Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

International Conference on Integrated Formal Methods

IFM 2002: Integrated Formal Methods pp 145–164Cite as

A Framework for Translating Models and Specifications

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 2335))

Abstract

The reasons for translating a description of a model in one notation into another are reviewed. This includes both translating entire models and describing different aspects of a system using different notations.

In order to demonstrate the ideas, the VeriTech framework for translation is described. A system being analyzed is seen as a collection of versions, along with a description of how the versions are related. The versions are given in different notations connected through a core notation by compilers from and to the notations of existing tools and specification methods. The reasons that translations cannot always be exact are analyzed, based on experience with over ten separate compiler translations among formal methods notations. Additional information gathered during translation is described, to facilitate optimizations, error tracing, and analysis.

The concept is presented of a faithful relation among models and families of properties true of those models. In this framework families of properties are provided with uniform syntactic transformations, in addition to the translations of the models. This framework is shown appropriate for common instances of relations among translations previously treated in an ad hoc way. The classes of properties that can be faithful for a given translation provide a measure of the usefulness of the translation. Open research directions are suggested concerning faithful transformations, additional information, error tracing, and optimizing translations.

This research was partially supported by the Fund for the Support of Research at the Technion and by the Bar-Nir Bergreen Software Technology Center of Excellence.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. K. R. Apt, N. Francez, and S. Katz. Appraising fairness in languages for distributed programming. Distributed Computing, 2:226–241, 1988.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. Saddek Bensalem, Vijay Ganesh, Yassine Lakhnech, César Muñoz, Sam Owre, Harald Rueß, John Rushby, Vlad Rusu, Hassen Saïdi, N. Shankar, Eli Singerman, and Ashish Tiwari. An overview of SAL. In C. Michael Holloway, editor, LFM 2000: Fifth NASA Langley Formal Methods Workshop, pages 187–196, Hampton, VA, June 2000. Available at http://shemesh.larc.nasa.gov/fm/Lfm2000/Proc/.

  3. M. Berg and S. Katz. Property transformations for translations. Technical Report CS-2002-05, Computer Science Department, The Technion, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  4. N. Bjorner, A. Browne, E. Chang, M. Colon, A. Kapur, Z. Manna, H.B. Simpa, and T.E. Uribe. Step: The stanford temporal prover-user’s manual. Technical Report STAN-CS-TR-95-1562, Department of Computer Science, Stanford University, November 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  5. T. Bolognesi and E. Brinksma. Introduction to the ISO specification language LOTOS. Computer Networks and ISDN Systems, 14:25–59, 1987.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. T. Bolognesi, J.v.d. Legemaat, and C.A. Vissars (eds.). LOTOSphere: software development with LOTOS. Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  7. G. Brat, K. Havelund, S. Park, and W. Visser. Model checking programs. In In IEEE International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASE), September 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  8. J.R. Burch, E.M. Clarke, K.L. McMillan, D. Dill, and L.J. Hwang. Symbolic model checking: 1020 states and beyond. Information and Computation, 98:142–170, 1992.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  9. E.M. Clarke, O. Grumberg, and D.A. Peled. Model Checking. MIT press, December 1999.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  11. O. Grumberg and S. Katz. VeriTech: translating among specifications and verification tools-design principles. In Proceedings of third Austria-Israel Symposium Software for Communication Technologies, pages 104–109, April 1999. http://www.cs.technion.ac.il/Labs/veritech/.

  12. O. Grumberg and D.E. Long. Model checking and modular verification. ACM Trans. on Programming Languages and Systems, 16(3):843–871, 1994.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. D. Harel. Statecharts: a visual formalism for complex systems. Science of Computer Programming, 8:231–274, 1987.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  14. D. Harel, H. Lachover, A. Naamad, A. Pnueli, M. Politi, R. Sherman, A. Shtull-Trauring, and M. Trakhtenbrot. Statemate: a working environment for the development of complex reactive systems. IEEE Trans. on Software Eng., 16(4):403–414, April 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  15. J. Hatcliff and M. Dwyer. Using the bandera tool set to model-check properties of concurrent java software. In International Conference on Concurrency Theory (CONCUR), June 2001. Invited tutorial paper.

    Google Scholar 

  16. K. Havelund and T. Pressburger. Model checking JAVA programs using JAVA PathFinder. International Journal on Software Tools for Technology Transfer, 2(4):366–381, 2000.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  17. C.A.R. Hoare and He Jifeng. Unifying Theories of Programming. Prentice-Hall, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  18. G. Holzmann. Design and Validation of Computer Protocols. Prentice-Hall International, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  19. G.J. Holzmann and D. Peled. The state of SPIN. In Proceedings of CAV96, volume 1102 of LNCS, pages 385–389. Springer-Verlag, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  20. C.N. Ip and D.L. Dill. Better verification through symmetry. Formal Methods in System Design, 9:41–75, 1996.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. S. Katz. Refinement with global equivalence proofs in temporal logic. In D. Peled, V. Pratt, and G. Holzmann, editors, Partial Order Methods in Verification, pages 59–78. American Mathematical Society, 1997. DIM ACS Series in Discrete Mathematics and Theoretical Computer Science, vol. 29.

    Google Scholar 

  22. S. Katz. Faithful translations among models and specifications. In Proceedings of FME2001: Formal Methods for Increasing Software Productivity, volume 2021 of LNCS, pages 419–434. Springer-Verlag, 2001.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  23. S. Katz and D. Peled. Interleaving set temporal logic. Theoretical Computer Science, 75:263–287, 1990. Preliminary version appeared in the 6th ACM-PODC, 1987.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  24. K. Korenblat, O. Grumberg, and S. Katz. Translations between texual transition systems and petri nets. In Third international conference on Integrated Formal Methods (IFM’02), Turku, Finland, May 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  25. R.P. Kurshan. Computer-aided Verification of Coordinating Processes. Princeton University Press, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Z. Manna and A. Pnueli. The Temporal Logic of Reactive and Concurrent Systems: Specification. Springer-Verlag, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  27. K. L. McMillan. Symbolic Model Checking: An Approach to the State Explosion Problem. Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  28. http://wwwbrauer.informatik.tu-muenchen.de/gruppen/theorie/KIT/.

  29. Sam Owre, John Rushby, Natarajan Shankar, and Friedrich von Henke. Formal verification for fault-tolerant architectures: Prolegomena to the design of PVS. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 21(2):107–125, February 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  30. B. Potter, J. Sinclair, and D. Till. An introduction to Formal Specification and Z. Prentice Hall, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  31. W. Reisig. Elements of Distributed Algorithms-Modeling and Analysis with Petri Nets. Springer-Verlag, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Computer Science Department, The Technion, Haifa, Israel

    Shmuel Katz & Orna Grumberg

Authors
  1. Shmuel Katz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Orna Grumberg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Electronics and Computer Science Declarative Systems and Software Engineering, University of Southampton, Highfield, Southampton, SO17 1BJ, UK

    Michael Butler

  2. Turku Centre for Computer Science, Lemminkäisenkatu 14A, 20520, Turku, Finland

    Luigia Petre

  3. Department of Computer Science, Åbo Akademi University, Lemminkäisenkatu 14, 20520, Turku, Finland

    Kaisa Sere

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2002 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Katz, S., Grumberg, O. (2002). A Framework for Translating Models and Specifications. In: Butler, M., Petre, L., Sere, K. (eds) Integrated Formal Methods. IFM 2002. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 2335. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-47884-1_9

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-47884-1_9

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-43703-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-47884-3

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation