Cyber-Physical Systems Design: Formal Foundations, Methods and Integrated Tool Chains

Fitzgerald, JS; Gamble, Carl; Larsen, Peter Gorm; Pierce, Ken; Woodcock, Jim

doi:10.1109/formalise.2015.14

Cited by 49 publications

(34 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Finally, it is essential that theory integration is accompanied by its application in design flows that support consistent integration of tools (Derler et al 2012;Sztipanovits et al 2015;Fitzgerald et al 2015). Work in that direction should go hand in hand with developing theoretical foundations for elaborating sound principles for compositionality and componentization, and defining sufficiently abstract component interfaces ensuring independence from modeling tools selected by developers.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…simulation as well as validation and verification to guarantee essential properties (Lee 2008;Rajkumar et al 2010;Wolf 2009;Geisberger and Broy 2015;Berger and Mousavi 2015;Derler et al 2012;Sztipanovits et al 2015;Fitzgerald et al 2015). Despite considerable effort of the involved research communities, it is important to recognize that we are still very far from reaching the desired degree of domain integration.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Rigorous design of cyber-physical systems

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cyber-physical systems have developed into a very active research field, with a broad range of challenges and research directions going from requirements, to implementation and simulation, as well as validation and verification to guarantee essential properties. In this survey paper, we focus exclusively on the following fundamental issue: how to link physicality and computation, continuous time-space dynamics with discrete untimed ones?We consider that cyber-physical system design flow involves the following three main steps: 1) cyber-physical systems modeling; 2) discretization for executability; and 3) simulation and implementation. We review-and strive to provide insight into possible approaches for addressing-the key issues, for each of these three steps.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Rigorous design of cyber-physical systems

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the INTO-CPS project we start from the view that disciplines such as software, mechatronics and control engineering have evolved with notations and theories that are tailored to their engineering needs, and that it is undesirable to suppress this diversity by enforcing uniform general-purpose models [3,4,10,11,12]. Our goal is to achieve a practical integration of diverse formalisms at the semantic level, and to realise the benefits in integrated tool chains.…”

Section: The Into-cps Technologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Multi-Paradigm Discrete-Event Modelling and Co-simulation of Cyber-Physical Systems

Neghina¹,

Zamfirescu²,

Larsen³

et al. 2018

STUD INFORM CONTROL

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:In the modelling of Cyber-Physical Systems (CPSs), there are different possible routes that can be followed to gradually achieve a collection of constituent models that can be co-simulated with a high level of accuracy. This paper demonstrates a methodology which initially develops all constituent models at a high level of abstraction with discreteevent models expressed using the Vienna Development Method (VDM). Subsequently, a number of these are refined (without changing the interfaces) by more detailed models expressed in different formalisms, and using tools that can export Functional Mock-up Units (FMUs) for co-simulation through the Functional Mock-up Interface (FMI) standard. The development team of each of these more detailed models can then experiment with the interactions with all the other constituent models, using the high-level discrete-event versions until higher-fidelity alternatives are ready. The results reported in this paper were obtained in an innovation experiment within the EU CPSE Labs research project, part of Smart Anything Everywhere initiative.

show abstract

“…One of the leading heterogeneous frameworks is Ptolemy-II, where computation modes are specified for model elements (Eker et al, 2003). Our own work links DE models of controllers with CT models of controlled plant based on a reconciled operational semantics (Fitzgerald et al, 2015).…”

Section: Bridging Semantic Gapsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Collaborative Model‐based Systems Engineering for Cyber‐Physical Systems, with a Building Automation Case Study

Fitzgerald

Gamble

Payne

et al. 2016

INCOSE International Symp

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We describe an approach to the model‐based engineering of cyber‐physical systems that permits the coupling of diverse discrete‐event and continuous‐time models and their simulators. A case study in the building automation domain demonstrates how such co‐models and co‐simulation can promote early cooperation between disciplines within a systems engineering process before the expensive commitment is made to integration in physical prototypes. We identify areas for future advances in foundations, methods and tools to realise the potential of a co‐modelling approach within established systems engineering processes.

show abstract

Cyber-Physical Systems Design: Formal Foundations, Methods and Integrated Tool Chains

Cited by 49 publications

References 21 publications

Rigorous design of cyber-physical systems

Rigorous design of cyber-physical systems

Multi-Paradigm Discrete-Event Modelling and Co-simulation of Cyber-Physical Systems

Collaborative Model‐based Systems Engineering for Cyber‐Physical Systems, with a Building Automation Case Study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About