Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The ASMETA Approach to Safety Assurance of Software Systems

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Logic, Computation and Rigorous Methods

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNPSE,volume 12750))

Abstract

Safety-critical systems require development methods and processes that lead to provably correct systems in order to prevent catastrophic consequences due to system failure or unsafe operation. The use of models and formal analysis techniques is highly demanded both at design-time, to guarantee safety and other desired qualities already at the early stages of the system development, and at runtime, to address requirements assurance during the system operational stage.

In this paper, we present the modeling features and analysis techniques supported by ASMETA (ASM mETAmodeling), a set of tools for the Abstract State Machines formal method. We show how the modeling and analysis approaches in ASMETA can be used during the design, development, and operation phases of the assurance process for safety-critical systems, and we illustrate the advantages of integrated use of tools as that provided by ASMETA.

P. Arcaini is supported by ERATO HASUO Metamathematics for Systems Design Project (No. JPMJER1603), JST. Funding Reference number: 10.13039/501100009024 ERATO.

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

Access this chapter

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 EPUB and 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

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Repository https://github.com/asmeta/asmeta/tree/master/asm_examples.

  2. 2.

    Note that $x denotes the variable x in the AsmetaL notation.

  3. 3.

    A Java annotation is a meta-data tag that permits to add information to code elements (class declarations, method declarations, etc.). Annotations are defined similarly as classes.

References

  1. Al-Shareefi, F.: Analysing Safety-Critical Systems and Security Protocols with Abstract State Machines. Ph.D. thesis, University of Liverpool (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Arcaini, P., Bonfanti, S., Gargantini, A., Mashkoor, A., Riccobene, E.: Formal validation and verification of a medical software critical component. In: 2015 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Formal Methods and Models for Codesign (MEMOCODE), pp. 80–89. IEEE, September 2015. https://doi.org/10.1109/MEMCOD.2015.7340473

  3. Arcaini, P., Bonfanti, S., Gargantini, A., Mashkoor, A., Riccobene, E.: Integrating formal methods into medical software development: the ASM approach. Sci. Comput. Program. 158, 148–167 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scico.2017.07.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Arcaini, P., Bonfanti, S., Gargantini, A., Riccobene, E.: Visual notation and patterns for abstract state machines. In: Milazzo, P., Varró, D., Wimmer, M. (eds.) Software Technologies: Applications and Foundations, pp. 163–178. Springer International Publishing, Cham (2016)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  5. Arcaini, P., Bonfanti, S., Gargantini, A., Riccobene, E., Scandurra, P.: Modelling an automotive software-intensive system with adaptive features using ASMETA. In: Raschke, A., Méry, D., Houdek, F. (eds.) ABZ 2020. LNCS, vol. 12071, pp. 302–317. Springer, Cham (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-48077-6_25

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  6. Arcaini, P., Gargantini, A., Riccobene, E.: AsmetaSMV: a way to link high-level ASM models to low-level NuSMV specifications. In: Frappier, M., Glässer, U., Khurshid, S., Laleau, R., Reeves, S. (eds.) ABZ 2010. LNCS, vol. 5977, pp. 61–74. Springer, Heidelberg (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-11811-1_6

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  7. Arcaini, P., Gargantini, A., Riccobene, E.: Automatic review of Abstract State Machines by meta property verification. In: Muñoz, C. (ed.) Proceedings of the Second NASA Formal Methods Symposium (NFM 2010), NASA/CP-2010-216215, pp. 4–13. NASA, Langley Research Center, Hampton VA 23681–2199, USA, April 2010

    Google Scholar 

  8. Arcaini, P., Gargantini, A., Riccobene, E.: CoMA: conformance monitoring of Java programs by Abstract State Machines. In: Khurshid, S., Sen, K. (eds.) RV 2011. LNCS, vol. 7186, pp. 223–238. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-29860-8_17

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  9. Arcaini, P., Gargantini, A., Riccobene, E.: Combining model-based testing and runtime monitoring for program testing in the presence of nondeterminism. In: Proceedings of the 2013 IEEE Sixth International Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation Workshops, pp. 178–187. ICSTW 2013, IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA (2013). https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSTW.2013.29

  10. Arcaini, P., Gargantini, A., Riccobene, E.: Using SMT for dealing with nondeterminism in ASM-based runtime verification. ECEASST 70, 1–15 (2014). https://doi.org/10.14279/tuj.eceasst.70.970

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Arcaini, P., Gargantini, A., Riccobene, E.: SMT-based automatic proof of ASM model refinement. In: De Nicola, R., Kühn, E. (eds.) SEFM 2016. LNCS, vol. 9763, pp. 253–269. Springer, Cham (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-41591-8_17

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  12. Arcaini, P., Gargantini, A., Riccobene, E.: Rigorous development process of a safety-critical system: from ASM models to Java code. Int. J. Softw. Tools Technol. Transfer 19(2), 247–269 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10009-015-0394-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Arcaini, P., Gargantini, A., Riccobene, E., Scandurra, P.: A model-driven process for engineering a toolset for a formal method. Softw. Pract. Experience 41, 155–166 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1002/spe.1019

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Arcaini, P., Holom, R.-M., Riccobene, E.: ASM-based formal design of an adaptivity component for a Cloud system. Formal Aspects Comput. 28(4), 567–595 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00165-016-0371-5

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. Arcaini, P., Mirandola, R., Riccobene, E., Scandurra, P.: MSL: a pattern language for engineering self-adaptive systems. J. Syst. Softw. 164, 110558 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2020.110558

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Arcaini, P., Riccobene, E., Scandurra, P.: Formal design and verification of self-adaptive systems with decentralized control. ACM Trans. Auton. Adapt. Syst. 11(4), 25:1-25:35 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1145/3019598

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. ASMETA (ASM mETAmodeling) toolset. https://asmeta.github.io/

  18. Barr, E.T., Harman, M., McMinn, P., Shahbaz, M., Yoo, S.: The oracle problem in software testing: a survey. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 41(5), 507–525 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1109/TSE.2014.2372785

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Benduhn, F., Thüm, T., Schaefer, I., Saake, G.: Modularization of refinement steps for agile formal methods. In: Duan, Z., Ong, L. (eds.) ICFEM 2017. LNCS, vol. 10610, pp. 19–35. Springer, Cham (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-68690-5_2

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  20. Bombarda, A., Bonfanti, S., Gargantini, A.: Developing medical devices from abstract state machines to embedded systems: a smart pill box case study. In: Mazzara, M., Bruel, J.-M., Meyer, B., Petrenko, A. (eds.) TOOLS 2019. LNCS, vol. 11771, pp. 89–103. Springer, Cham (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-29852-4_7

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  21. Bombarda, A., Bonfanti, S., Gargantini, A., Radavelli, M., Duan, F., Lei, Yu.: Combining model refinement and test generation for conformance testing of the IEEE PHD protocol using abstract state machines. In: Gaston, C., Kosmatov, N., Le Gall, P. (eds.) ICTSS 2019. LNCS, vol. 11812, pp. 67–85. Springer, Cham (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-31280-0_5

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  22. Bonfanti, S., Gargantini, A., Mashkoor, A.: AsmetaA: animator for Abstract State Machines. In: Butler, M., Raschke, A., Hoang, T.S., Reichl, K. (eds.) ABZ 2018. LNCS, vol. 10817, pp. 369–373. Springer, Cham (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-91271-4_25

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  23. Bonfanti, S., Gargantini, A., Mashkoor, A.: Generation of C++ unit tests from Abstract State Machines specifications. In: 2018 IEEE International Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation Workshops (ICSTW), pp. 185–193, April 2018. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSTW.2018.00049

  24. Bonfanti, S., Gargantini, A., Mashkoor, A.: Design and validation of a C++ code generator from Abstract State Machines specifications. J. Softw. Evol. Process 32(2), e2205 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1002/smr.2205

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Börger, E.: The ASM refinement method. Formal Aspects Comput. 15, 237–257 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Börger, E., Raschke, A.: Modeling Companion for Software Practitioners. Springer, Heidelberg (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-56641-1

  27. Börger, E., Stärk, R.: Abstract State Machines: A Method for High-Level System Design and Analysis. Springer Verlag, Heidelberg (2003). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-18216-7

  28. Calinescu, R., Weyns, D., Gerasimou, S., Iftikhar, M.U., Habli, I., Kelly, T.: Engineering trustworthy self-adaptive software with dynamic assurance cases. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 44(11), 1039–1069 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1109/TSE.2017.2738640

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Carioni, A., Gargantini, A., Riccobene, E., Scandurra, P.: A scenario-based validation language for ASMs. In: Börger, E., Butler, M., Bowen, J.P., Boca, P. (eds.) ABZ 2008. LNCS, vol. 5238, pp. 71–84. Springer, Heidelberg (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-87603-8_7

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  30. Cimatti, A., et al.: NuSMV 2: an opensource tool for symbolic model checking. In: Brinksma, E., Larsen, K.G. (eds.) CAV 2002. LNCS, vol. 2404, pp. 359–364. Springer, Heidelberg (2002). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45657-0_29

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  31. Falcone, Y., Mariani, L., Rollet, A., Saha, S.: Runtime failure prevention and reaction. In: Bartocci, E., Falcone, Y. (eds.) Lectures on Runtime Verification. LNCS, vol. 10457, pp. 103–134. Springer, Cham (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-75632-5_4

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  32. Fraser, G., Wotawa, F., Ammann, P.E.: Testing with model checkers: a survey. Softw. Test. Verif. Reliab. 19(3), 215–261 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Gargantini, A., Riccobene, E.: ASM-based testing: coverage criteria and automatic test sequence. J. Univers. Comput. Sci. 7(11), 1050–1067 (2001). https://doi.org/10.3217/jucs-007-11-1050

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Gargantini, A., Riccobene, E., Rinzivillo, S.: Using spin to generate tests from ASM specifications. In: Börger, E., Gargantini, A., Riccobene, E. (eds.) ASM 2003. LNCS, vol. 2589, pp. 263–277. Springer, Heidelberg (2003). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-36498-6_15

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  35. Gargantini, A., Riccobene, E., Scandurra, P.: A semantic framework for metamodel-based languages. Autom. Softw. Eng. 16(3–4), 415–454 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10515-009-0053-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Gargantini, A., Riccobene, E., Scandurra, P.: Ten reasons to metamodel ASMs. In: Abrial, J.-R., Glässer, U. (eds.) Rigorous Methods for Software Construction and Analysis. LNCS, vol. 5115, pp. 33–49. Springer, Heidelberg (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-11447-2_3

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  37. Gaspari, P., Riccobene, E., Gargantini, A.: A formal design of the Hybrid European Rail Traffic Management System. In: Proceedings of the 13th European Conference on Software Architecture - Volume 2. pp. 156–162. ECSA 2019, Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA (2019). https://doi.org/10.1145/3344948.3344993

  38. Gurevich, Y.: Evolving Algebras 1993: Lipari Guide, pp. 9–36. Oxford University Press Inc., USA (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  39. Harel, D., Rumpe, B.: Meaningful modeling: What’s the semantics of “Semantics”? Computer 37(10), 64–72 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1109/MC.2004.172

  40. Leveson, N.: Are you sure your software will not kill anyone? Commun. ACM 63(2), 25–28 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1145/3376127

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Lutz, R.R.: Software engineering for safety: a roadmap. In: Proceedings of the Conference on The Future of Software Engineering, pp. 213–226. ICSE 2000, Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA (2000). https://doi.org/10.1145/336512.336556

  42. Mirandola, R., Potena, P., Riccobene, E., Scandurra, P.: A reliability model for service component architectures. J. Syst. Softw. 89, 109–127 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2013.11.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Riccobene, E., Scandurra, P.: A formal framework for service modeling and prototyping. Formal Aspects Comput. 26(6), 1077–1113 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00165-013-0289-0

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  44. Riccobene, E., Scandurra, P.: Model-based simulation at runtime with Abstract State Machines. In: Muccini, H., et al. (eds.) Software Architecture, pp. 395–410. Springer International Publishing, Cham (2020)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  45. Schmidt, D.C.: Guest editor’s introduction: model-driven engineering. IEEE Comput. 39(2), 25–31 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1109/MC.2006.58

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Utting, M., Legeard, B., Bouquet, F., Fourneret, E., Peureux, F., Vernotte, A.: Chapter two - recent advances in model-based testing. Advances in Computers, vol. 101, pp. 53–120. Elsevier (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.adcom.2015.11.004

  47. Van Tendeloo, Y., Van Mierlo, S., Vangheluwe, H.: A multi-paradigm modelling approach to live modelling. Softw. Syst. Model. 18(5), 2821–2842 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-018-0700-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Vessio, G.: Reasoning about properties with Abstract State Machines. In: Gogolla, M., Muccini, H., Varró, D. (eds.) Proceedings of the Doctoral Symposium at Software Technologies: Applications and Foundations 2015 Conference (STAF 2015), L’Aquila, Italy, 20 July 2015. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, vol. 1499, pp. 1–10. CEUR-WS.org (2015). http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1499/paper1.pdf

  49. Weyns, D., et al.: Perpetual assurances for self-adaptive systems. In: de Lemos, R., Garlan, D., Ghezzi, C., Giese, H. (eds.) Software Engineering for Self-Adaptive Systems III. Assurances. LNCS, vol. 9640, pp. 31–63. Springer, Cham (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-74183-3_2

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. National Institute of Informatics, Tokyo, Japan

    Paolo Arcaini

  2. University of Bergamo, Bergamo, Italy

    Andrea Bombarda, Silvia Bonfanti, Angelo Gargantini & Patrizia Scandurra

  3. Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy

    Elvinia Riccobene

Authors
  1. Paolo Arcaini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Andrea Bombarda
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Silvia Bonfanti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Angelo Gargantini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Elvinia Riccobene
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Patrizia Scandurra
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Paolo Arcaini .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Institut für Softwaretechnik und Programmiersprachen, University of Ulm, Ulm, Germany

    Alexander Raschke

  2. Dipartimento di Informatica, Università degli Studi di Milano, Crema, Italy

    Elvinia Riccobene

  3. UIUC Institute, Zhejiang University, Haining, China

    Klaus-Dieter Schewe

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Arcaini, P., Bombarda, A., Bonfanti, S., Gargantini, A., Riccobene, E., Scandurra, P. (2021). The ASMETA Approach to Safety Assurance of Software Systems. In: Raschke, A., Riccobene, E., Schewe, KD. (eds) Logic, Computation and Rigorous Methods. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 12750. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-76020-5_13

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-76020-5_13

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-76019-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-76020-5

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation