The ForSpec Temporal Logic: A New Temporal Property-Specification Language

Armoni, Roy; Fix, Limor; Flaisher, Alon; Gerth, Rob; Ginsburg, Boris; Kanza, Tomer; Landver, Avner; Mador-Haim, Sela; Singerman, Eli; Tiemeyer, Andreas; Vardi, Moshe Y.; Zbar, Yael

doi:10.1007/3-540-46002-0_21

Cited by 131 publications

(123 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

122

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Various extensions to LTL, such as Metrical Temporal Logic (MTL) and ForSpec Temporal Logic (FTL) [63] have been proposed in the literature to overcome this limitation.…”

Section: ( ( ( )))mentioning

confidence: 99%

Formalizing and appling compliance patterns for business process compliance

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Document VersionAccepted manuscript including changes made at the peer-review stage Please check the document version of this publication:• A submitted manuscript is the author's version of the article upon submission and before peer-review. There can be important differences between the submitted version and the official published version of record. People interested in the research are advised to contact the author for the final version of the publication, or visit the DOI to the publisher's website.• The final author version and the galley proof are versions of the publication after peer review.• The final published version features the final layout of the paper including the volume, issue and page numbers. Link to publication Citation for published version (APA):Elgammal, A., Turetken, O., van den Heuvel, W., & Papazoglou, M. (2016). Formalizing and appling compliance patterns for business process compliance. Software and Systems Modeling, 15(1), 119-146. DOI: 10.1007/s10270-014-0395-3 General rightsCopyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights.• Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research.• You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain • You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal ? Take down policyIf you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim. University, 5000 LE, Tilburg, Netherlands. Email: (w.j.a.m.vdnheuvel, m.p.papazoglou)@uvt.nl Abstract: Today's enterprises demand a high degree of compliance of business processes to meet diverse regulations and legislations. Several industrial studies have shown that compliance management is a daunting task, and organizations are still struggling and spending billions of dollars annually to ensure and prove their compliance. In this paper, we introduce a comprehensive compliance management framework with a main focus on design-time compliance management as a first step towards a preventive lifetime compliance support. The framework enables the automation of compliance related-activities that are amenable to automation, and therefore can significantly reduce the expenditures spent on compliance. It can help experts to carry out their work more efficiently, cut the time spent on tedious manual activities, and reduce potential human errors. An evident candidate compliance activity for automation is the compliance checking, which can be achieved by utilizing formal reasoning and verification techniques. However, formal languages are well-known of their complexity as only versed users in mathematical theories and formal logics are able to use an...

show abstract

“…Various extensions to LTL, such as Metrical Temporal Logic (MTL) and ForSpec Temporal Logic (FTL) [63] have been proposed in the literature to overcome this limitation.…”

Section: ( ( ( )))mentioning

confidence: 99%

Formalizing and appling compliance patterns for business process compliance

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The failure state is a 2 and we split it by adding the predicate c 3 . We construct the abstract structure M A ({a 1 1 , a 2 1 , a 1 2 , a 2 2 , a 3 , a 4 }) (see M 2 on the right side of Figure 1). Since all the edges are now concrete edges, L l = L u , and we skip the second step of refineWord.…”

Section: The Refinement Algorithmmentioning

confidence: 99%

An abstraction-refinement framework for trigger querying

Avni

Kupferman

2013

Form Methods Syst Des

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Trigger querying is the problem of finding, given a system M and an LTL formula ϕ, the set of scenarios that trigger ϕ in M ; that is, the language L of finite computations of M such that all infinite computations that have a prefix in L continue with a suffix that satisfies ϕ. For example, the trigger query M |=? → F err asks for the set of scenarios after which err aught to eventually happen. Trigger querying thus significantly extends query checking, which seeks propositional solutions, and is an extremely useful methodology for system exploration and understanding. The weakness of trigger querying lies in the fact that the size of the solution is linear in the size of the system. For trigger querying to become feasible in practice, we must offer solutions to cope with systems of big, and possibly infinite, state spaces. In this paper we describe an abstraction-refinement framework for trigger querying. The general idea is to replace the reasoning about M by reasoning about an abstraction MA of M , and return to the user two languages, L l and Lu, that under-and over-approximate L, respectively. We consider predicate abstraction, and the languages L l and Lu are defined with respect to the set of predicates. The challenge in defining the approximating languages is that trigger querying does not have a clear polarity, and the definition of L l and Lu has to combine the upper-and over-approximations of M . We describe an automata-theoretic approach for refining and reducing Lu \ L l . While refinement for model checking is lengthwise, in the sense that it is based on counterexamples, here we suggest both lengthwise and widthwise refinement, where the latter is based on cuts in an automaton for Lu \ L l and thus can symbolically handle batches of counterexamples. We show that our framework is robust and can be applied also for classical query checking as well as variants and extensions of trigger querying.

show abstract

“…In the static verification community, several other specification languages like Sugar [4] and ForSpec [3] exist, which also contain additional syntactic sugar hiding the temporal logics in the semantic layer to make the input languages more user-friendly.…”

Section: G(modify(c) → Remove(s C) R ¬Contains(s C))mentioning

confidence: 99%

Tracechecks: Defining Semantic Interfaces with Temporal Logic

Bodden

Stolz

2006

Software Composition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Tracechecks are a formalism based on linear temporal logic (LTL) with variable bindings and pointcuts of the aspect-oriented language AspectJ for the purpose of verification. We demonstrate how tracechecks can be used to model temporal assertions. These assertions reason about the dynamic control flow of an application. They can be used to formally define the semantic interface of classes. We explain in detail how we make use of AspectJ pointcuts to derive a formal model of an existing application and use LTL to express temporal assertions over this model.We developed a reference implementation with the abc compiler showing that the tool can be applied in practice and is memory-efficient.In addition we show how tracechecks can be deployed as Java5 annotations, yielding a system which is fully compliant with any Java compiler and hiding any peculiarities of aspect-oriented programming from the user. Through annotations, the tracecheck specifications become a semantic part of an interface. Consumers of such a component can then take advantage of the contained annotations by applying our tool and have their use of this component automatically checked at runtime for compliance with the intent of the component provider.

show abstract

The ForSpec Temporal Logic: A New Temporal Property-Specification Language

Cited by 131 publications

References 26 publications

Formalizing and appling compliance patterns for business process compliance

Formalizing and appling compliance patterns for business process compliance

An abstraction-refinement framework for trigger querying

Tracechecks: Defining Semantic Interfaces with Temporal Logic

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About