Correct by Prognosis: Methodology for a Contract-Based Refinement of Evolution Models

The scope of this paper is collaborative, distributed safety-critical systems building up a larger scale system of systems (SoS). Systems are independently designed and can operate autonomously following both global SoSand individual goals. A major aspect of SoSs is the evolution over time, i.e. the change of its architecture as a result of changes in the context of the SoS or the changes of individual or global goals. We define a modeling concept for evolution specifying all possible changes of the SoS over time. This evolution model is used to generate and analyze future architectures enabling the prediction of future violations of static specifications. The challenge is to address the consistency of the evolution model with respect to the static specification of the SoS. This is achieved by deriving so called dynamicity contracts and thus restricting the evolution model in such a manner, that only correct architectures are produced. 1 OFFIS – Institute for Information Technology, Escherweg 2,26121 Oldenburg, Germany etzien@offis.de 2 OFFIS – Institute for Information Technology, Escherweg 2,26121 Oldenburg, Germany gezgin@offis.de

[1]  Daniel Le Métayer,et al.  Software architecture styles as graph grammars , 1996, SIGSOFT '96.

[2]  Jeff Magee,et al.  Analysing dynamic change in software architectures: a case study , 1998, Proceedings. Fourth International Conference on Configurable Distributed Systems (Cat. No.98EX159).

[3]  Serge Chaumette,et al.  Dynamicity Aware Graph Relabeling Systems (DA-GRS), A Local Computation based Model to Describe Manet Algorithms , 2005, IASTED PDCS.

[4]  Bertrand Meyer,et al.  Applying 'design by contract' , 1992, Computer.

[5]  Achim Rettberg,et al.  Contracts for evolving systems , 2013, 16th IEEE International Symposium on Object/component/service-oriented Real-time distributed Computing (ISORC 2013).

[6]  Mark W. Maier.  Architecting Principles for Systems‐of‐Systems , 1996 .

[7]  Holger Giese,et al.  Model-Driven Development of Reconfigurable Mechatronic Systems with Mechatronic UML , 2004, MDAFA.

[8]  Douglas C. Schmidt,et al.  Ultra-Large-Scale Systems: The Software Challenge of the Future , 2006 .

[9]  Mauro Birattari,et al.  Engineering self-coordinating software intensive systems , 2010, FoSER '10.

[10]  Rajeev Alur,et al.  Modeling and analysis of hybrid systems , 2003 .

[11]  Stefan Henkler,et al.  Modeling and verifying dynamic communication structures based on graph transformations , 2011, Computer Science - Research and Development.

[12]  David Garlan,et al.  Specifying and Analyzing Dynamic Software Architectures , 1998, FASE.

[13]  Achim Rettberg,et al.  Impact analysis for timing requirements on real-time systems , 2014, 2014 IEEE 20th International Conference on Embedded and Real-Time Computing Systems and Applications.

[14]  Reinhard Wilhelm,et al.  Static Analysis of Dynamic Communication Systems by Partner Abstraction , 2007, SAS.

[15]  Arend Rensink.  The GROOVE Simulator: A Tool for State Space Generation , 2003, AGTIVE.

[16]  Morris Sloman,et al.  Configuring distributed systems , 1992, EW 5.

[17]  Andreas Winter,et al.  An Overview of the GXL Graph Exchange Language , 2001, Software Visualization.

[18]  Holger Giese,et al.  Systematic verification of multi-agent systems based on rigorous executable specifications , 2007, Int. J. Agent Oriented Softw. Eng..

[19]  Thomas A. Henzinger.  Masaccio: A Formal Model for Embedded Components , 2000, IFIP TCS.

[20]  Hardi Hungar,et al.  Using contract-based component specifications for virtual integration testing and architecture design , 2011, 2011 Design, Automation & Test in Europe.