Results 1  10
of
25
The algebra of connectors – structuring interaction
 in BIP. In EmSoft
, 2007
"... Abstract—We provide an algebraic formalization of connectors in the BIP component framework. A connector relates a set of typed ports. Types are used to describe different modes of synchronization, in particular, rendezvous and broadcast. Connectors on a set of ports P are modeled as terms of the al ..."
Abstract

Cited by 59 (12 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
Abstract—We provide an algebraic formalization of connectors in the BIP component framework. A connector relates a set of typed ports. Types are used to describe different modes of synchronization, in particular, rendezvous and broadcast. Connectors on a set of ports P are modeled as terms of the algebra ACðPÞ, generated from P by using a binary fusion operator and a unary typing operator. Typing associates with terms (ports or connectors) synchronization types—trigger or synchron—that determine modes of synchronization. Broadcast interactions are initiated by triggers. Rendezvous is a maximal interaction of a connector that includes only synchrons. The semantics of ACðPÞ associates with a connector the set of its interactions. It induces on connectors an equivalence relation which is not a congruence as it is not stable for fusion. We provide a number of properties of ACðPÞ used to symbolically simplify and handle connectors. We provide examples illustrating applications of ACðPÞ, including a general component model encompassing methods for incremental model decomposition and efficient implementation by using symbolic techniques. Index Terms—Realtime and embedded systems, system architectures, integration, and modeling, systems specification methodology, interconnections, architecture. Ç
An Approach to Modelling and Verification of Component Based Systems
 In Proceedings of the 33rd International Conference on Current Trends in Theory and Practice of Computer, Science SOFSEM07, volume 4362 of LNCS
, 2007
"... Abstract. We build on a framework for modelling and investigating componentbased systems that strictly separates the description of behavior of components from the way they interact. We discuss various properties of system behavior as liveness, local progress, local and global deadlock, and robustne ..."
Abstract

Cited by 14 (4 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
Abstract. We build on a framework for modelling and investigating componentbased systems that strictly separates the description of behavior of components from the way they interact. We discuss various properties of system behavior as liveness, local progress, local and global deadlock, and robustness. We present a criterion that ensures liveness and can be tested in polynomial time. 1
Incremental ComponentBased Construction and Verification of a Robotic System
"... Autonomous robots are complex systems that require the interaction/cooperation of numerous heterogeneous software components. Nowadays, robots are critical systems and must meet safety properties including in particular temporal and realtime constraints. We present a methodology for modeling and ..."
Abstract

Cited by 8 (5 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
Autonomous robots are complex systems that require the interaction/cooperation of numerous heterogeneous software components. Nowadays, robots are critical systems and must meet safety properties including in particular temporal and realtime constraints. We present a methodology for modeling and analyzing a robotic system using the BIP component framework integrated with an existing framework and architecture, the LAAS 1 based on G en oM. The BIP componentization approach has been successfully used in other domains. In this study, we show how it can be seamlessly integrated in the preexisting methodology. We present the componentization of the functional level of a robot, the synthesis of an execution controller as well as validation techniques for checking essential “safety” properties.
Ensuring Properties of Interaction Systems
 In: Program Analysis and Compilation. LNCS
, 2007
"... Abstract. We propose results ensuring properties of a componentbased system from properties of its interaction model and of its components. We consider here deadlockfreedom and local progress of subsystems. This is done in the framework of interaction systems, a model for component based modelling ..."
Abstract

Cited by 4 (2 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
Abstract. We propose results ensuring properties of a componentbased system from properties of its interaction model and of its components. We consider here deadlockfreedom and local progress of subsystems. This is done in the framework of interaction systems, a model for component based modelling described in [9]. An interaction system is the superposition of two models: a behavior model and an interaction model. The behavior model describes the behavior of individual components. The interaction model describes the way the components may interact by introducing connectors that relate actions from different components. We illustrate our concepts and results with examples. 1
Contracts for BIP: Hierarchical Interaction Models for Compositional Verification
, 2007
"... This paper presents an extension of the BIP component framework to hierarchical components by considering also port sets of atomic components to be structured (ports may be in conflict or ordered, where a larger port represents an interaction set with larger interactions). A composed component consi ..."
Abstract

Cited by 4 (1 self)
 Add to MetaCart
This paper presents an extension of the BIP component framework to hierarchical components by considering also port sets of atomic components to be structured (ports may be in conflict or ordered, where a larger port represents an interaction set with larger interactions). A composed component consisting of a set of components connected through BIP connectors and a set of ports representing a subset of the internal connectors and ports, has two semantics: one in terms if interactions as defined by the BIP semantics, and one in terms of the actions represented by external ports where the structure of the port set of the component is derived from the internal structure of the component. A second extension consists in the addition of implicit interactions which is done through an explicit distinction of conflicting and concurrent ports: interactions involving only non conflicting ports can be executed concurrently without the existence of an explicit connector. Finally, we define contractbased reasoning for component hierarchies.
Compositional analysis of deadlockfreedom for treelike component architectures
 In Proceedings of EMSOFT’08
"... We study architectural constraints for component systems in order to be able to guarantee safetyproperties. Representing safetyproperties, we investigate deadlockfreedom. We present a compositional and hence polynomial time condition for deadlockfreedom for a class of componentsystems whose a ..."
Abstract

Cited by 2 (0 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
We study architectural constraints for component systems in order to be able to guarantee safetyproperties. Representing safetyproperties, we investigate deadlockfreedom. We present a compositional and hence polynomial time condition for deadlockfreedom for a class of componentsystems whose architecture is treelike. The architectural constraints that are developed can be understood as a design pattern that helps to construct systems satisfying safetyproperties on the one hand. On the other hand, they might help to draw attention to potentially critical situations in a design. To model componentsystems we use the formalism of interaction systems as proposed by Sifakis et al. The ideas can be transferred to other formal models where subsystems are cooperating via synchronous communication.
C.: A Polynomialtime Checkable Sufficient Condition for DeadlockFreedom of Componentbased Systems
, 2007
"... Abstract. Interaction systems are a formal model for componentbased systems. Combining components via connectors to form more complex systems may give rise to deadlock situations. Deciding the existence of deadlocks is NPhard as it involves global state analysis. We present here a parametrized pol ..."
Abstract

Cited by 2 (2 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
Abstract. Interaction systems are a formal model for componentbased systems. Combining components via connectors to form more complex systems may give rise to deadlock situations. Deciding the existence of deadlocks is NPhard as it involves global state analysis. We present here a parametrized polynomialtime algorithm that is able to confirm deadlockfreedom for a certain class of interaction systems. The discussion includes characteristic examples and displays the role of the parameter of the algorithm. 1
M.: Robustness in Interaction Systems
, 2007
"... Abstract. We treat the effect of absence/failure of ports or components on properties of componentbased systems. We do so in the framework of interaction systems, a formalism for componentbased systems that strictly separates the issues of local behavior and interaction, for which ideas to establi ..."
Abstract

Cited by 2 (2 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
Abstract. We treat the effect of absence/failure of ports or components on properties of componentbased systems. We do so in the framework of interaction systems, a formalism for componentbased systems that strictly separates the issues of local behavior and interaction, for which ideas to establish properties of systems were developed. We propose how to adapt these ideas to analyze how the properties behave under absence or failure of certain components or merely some ports of components. We demonstrate our approach for the properties local and global deadlockfreedom as well as liveness and local progress. 1
Compositional Reachability Analysis of Genetic Networks
"... Genetic regulatory networks have been modeled as discrete transition systems by many approaches, benefiting from a large number of formal verification algorithms available for the analysis of discrete transition systems. However, most of these approaches do not scale up well. In this article, we exp ..."
Abstract

Cited by 2 (0 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
Genetic regulatory networks have been modeled as discrete transition systems by many approaches, benefiting from a large number of formal verification algorithms available for the analysis of discrete transition systems. However, most of these approaches do not scale up well. In this article, we explore the use of compositionality for the analysis of genetic regulatory networks. We present a framework for modeling genetic regulatory networks in a modular yet faithful manner based on the mathematically wellfounded formalism of differential inclusions. We then propose a compositional algorithm to efficiently analyze reachability properties of the model. A case study shows the potential of this approach.
Deriving Complexity Results for Interaction Systems from 1Safe Petri Nets
"... Abstract. Interaction systems are a formal model for componentbased systems, where components are combined via connectors to form more complex systems. We compare interaction systems (IS) to the wellstudied model of 1safe Petri nets (1SN) by giving a translation map1: 1SN → IS and a translation ma ..."
Abstract

Cited by 2 (2 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
Abstract. Interaction systems are a formal model for componentbased systems, where components are combined via connectors to form more complex systems. We compare interaction systems (IS) to the wellstudied model of 1safe Petri nets (1SN) by giving a translation map1: 1SN → IS and a translation map2: IS → 1SN, sothata1safePetrinet (an interaction system) and its according interaction system (1safe Petri net) defined by the respective mapping are isomorphic up to some label relation R. So in some sense both models share the same expressiveness. Also, the encoding map 1 is polynomial and can be used to reduce the problems of reachability, deadlock and liveness in 1SN to the problems of reachability, deadlock and liveness in IS, yielding PSPACEhardness for these questions. 1