A declarative formal approach to dynamic reconfiguration

Simonot, Marianne; Aponte, Virginia

doi:10.1145/1595800.1595802

Cited by 10 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…FracL [35] is another formalization of Fractal for the Focal framework, which in turn relies on Coq. Similarly to Léger et al they define the invariants of the Fractal component model as well as the semantics of reconfiguration operations as pre-and-postconditions.…”

Section: Verification Of Reconfigurationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Safe reconfiguration of Coqcots and Pycots components

Buisson

Dagnat

Leroux

et al. 2016

Journal of Systems and Software

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

International audienceSoftware systems have to face evolutions of their running context and users. Therefore, the so-called dynamic reconfiguration has been commonly adopted for modifying some components and/or the architecture at runtime. Traditional approaches typically stop the needed components, apply the changes, and restart the components. However, this scheme is not suitable for critical systems and degrades user experience. This paper proposes to switch from the stop/restart scheme to dynamic software updating (DSU) techniques. Instead of stopping a component, its implementation is replaced by another one specifically built to apply the modifications while maintaining the best quality of service possible. The major contributions of this work are: (i) the integration of DSU techniques in a component model; (ii) a reconfiguration development process including specification, proof of correctness using Coq, and; (iii) a systematic method to produce the executable script. In this perspective, the use of DSU techniques brings higher quality of service when reconfiguring component-based software. Moreover, the formalization allows ensuring the safety and consistency of the reconfiguration process

show abstract

Section: Verification Of Reconfigurationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Safe reconfiguration of Coqcots and Pycots components

Buisson

Dagnat

Leroux

et al. 2016

Journal of Systems and Software

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…-Initial/target architectures describe the starting and the ending points of the reconfiguration addressed by the pattern. While any ADL can be used here, graph-grammar-based, e.g., [6] or logicbased, e.g., [1,3,16] languages allow to abstract over the unchanged parts of the architecture.…”

Section: The Reconfiguration Pattern Formmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assisting the evolutionary development of SoS with reconfiguration patterns

Petitdemange

Borne

Buisson

2016

Proccedings of the 10th European Conference on Software Architecture Workshops

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

International audienceSystem of systems (SoS) engineering is an emerging approach to deal with complex systems that have low or no control over their constituents. An SoS must adapt itself not only to the willingness of its constituents to participate or disengage, but also to evolving needs. As reconfiguration is a routine task, the SoS architect needs specific assistance, especially to easily identify reusable solution principles and to track her/his decisions in the design of reconfiguration. To address these issues, we propose to introduce the concept of reconfiguration pattern based on prior design and architectural patterns. These patterns constitute well-documented, principled and adaptable solution building blocks. We illustrate our approach with one reconfiguration pattern applied on an example based on the French communication system for emergency services

show abstract

“…Fractal (Bruneton et al, 2006) is a component model that its main goals are to implement, deploy and manage complex software systems (Simonot and Aponte, 2009). The Fractal model combines ideas of component-based software engineering and software architecture, reflective systems and configurable and adaptable distributed systems (Ordon et al, 2009).…”

Section: The Fractal Component Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

A component-based knowledge domain model for adaptive human learning systems

Boulehouache

Maamri²,

Sahnoun³

2015

IJKL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Adaptive human learning systems (AHLSs) are important tools to personalise learning. However, the used domain representation formalisms lack the needed precision and flexibility those make the domains efficiently adaptable and intensively reusable. To address this issue, we propose a component based knowledge domain for an AHLS that aims to improve the adapting efficiency and provides intensive reuse of the pre-built (sub) knowledge domains. To show the feasibility and the benefits of the proposed AHLS, a prototype that experiments the explanation variants method is implemented. So, unlike the other, our AHLS achieves the adapted learning by (re)selecting and sequencing the appropriate linear combination of the component variants explaining the corresponding concepts. Also, as a more challenging task, to get a compromised solution of the conflicting learning goals and to reduce the substantial overhead, the adapting is formulated as a multi-objective component variants selection problem and it is implemented using Genetic Algorithms.Reference to this paper should be made as follows: Boulehouache, S., Maamri, R. and Sahnoun, Z. (2015) 'A component-based knowledge domain model for adaptive human learning systems', Int.

show abstract

A declarative formal approach to dynamic reconfiguration

Cited by 10 publications

References 19 publications

Safe reconfiguration of Coqcots and Pycots components

Safe reconfiguration of Coqcots and Pycots components

Assisting the evolutionary development of SoS with reconfiguration patterns

A component-based knowledge domain model for adaptive human learning systems

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About