Modular Verification of Open Features Using Three-Valued Model Checking

Li, Harry C.; Krishnamurthi, Shriram; Fisler, Kathi

doi:10.1007/s10515-005-2643-9

Cited by 42 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The challenge, to the best of our knowledge first recognized in [21,22], is to develop formal and modular modelling and verification approaches which specifically take cross-cutting feature constraints into account. In this section, we discuss a number of formal methods and analysis techniques that have been applied in SPLE.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Combining declarative and procedural views in the specification and analysis of product families

Beek

Lafuente

Petrocchi

2013

Proceedings of the 17th International Software Product Line Conference Co-Located Workshops

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We introduce the feature-oriented language FLan as a proof of concept for specifying both declarative aspects of product families, namely constraints on their features, and procedural aspects, namely design processes and run-time behaviour. FLan is inspired by the concurrent constraint programming paradigm. A store of constraints allows one to specify in a declarative way all common constraints on features, including cross-tree constraints as known from feature models. A standard yet rich set of process-algebraic operators allows one to specify in a procedural way the configuration and behaviour of products. There is a close interaction between both views: (i) the execution of a process is constrained by its store to forbid undesired configurations; (ii) a process can query a store to resolve design and behavioural choices; (iii) a process can update the store, for instance to add new features. An implementation in the Maude framework allows for a variety of formal automated analyses of product families specified in FLan, ranging from consistency checking to model checking.

show abstract

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Combining declarative and procedural views in the specification and analysis of product families

Beek

Lafuente

Petrocchi

2013

Proceedings of the 17th International Software Product Line Conference Co-Located Workshops

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For each property of a feature, constraints on interface states that composed features must satisfy can be generated [35,148]. CTL can be used as a property specification language and three-valued model checking is used to ensure open verification [150]. Different programming language composition mechanisms, such as collaborationbased designs [80,147], and cross-cutting (aka aspects) features [149,133], have also been experimented with.…”

Section: Model Checkingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Software diversity: state of the art and perspectives

Schaefer

Rabiser²,

Clarke

et al. 2012

Int J Softw Tools Technol Transfer

136

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Diversity is prevalent in modern software systems to facilitate adapting the software to customer requirements or the execution environment. Diversity has an impact on all phases of the software development process. Appropriate means and organizational structures are required to deal with the additional complexity introduced by software variability. This introductory article to the special section "Software Diversity -Modeling, Analysis and Evolution" provides an overview of the current state of the art in diverse systems development and discusses challenges and potential solutions. The article covers requirements analysis, design, implementation, verification and validation, maintenance and evolution as well as organizational aspects. It also provides an overview of the articles which are part of this special section and address particular issues of diverse systems development.

show abstract

“…Again, all of these approaches focus on Java only. Li et al [2002Li et al [ , 2005 proposed a technique to verify feature-oriented systems in two steps: (1) features are verified modularly and (2) their composition is verified without the need of re-verifying the involved features again. Their approach relies on three-valued model checking to take the "openness" of feature into account.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

A calculus for uniform feature composition

Apel

Hutchins

2008

ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The goal of feature-oriented programming (FOP) is to modularize software systems in terms of features. A feature refines the content of a base program. Both base programs and features may contain various kinds of software artifacts, for example, source code in different languages, models, build scripts, and documentation. We and others have noticed that when composing features, different kinds of software artifacts can be refined in a uniform way, regardless of what they represent. We present gDEEP, a core calculus for feature composition, which captures the language independence of FOP; it can be used to compose features containing many different kinds of artifact in a type-safe way. The calculus allows us to gain insight into the principles of FOP and to define general algorithms for feature composition and validation. We provide the formal syntax, operational semantics, and type system of gDEEP and outline how languages like Java, Haskell, Bali, and XML can be plugged in.

show abstract

Modular Verification of Open Features Using Three-Valued Model Checking

Cited by 42 publications

References 30 publications

Combining declarative and procedural views in the specification and analysis of product families

Combining declarative and procedural views in the specification and analysis of product families

Software diversity: state of the art and perspectives

A calculus for uniform feature composition

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About