Formal refinement of extended state machines

June 07, 2016 Β· Declared Dead Β· πŸ› Refine@FM

πŸ‘» CAUSE OF DEATH: Ghosted
No code link whatsoever

"No code URL or promise found in abstract"

Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner

Authors Thomas Fayolle, Marc Frappier, RΓ©gine Laleau, FrΓ©dΓ©ric Gervais arXiv ID 1606.02016 Category cs.SE: Software Engineering Citations 2 Venue Refine@FM Last Checked 4 months ago
Abstract
In a traditional formal development process, e.g. using the B method, the informal user requirements are (manually) translated into a global abstract formal specification. This translation is especially difficult to achieve. The Event-B method was developed to incrementally and formally construct such a specification using stepwise refinement. Each increment takes into account new properties and system aspects. In this paper, we propose to couple a graphical notation called Algebraic State-Transition Diagrams (ASTD) with an Event-B specification in order to provide a better understanding of the software behaviour. The dynamic behaviour is captured by the ASTD, which is based on automata and process algebra operators, while the data model is described by means of an Event-B specification. We propose a methodology to incrementally refine such specification couplings, taking into account new refinement relations and consistency conditions between the control specification and the data specification. We compare the specifications obtained using each approach for readability and proof complexity. The advantages and drawbacks of the traditional approach and of our methodology are discussed. The whole process is illustrated by a railway CBTC-like case study. Our approach is supported by tools for translating ASTD's into B and Event-B into B.
Community shame:
Not yet rated
Community Contributions

Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!

πŸ“œ Similar Papers

In the same crypt β€” Software Engineering

Died the same way β€” πŸ‘» Ghosted