. McMillan,et al.  Symbolic model checking: an approach to the state explosion problem , 1992 .

[21]  Edmund M. Clarke,et al.  Symbolic Model Checking: 10^20 States and Beyond , 1990, Inf. Comput..

[22]  T. Saaty,et al.  The Analytic Hierarchy Process , 1985 .

[23]  James C. Corbett,et al.  Bandera: extracting finite-state models from Java source code , 2000, ICSE.

[24]  Murray Turoff,et al.  The Delphi Method: Techniques and Applications , 1976 .

[25]  Edmund M. Clarke,et al.  Formal Methods: State of the Art and Future Directions Working Group Members , 1996 .