Formal refinement of extended state machines
In a traditional formal development process, e.g. using the B method, the informal user requirements are (manually) translated into a global abstract formal specification. This translation is especially difficult to achieve. The Event-B method was developed to incrementally and formally construct su...
Main Authors: | , , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Open Publishing Association
2016-06-01
|
Series: | Electronic Proceedings in Theoretical Computer Science |
Online Access: | http://arxiv.org/pdf/1606.02016v1 |
id |
doaj-175b2a384e18400fbe0cece74fcabbe3 |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-175b2a384e18400fbe0cece74fcabbe32020-11-25T01:15:18ZengOpen Publishing AssociationElectronic Proceedings in Theoretical Computer Science2075-21802016-06-01209Proc. Refine 201511610.4204/EPTCS.209.1:1Formal refinement of extended state machinesThomas Fayolle0Marc Frappier1Régine Laleau2Frédéric Gervais3 Université Paris-Est LACL Université de Sherbrooke GRIL Université Paris-Est LACL Université Paris-Est LACL In a traditional formal development process, e.g. using the B method, the informal user requirements are (manually) translated into a global abstract formal specification. This translation is especially difficult to achieve. The Event-B method was developed to incrementally and formally construct such a specification using stepwise refinement. Each increment takes into account new properties and system aspects. In this paper, we propose to couple a graphical notation called Algebraic State-Transition Diagrams (ASTD) with an Event-B specification in order to provide a better understanding of the software behaviour. The dynamic behaviour is captured by the ASTD, which is based on automata and process algebra operators, while the data model is described by means of an Event-B specification. We propose a methodology to incrementally refine such specification couplings, taking into account new refinement relations and consistency conditions between the control specification and the data specification. We compare the specifications obtained using each approach for readability and proof complexity. The advantages and drawbacks of the traditional approach and of our methodology are discussed. The whole process is illustrated by a railway CBTC-like case study. Our approach is supported by tools for translating ASTD's into B and Event-B into B.http://arxiv.org/pdf/1606.02016v1 |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Thomas Fayolle Marc Frappier Régine Laleau Frédéric Gervais |
spellingShingle |
Thomas Fayolle Marc Frappier Régine Laleau Frédéric Gervais Formal refinement of extended state machines Electronic Proceedings in Theoretical Computer Science |
author_facet |
Thomas Fayolle Marc Frappier Régine Laleau Frédéric Gervais |
author_sort |
Thomas Fayolle |
title |
Formal refinement of extended state machines |
title_short |
Formal refinement of extended state machines |
title_full |
Formal refinement of extended state machines |
title_fullStr |
Formal refinement of extended state machines |
title_full_unstemmed |
Formal refinement of extended state machines |
title_sort |
formal refinement of extended state machines |
publisher |
Open Publishing Association |
series |
Electronic Proceedings in Theoretical Computer Science |
issn |
2075-2180 |
publishDate |
2016-06-01 |
description |
In a traditional formal development process, e.g. using the B method, the informal user requirements are (manually) translated into a global abstract formal specification. This translation is especially difficult to achieve. The Event-B method was developed to incrementally and formally construct such a specification using stepwise refinement. Each increment takes into account new properties and system aspects. In this paper, we propose to couple a graphical notation called Algebraic State-Transition Diagrams (ASTD) with an Event-B specification in order to provide a better understanding of the software behaviour. The dynamic behaviour is captured by the ASTD, which is based on automata and process algebra operators, while the data model is described by means of an Event-B specification. We propose a methodology to incrementally refine such specification couplings, taking into account new refinement relations and consistency conditions between the control specification and the data specification. We compare the specifications obtained using each approach for readability and proof complexity. The advantages and drawbacks of the traditional approach and of our methodology are discussed. The whole process is illustrated by a railway CBTC-like case study. Our approach is supported by tools for translating ASTD's into B and Event-B into B. |
url |
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1606.02016v1 |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT thomasfayolle formalrefinementofextendedstatemachines AT marcfrappier formalrefinementofextendedstatemachines AT reginelaleau formalrefinementofextendedstatemachines AT fredericgervais formalrefinementofextendedstatemachines |
_version_ |
1725154075534688256 |