Article

Checking software component behavior using behavior protocols and spin

Author:

Jan KofronAuthors Info & Claims

SAC '07: Proceedings of the 2007 ACM symposium on Applied computing

Pages 1513 - 1517

https://doi.org/10.1145/1244002.1244326

Published: 11 March 2007 Publication History

Get Access

Abstract

Using software components is a modern approach for building extensible and reliable applications. To ensure high dependability, a component application should undergo verification, e.g. model checking, to prove it has certain properties. The implementation of an application is usually too complex to be verified at a formal level; therefore, a model being an abstraction of the implementation is to be used. Behavior protocols [11] are a platform for modeling of software component behavior. In this paper, we propose a method for translation behavior protocols to Promela [7], which is consequently used as the input for the Spin model checker [7]. Having the Promela code describing the component behavior, one can efficiently check for the behavior compatibility and LTL (Linear Temporal Logic) properties of cooperating software components.

References

[1]

J. Adamek, T. Bures, P. Jezek, J. Kofron, V. Mencl, P. Parizek, and F. Plasil. Component reliability extensions for Fractal component model, http://kraken.cs.cas.cz/ft/public/public_index.phtml, 2006.

Google Scholar

[2]

J. Adamek and F. Plasil. Component composition errors and update atomicity: Static analysis. Journal of Software Maintenance and Evolution: Research and Practice, 17(5), 2004.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[3]

T. Barros, L. Henrio, and E. Madelaine. Verification of distributed hierarchical components. In Proceedings of the International Workshop on Formal Aspects of Component Software (FACS 2005), August 2006.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[4]

J. Corbett, M. Dwyer, J. Hatcliff, C. Pasareanu, Robby, S. Laubach, and H. Zheng. Bandera: Extracting Finite-state Models from Java Source Code. In Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on Software Engineering, June 2000.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[5]

C. Demartini, R. Iosif, and R. Sisto. dSPIN: A dynamic extension of SPIN. In SPIN, pages 261--276, 1999.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[6]

P. Hnetynka and F. Plasil. Dynamic reconfiguration and access to services in hierarchical component models. In Proceedings of CBSE 2006, pages 352--359. Springer-Verlag, 2006.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[7]

G. J. Holzmann. The SPIN Model Checker: Primer and Reference Manual. Addison-Wesley Professional, September 2003.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[8]

J. Kofron. Software Component Verification: On Translating Behavior Protocols to Promela, technical report no. 2006/11, Dep. of SW Engineering, Charles University in Prague, 2006.

Google Scholar

[9]

M. Mach, F. Plasil, and J. Kofron. Behavior protocol verification: Fighting state explosion. International Journal of Computer and Information Science, 6(1), 2005.

Google Scholar

[10]

P. Parizek and F. Plasil. Specification and generation of environment for model checking of software components. In Presented at Formal Foundations of Embedded Software and Component-Based Software Architectures (FESCA 2006), 2006.

Google Scholar

[11]

F. Plasil and S. Visnovsky. Behavior protocols for software components. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng., 28(11):1056--1076, 2002.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[12]

R. Rouvoy and P. Merle. Towards a model-driven approach to build component-based adaptable middleware. In ARM '04: Proceedings of the 3rd workshop on Adaptive and reflective middleware, pages 195--200, New York, NY, USA, 2004. ACM Press.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[13]

O. Tkachuk, M. Dwyer, and C. Pasareanu. Automated environment generation for software model checking. In Proc. of the Eighteenth IEEE Int. Conf. on Automated Software Engineering, 2003.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[14]

W. Visser, P. Mehlitz, J. Penix, D. Giannakopoulou, C. Pasareanu, and M. Mansouri-Samani. Java Pathfinder, http://javapathfinder.sourceforge.net, 2006.

Google Scholar

Cited By

View all

de Ferro CCogumbreiro TMartins F(2023)Shelley: A Framework for Model Checking Call Ordering on Hierarchical SystemsCoordination Models and Languages10.1007/978-3-031-35361-1_5(93-114)Online publication date: 15-Jun-2023
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-35361-1_5
Hannousse A(2019)Dealing with crosscutting and dynamic features in component software using aspect‐orientation: requirements and experiencesIET Software10.1049/iet-sen.2018.532413:5(434-446)Online publication date: Oct-2019
https://doi.org/10.1049/iet-sen.2018.5324
Bliudze SMavridou ASzymanek RZolotukhina A(2017)Exogenous coordination of concurrent software components with JavaBIPSoftware: Practice and Experience10.1002/spe.249547:11(1801-1836)Online publication date: 3-Apr-2017
https://doi.org/10.1002/spe.2495
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

Checking software component behavior using behavior protocols and spin

Recommendations

Model Checking of Software Components: Combining Java PathFinder and Behavior Protocol Model Checker
SEW '06: Proceedings of the 30th Annual IEEE/NASA Software Engineering Workshop

Although there exist several software model checkers that check the code against properties specified e.g. via a temporal logic and assertions, or just verifying low-level properties (like unhandled exceptions), none of them supports checking of ...
Bounded model checking of high-integrity software
HILT '13: Proceedings of the 2013 ACM SIGAda annual conference on High integrity language technology

Model checking [5] is an automated algorithmic technique for exhaustive verification of systems, described as finite state machines, against temporal logic [9] specifications. It has been used successfully to verify hardware at an industrial scale [6]. ...
Using DEv-PROMELA for Modelling and Verification of Software
SIGSIM-PADS '16: Proceedings of the 2016 ACM SIGSIM Conference on Principles of Advanced Discrete Simulation

Efficient modelling and verification of models need an accurate representation of systems. Especially, PROMELA cannot represent time as quantitative properties. That means some properties depending on time cannot be checked with SPIN model-checker. ...

Reviews

Reviewer: Larry Bernstein

An interesting and possibly important status report on checking component behavior is presented in this paper. Do not expect to be able to use the results to check your components just yet. Do expect to find an incomplete perspective, as the work is narrowly referenced. For example, there is no mention of the SMC systems that “can be used for checking safety of concurrent programs under different fairness assumptions. It is based on explicit state enumeration” [1]. The paper’s approach is to show how new language functions can be used to assure compatibility between components. There is no provision for data normalization, or checking for parameter syntax or semantic compatibility. I hope that this is part of the author’s plan for future work. The approach described must be reported in the context of the significant work already published in this area. The need for behavior protocols for modeling component behavior addressed in this paper is an important step in moving to reusable components. We need to encourage this work. Online Computing Reviews Service

Access critical reviews of Computing literature here

Become a reviewer for Computing Reviews.

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

SAC '07: Proceedings of the 2007 ACM symposium on Applied computing

March 2007

1688 pages

ISBN:1595934804

DOI:10.1145/1244002

Conference Chairs:
Yookun Cho
Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea
,
Roger L. Wainwright
University of Tulsa, Tulsa, Oklahoma
,
Hisham M. Haddad
Kennesaw State University, Kennesaw, Georgia
,
Sung Y. Shin
South Dakota State University, Brookings, South Dakota
,
Program Chair:
Yong Wan Koo
The University of Suwon, Gyeongggi-do, Korea

Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 11 March 2007

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Article

Conference

SAC07

Sponsor:

SIGAPP

SAC07: The 2007 ACM Symposium on Applied Computing

March 11 - 15, 2007

Seoul, Korea

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 1,650 of 6,669 submissions, 25%

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

9
Total Citations
View Citations
258
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)0
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0

Reflects downloads up to 06 Nov 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all

de Ferro CCogumbreiro TMartins F(2023)Shelley: A Framework for Model Checking Call Ordering on Hierarchical SystemsCoordination Models and Languages10.1007/978-3-031-35361-1_5(93-114)Online publication date: 15-Jun-2023
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-35361-1_5
Hannousse A(2019)Dealing with crosscutting and dynamic features in component software using aspect‐orientation: requirements and experiencesIET Software10.1049/iet-sen.2018.532413:5(434-446)Online publication date: Oct-2019
https://doi.org/10.1049/iet-sen.2018.5324
Bliudze SMavridou ASzymanek RZolotukhina A(2017)Exogenous coordination of concurrent software components with JavaBIPSoftware: Practice and Experience10.1002/spe.249547:11(1801-1836)Online publication date: 3-Apr-2017
https://doi.org/10.1002/spe.2495
Moffett YDingel JBeaulieu A(2013)Verifying Protocol Conformance Using Software Model Checking for the Model-Driven Development of Embedded SystemsIEEE Transactions on Software Engineering10.1109/TSE.2013.1439:9(1307-13256)Online publication date: 1-Sep-2013
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1109/TSE.2013.14
Sirigineedi GTsourdos AWhite BZbikowski R(2012)Towards Verifiable Approach to Mission Planning for Multiple UAVsAIAA Infotech@Aerospace Conference10.2514/6.2009-1853Online publication date: 14-Jun-2012
https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2009-1853
Poch TŠerý OPlášil FKofroň J(2011)Threaded behavior protocolsFormal Aspects of Computing10.1007/s00165-011-0194-325:4(543-572)Online publication date: 18-Sep-2011
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00165-011-0194-3
Děcký M(2010)A road to a formally verified general-purpose operating systemProceedings of the First international conference on Architecting Critical Systems10.1007/978-3-642-13556-9_5(72-88)Online publication date: 23-Jun-2010
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/978-3-642-13556-9_5
Adamek JHnetynka PCrnković INawrocki J(2008)Perspectives in component-based software engineeringProceedings of the 2008 international workshop on Software Engineering in east and south europe10.1145/1370868.1370875(35-42)Online publication date: 13-May-2008
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/1370868.1370875
Kofron JPoch TSery O(2008)Making Components FitProceedings of the 2008 32nd Annual IEEE Software Engineering Workshop10.1109/SEW.2008.10(65-74)Online publication date: 15-Oct-2008
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1109/SEW.2008.10

View Options

Get Access

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Cited By

Index Terms

Recommendations

Model Checking of Software Components: Combining Java PathFinder and Behavior Protocol Model Checker

Bounded model checking of high-integrity software

Using DEv-PROMELA for Modelling and Verification of Software

Reviews

Access critical reviews of Computing literature here

Comments

Published In

Sponsors

Publisher

Publication History

Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Conference

Acceptance Rates

Other Metrics

Article Metrics

Other Metrics

Cited By

Login options

Full Access

PDF

eReader

Abstract

References

Cited By

Index Terms

Recommendations

Model Checking of Software Components: Combining Java PathFinder and Behavior Protocol Model Checker

Bounded model checking of high-integrity software

Using DEv-PROMELA for Modelling and Verification of Software

Reviews

Access critical reviews of Computing literature here

Comments

Information

Published In

Sponsors

Publisher

Publication History

Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Conference

Acceptance Rates

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Get Access

Login options

Full Access

View options

PDF

eReader

Figures

Other

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media

Affiliations