Model Checking as a Service: Towards Pragmatic Hidden Formal Methods
•
0 likes•101 views
Authors: Bence Graics, Ákos Hajdu, Zoltán Micskei, Vince Molnár, István Ráth, Luigi Andolfato, Ivan Gomes, and Robert Karban Read the research here: https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3417990.3421407
![Motivation
• Model-Based Systems Engineering
• Commercial tools for design, simulation
• Cloud-based, open collaborative modeling environments
• IncQuery Server [10]: scalable query evaluation over model repositories
2]()
Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
Similar to Model Checking as a Service: Towards Pragmatic Hidden Formal Methods
Similar to Model Checking as a Service: Towards Pragmatic Hidden Formal Methods (20)
More from IncQuery Labs
More from IncQuery Labs (12)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Model Checking as a Service: Towards Pragmatic Hidden Formal Methods
- 1. Model Checking as a Service: Towards Pragmatic Hidden Formal Methods Benedek Horváth12, Bence Graics3, Ákos Hajdu3, Zoltán Micskei3, Vince Molnár3, István Ráth1, Luigi Andolfato4, Ivan Gomes5, and Robert Karban5 1 IncQuery Labs cPlc., Budapest, Hungary 2 Johannes Kepler University Linz, Linz, Austria 3 Budapest University of Technology and Economics, Budapest, Hungary 4 European Southern Observatory, München, Germany 5 Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA, USA Contact: Benedek.Horvath@incquerylabs.com
- 2. Motivation • Model-Based Systems Engineering • Commercial tools for design, simulation • Cloud-based, open collaborative modeling environments • IncQuery Server [10]: scalable query evaluation over model repositories 2
- 3. Correctness of behavioral models • Simulation, testing may not find every error • Formal verification: systematically checks the model • Challenges: C1. High resource demand of formal verification C2. Parallel verification tasks of multiple users C3. Semantic gap between engineering and formal domains 3
- 4. Objectives • Cloud: elastically scalable computation resources O1. Dynamically allocate more memory and CPU O2. Dynamically start more instances O3. Semantic integrity a) semantic-preserving transformations, b) restricted but meaningful subset of engineering language 4
- 5. Motivating Example and Scope 5 Battery control Data transfer
- 6. Property to check 6 Should never transmit when the battery is below 40%
- 7. Reachability property • State predicate of a faulty behavior • Find a trace where the predicate is true 7
- 8. Gamma Statechart Composition Framework [17] Hidden Formal Methods: V&V Formal Compositional Semantics Gamma Statechart & Composition Language 8
- 9. Model Checking as a Service O1-O2. Cloud deployment: containerized components O3. Initial subset of modeling elements, PSSM [21] O3. Intermediate language: model checker integration 7 Back-annotation 4 Transformation SysML tool 1 Modeling (user) Jupyter notebook 2 V&V actions (user) IncQuery Server MCaaS add-on 3 Static checksModel repository MC runtime 2 5 Formal model + query translation 6 Result + trace back-annotation Gamma intermediate models Theta model checker MC runtime 1 5 Formal model + query translation 6 Result + trace back-annotation Gamma intermediate models UPPAAL model checker 9
- 10. MCaaS: Prototype Implementation • MCaaS add-on for IncQuery Server [10] • Modeling and static checks: • Allowed subset of modeling elements • Well-formedness constraints in Viatra Query Language [3] 7 Back-annotation 4 Transformation SysML tool 1 Modeling (user) Jupyter notebook 2 V&V actions (user) IncQuery Server MCaaS add-on 3 Static checksModel repository MC runtime 2 5 Formal model + query translation 6 Result + trace back-annotation Gamma intermediate models Theta model checker MC runtime 1 5 Formal model + query translation 6 Result + trace back-annotation Gamma intermediate models UPPAAL model checker 10
- 11. MCaaS: Prototype Implementation • Transformation to the intermediate language: • Gamma Statechart Language [17] + Gamma Property Language • Traceability model 7 Back-annotation 4 Transformation SysML tool 1 Modeling (user) Jupyter notebook 2 V&V actions (user) IncQuery Server MCaaS add-on 3 Static checksModel repository MC runtime 2 5 Formal model + query translation 6 Result + trace back-annotation Gamma intermediate models Theta model checker MC runtime 1 5 Formal model + query translation 6 Result + trace back-annotation Gamma intermediate models UPPAAL model checker 11
- 12. MCaaS: Prototype Implementation • Translation to model checker: • Gamma statechart → timed automata in UPPAAL • Reachability property → liveness query (EF) in CTL 7 Back-annotation 4 Transformation SysML tool 1 Modeling (user) Jupyter notebook 2 V&V actions (user) IncQuery Server MCaaS add-on 3 Static checksModel repository MC runtime 2 5 Formal model + query translation 6 Result + trace back-annotation Gamma intermediate models Theta model checker MC runtime 1 5 Formal model + query translation 6 Result + trace back-annotation Gamma intermediate models UPPAAL model checker 12
- 13. MCaaS: Prototype Implementation • Back-annotation: 7 Back-annotation 4 Transformation SysML tool 1 Modeling (user) Jupyter notebook 2 V&V actions (user) IncQuery Server MCaaS add-on 3 Static checksModel repository MC runtime 2 5 Formal model + query translation 6 Result + trace back-annotation Gamma intermediate models Theta model checker MC runtime 1 5 Formal model + query translation 6 Result + trace back-annotation Gamma intermediate models UPPAAL model checker 13 6 7 Model checker trace Gamma trace SysML sequence diagram
- 14. Conclusion and Future Work • Cloud-based workflow to verify SysML [20] models • Initial subset of elements for verification • Semantic integrity of the workflow → example trace is simulateable • Future work: • New model checker, e.g., Theta [23] • Adaptive scalabilityand combination of model checkers [22] • Extend the supported elements, e.g., activity, do-behavior • Support SysML v2 14
- 15. Acknowledgements • This research was carried out at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL), California Institute of Technology, under a contract with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). • This work partially received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under the Marie Skłodowska-Curie grant agreement No 813884. • The authors are grateful for the valuable advice of Péter Bokor, Ákos Horváth, and the anonymous reviewers. 15
- 16. References [3] Gábor Bergmann, Zoltán Ujhelyi, István Ráth, and Dániel Varró. 2011. A Graph Query Language for EMF Models. In Proc. of the 4th Intl. Conference on Theory and Practice of Model Transformations (LNCS, Vol. 6707). Springer, 167–182. [7] Corrina Gibson, Robert Karban, Luigi Andolfato, and John Day. 2014. Formal Validationof Fault Management Design Solutions. Softw. Eng. Notes 39, 1 (2014), 1-5. [8] Corrina Gibson, Robert Karban, Luigi Andolfato, and John C. Day. 2014. Abstractions for Executable and Checkable Fault Management Models. In Proc. of the Conference on Systems Engineering Research. Elsevier, 146–154. [10] Ábel Hegedüs, Gábor Bergmann, Csaba Debreceni, Ákos Horváth, Péter Lunk, Ákos Menyhért, István Papp, Dániel Varró, Tomas Vileiniskis, and István Ráth. 2018. Incquery Server for Teamwork Cloud: Scalable Query Evaluation over CollaborativeModel Repositories. In Proc. of the 21st International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems. ACM, 27–31. [16] Alvaro Miyazawa, Pedro Ribeiro, Wei Li, Ana Cavalcanti, Jon Timmis, and Jim Woodcock. 2019. RoboChart: modelling and verification of the functional behaviour of robotic applications. Softw. and Sys. Model. 18, 5 (2019), 3097–3149. 16
- 17. References [17] Vince Molnár, Bence Graics, András Vörös, István Majzik, and Dániel Varró. 2018. The Gamma statechart composition framework: Design, verification and code generation for component-based reactive systems. In Proc. of the 40th International Conference on Software Engineering. ACM, 113–116. [20] OMG. 2019. OMG System Modeling Language (SysML). formal/19-11-01. [21] OMG. 2019. Precise Semantics of UML State Machines (PSSM). formal/19-05- 01. [22] Amir Molzam Sharifloo and Andreas Metzger. 2013. MCaaS: Model Checking in the Cloud for Assurances of Adaptive Systems. In Software Engineering for Self- Adaptive Systems III (LNCS, Vol. 9640). Springer, 137–153. [23] Tamás Tóth, Ákos Hajdu, András Vörös, Zoltán Micskei, and István Majzik. 2017. Theta: a Framework for Abstraction Refinement-Based Model Checking. In Proc. of the 17th Conference on Formal Methods in Computer-Aided Design. 176–179. 17
- 18. Related Work • Gibson et al. Formal Validation of Fault Management Design Solutions [7- 8] • Verification of collaborating SysML state machines, including do-behavior • Model checker: Java Pathfinder • Checkable property: assertion in Java code • No back-annotation • Miyazawa et al. RoboChart modelling and verification of the functional behaviour of robotic applications [16] • Domain-Specific Modeling Language for robotic applications • Minimalist core of UML state machine notation, supporting collaborationand timing • Checkable property: textual DSL with verification-specific keywords • Model checker: CSP (Communicating Sequential Processes) problem checked by FDR • Sharifloo and Metzger MCaaS: Model Checking in the Cloud for Assurances of Adaptive Systems [22] • Cloud resource allocationpredication for model checkers based on model complexity, run-time measures from past executions • Can be adopted in future work 18
- 19. MCaaS: Prototype Implementation • Transformation to the intermediate language: • Gamma Statechart Language [17] + Gamma Property Language • Traceability model 7 Back-annotation 4 Transformation SysML tool 1 Modeling (user) Jupyter notebook 2 V&V actions (user) IncQuery Server MCaaS add-on 3 Static checksModel repository MC runtime 2 5 Formal model + query translation 6 Result + trace back-annotation Gamma intermediate models Theta model checker MC runtime 1 5 Formal model + query translation 6 Result + trace back-annotation Gamma intermediate models UPPAAL model checker 19 EF (state Spacecraft.Operation.Transmitting && var Spacecraft.battery < 40)
- 20. MCaaS: Prototype Implementation • Translation to model checker: • Gamma statechart → timed automata in UPPAAL • Reachability property → liveness query (EF) in CTL 7 Back-annotation 4 Transformation SysML tool 1 Modeling (user) Jupyter notebook 2 V&V actions (user) IncQuery Server MCaaS add-on 3 Static checksModel repository MC runtime 2 5 Formal model + query translation 6 Result + trace back-annotation Gamma intermediate models Theta model checker MC runtime 1 5 Formal model + query translation 6 Result + trace back-annotation Gamma intermediate models UPPAAL model checker 20EF P_OperationOfMainOfSpacecraft.Transmitting && batteryOfSpacecraft < 40