Interchange Format for Hybrid Systems: Abstract Semantics

Pinto, Alessandro; Carloni, Luca P.; Sangiovanni-Vincentelli, A.

doi:10.1007/11730637_37

Cited by 26 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, we also believe that combining and leveraging HSIF, Modelica, and the Metropolis metamodel, we can push for the foundations of a standard interchange format as well as a standard design capture language where semantics is favored over syntax. Consequently, we have made a first step in this direction by proposing a new interchange format and by presenting some examples of its application to the definition of a design flow that includes HyVisual, Modelica and CheckMate to enter the design, simulate it and formally verify its properties [145,144]. The new interchange format is at this point a proposal, since work still needs to be done to support it with the appropriate debugging and analysis tools and with translators to and from existing tools.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The abstract semantics of the interchange format proposed in [145] is reported in [144]. To facilitate the customization to a specific semantics, the model designer uses generic schedulers and refines their implementation by defining the behavior of certain abstract functions that are invoked during a scheduling cycle.…”

Section: Metropolis-based Abstract Semantics For Hybrid Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In particular, the function that determines the current valuation of the system is partitioned among the various components, thus enhancing modularity and maintaining encapsulation. In [144], we also illustrate how the interchange format can be used to create a design flow that includes tools as diverse as HyVisual, Modelica and CheckMate.…”

Section: Metropolis-based Abstract Semantics For Hybrid Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Languages and Tools for Hybrid Systems Design

Carloni

Passerone

Pinto

et al. 2006

FNT in Electronic Design Automation

Self Cite

115

109

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The explosive growth of embedded electronics is bringing information and control systems of increasing complexity to every aspects of our lives. The most challenging designs are safety-critical systems, such as transportation systems (e.g., airplanes, cars, and trains), industrial plants and health care monitoring. The difficulties reside in accommodating constraints both on functionality and implementation. The correct behavior must be guaranteed under diverse states of the environment and potential failures; implementation has to meet cost, size, and power consumption requirements. The design is therefore subject to extensive mathematical analysis and simulation. However, traditional models of information systems do not interface well to the continuous evolving nature of the environment in which these devices operate. Thus, in practice, different mathematical representations have to be mixed to analyze the overall behavior of the system. Hybrid systems are a particular class of mixed models that focus on the combination of discrete and continuous subsystems. There is a wealth of tools and languages that have been proposed over the years to handle hybrid systems. However, each tool makes different assumptions on the environment, resulting in somewhat different notions of hybrid system. This makes it difficult to share information among tools. Thus, the community cannot maximally leverage the substantial amount of work that has been directed to this important topic. In this paper, we review and compare hybrid system tools by highlighting their differences in terms of their underlying semantics, expressive power and mathematical mechanisms. We conclude our review with a comparative summary, which suggests the need for a unifying approach to hybrid systems design. As a step in this direction, we make the case for a semantic-aware interchange format, which would enable the use of joint techniques, make a formal comparison between different approaches possible, and facilitate exporting and importing design representations.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Metropolis-based Abstract Semantics For Hybrid Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Metropolis-based Abstract Semantics For Hybrid Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Languages and Tools for Hybrid Systems Design

Carloni

Passerone

Pinto

et al. 2006

FNT in Electronic Design Automation

Self Cite

115

109

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This evolution can be seen in the hybrid systems [83], embedded systems [34], and security [55] communities. However, the immediacy of behavioral issues has dominated the spotlight, leaving issues in the structural regime behind.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Formalizing the structural semantics of domain-specific modeling languages

Jackson

Sztipanovits

2008

Softw Syst Model

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract-Model-based approaches to system design are now widespread and successful. These approaches make extensive use of model structure to describe systems using domain-specific abstractions, to specify and implement model transformations, and to analyze structural properties of models. In spite of its general importance the structural semantics of modeling languages are not well-understood. In this paper we develop the formal foundations for the structural semantics of domain specific modeling languages (DSML), including the mechanisms by which metamodels specify the structural semantics of DSMLs. Additionally, we show how our formalization can complement existing tools, and how it yields algorithms for the analysis of DSMLs and model transformations.

show abstract

“…UPPAAL is primarily a model-checker for timed automata (Alur and Dill, 1994), however, it also supports statistical model-checking of hybrid systems (David et al, 2011(David et al, ). 2013Beohar et al, 2010) and HSIF (Pinto et al, 2006) solve the complexity problem of one format translation to another by performing at most two translations, the approach still suffers from the fact that UPPAAL features like committed locations and C-like function code are not supported in SPACEEX and UPPAAL has limited support for ODEs. Moreover, by using co-simulation, we are able to take advantage not just of the specific strengths of the language of each tool, but also of their native simulation engines, since each FMU is internally running essentially a "copy" of the simulation algorithm of the original tool.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Co-Simulation of Hybrid Systems with SpaceEx and Uppaal

Bogomolov

Greitschus

Jensen

et al. 2015

Linköping Electronic Conference Proceedings

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Functional Mock-up Interface (FMI) is an industry standard which enables co-simulation of complex heterogeneous systems using multiple simulation engines. In this paper, we show how to use FMI in order to co-simulate hybrid systems modeled in the model checkers SPACEEX and UPPAAL. We show how FMI components can be automatically generated from SPACEEX and UPPAAL models. We also validate the cosimulation approach by comparing the simulations of a room heating benchmark in two cases: first, when a single model is simulated in SPACEEX; and second, when the model is split in two submodels, and co-simulated using SPACEEX and UPPAAL. Finally, we perform a measurement experiment on a composite model to show a potential for statistical model checking using stochastic co-simulations.

show abstract

Interchange Format for Hybrid Systems: Abstract Semantics

Cited by 26 publications

References 12 publications

Languages and Tools for Hybrid Systems Design

Languages and Tools for Hybrid Systems Design

Formalizing the structural semantics of domain-specific modeling languages

Co-Simulation of Hybrid Systems with SpaceEx and Uppaal

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About