Process Refinement in B

Dunne, Steve; Conroy, Stacey

doi:10.1007/11415787_4

Cited by 8 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For B, the concept of trace refinement is implemented in the form of refinement checking to ensure that an abstract machine contains all concrete traces [7,9,18]. We define a trace T as an ordered list of transitions t 1 , .…”

Section: Trace Refinement In Bmentioning

confidence: 99%

Trace Refinement in B and Event-B

Stock¹,

Mashkoor²,

Leuschel³

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Traces are used to show whether a model complies with the intended behavior. A modeler can use trace checking to ensure the preservation of the model behavior during the refinement process. In this paper, we present a trace refinement technique and tool called BERT that allows designers to ensure the behavioral integrity of high-level traces at the concrete level. The proposed technique is evaluated within the context of the B and Event-B methods on industrial-strength case studies from the automotive domain.

show abstract

Section: Trace Refinement In Bmentioning

confidence: 99%

Trace Refinement in B and Event-B

Stock¹,

Mashkoor²,

Leuschel³

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The use of event traces to model system behaviour is well-known from process algebra, especially CSP [32]. Although event traces are not part of the standard semantic definitions in B, many authors have made the link between B machines and event traces including [17,24,57]. The ProB animator can also be viewed as a way of computing sample traces of a B machine.…”

Section: Tracesmentioning

confidence: 99%

ProB: an automated analysis toolset for the B method

Leuschel

Butler

2008

Int J Softw Tools Technol Transf

311

150

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We present ProB, a validation toolset for the B method. ProB's automated animation facilities allow users to gain confidence in their specifications. ProB also contains a model checker and a refinement checker, both of which can be used to detect various errors in B specifications. We describe the underlying methodology of ProB, and present the important aspects of the implementation. We also present empirical evaluations as well as several case studies, highlighting that ProB enables users to uncover errors that are not easily discovered by existing tools.

show abstract

“…By not embedding inputs, we are replacing this by seq(Index × Input) → { * } ↔ seq Output, in functional programming terms: uncurrying and zipping. 4 For discussions about which aspects of a system should or could be observed see [45] and [23].…”

Section: Definition 7 (Refusal Embedding)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Relational concurrent refinement part II: Internal operations and outputs

2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Two styles of description arise naturally in formal specification: state-based and behavioural. In state-based notations, a system is characterised by a collection of variables, and their values determine which actions may occur throughout a system history. Behavioural specifications describe the chronologies of actions -interactions between a system and its environment. The exact nature of such interactions is captured in a variety of semantic models with corresponding notions of refinement; refinement in state based systems is based on the semantics of sequential programs and is modelled relationally. Acknowledging that these viewpoints are complementary, substantial research has gone into combining the paradigms. The purpose of this paper is to do three things. First, we survey recent results linking the relational model of refinement to the process algebraic models. Specifically, we detail how variations in the relational framework lead to relational data refinement being in correspondence with traces-divergences, singleton failures and failures-divergences refinement in a process semantics. Second, we generalise these results by providing a general flexible scheme for incorporating the two main "erroneous" concurrent behaviours: deadlock and divergence, into relational refinement. This is shown to subsume previous characterisations. In doing this we derive relational refinement rules for specifications containing both internal operations and outputs that corresponds to failures-divergences refinement. Thirdly, the theory has been formally specified and verified using the interactive theorem prover KIV.

show abstract

Process Refinement in B

Cited by 8 publications

References 23 publications

Trace Refinement in B and Event-B

Trace Refinement in B and Event-B

ProB: an automated analysis toolset for the B method

Relational concurrent refinement part II: Internal operations and outputs

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About