Abstract This paper compares statecharts, a specification formalism for reactive systems, to state transition assertions, a verification method for hard real-time systems. While these two methods are used for different tasks and they take different points of view in describing a system, it is useful to compare them to determine what is necessary in a formal specification notation for real-time systems. In this paper, we conclude with a list of issues that need to be resolved when integrating formal verification with a specification notation. The future goal of this work is to provide a more readable front-end specification formalism which can be used for verification. The purpose of doing a formal verification of specifications is to check for correctness early in the system development process and discover errors which can prove costly in later stages. If a more readable notation like statecharts is embedded in the theorem-prover, HOL (Higher Order Logic), it would provide the tools necessary to do mechanized verification.
[1]
Dennis Shasha,et al.
The many faces of consensus in distributed systems
,
1992,
Computer.
[2]
David Harel,et al.
On visual formalisms
,
1988,
CACM.
[3]
Phillip John Windley.
The formal verification of generic interpreters
,
1990
.
[4]
Michael J. C. Gordon.
A Formal Method for Hard Real-Time Programming
,
1991
.
[5]
Amnon Naamad,et al.
Statemate: a working environment for the development of complex reactive systems
,
1988,
ICSE '88.
[6]
Amir Pnueli,et al.
On the Formal Semantics of Statecharts (Extended Abstract)
,
1987,
LICS.
[7]
Amir Pnueli,et al.
Timed and Hybrid Statecharts and Their Textual Representation
,
1992,
FTRTFT.
[8]
Derek Coleman,et al.
Introducing Objectcharts or how to use Statecharts in object-oriented design
,
1992
.