Abstract
In Cyber-Physical Systems (CPS), cyber and physical components must work seamlessly in tandem. Runtime verification of CPS is essential yet very difficult, due to deployment environments that are expensive, dangerous, or simply impossible to use for verification tasks. A key enabling factor of runtime verification of CPS is the ability to integrate real-time simulations of portions of the CPS into live running systems. We propose a verification approach that allows CPS application developers to opportunistically leverage real-time simulation to support runtime verification. Our approach, termed BraceBind, allows selecting, at runtime, between actual physical processes or simulations of them to support a running CPS application. To build BraceBind, we create a real-time simulation architecture to generate and manage multiple real-time simulation environments based on existing simulation models in a manner that ensures sufficient accuracy for verifying a CPS application. Specifically, BraceBind aims to both improve simulation speed and minimize latency, thereby making it feasible to integrate simulations of physical processes into the running CPS application. BraceBind then integrates this real-time simulation architecture with an existing runtime verification approach that has low computational overhead and high accuracy. This integration uses an aspect-oriented adapter architecture that connects the variables in the cyber portion of the CPS application with either sensors and actuators in the physical world or the automatically generated real-time simulation. Our experimental results show that, with a negligible performance penalty, our approach is both efficient and effective in detecting program errors that are otherwise only detectable in a physical deployment.
- Ahmad T. Al-Hammouri. 2012. A comprehensive co-simulation platform for cyber-physical systems. Comput. Commun. 36, 1 (2012), 8--19. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- J. Bastian, C. Clauß, S. Wolf, and P. Schneider. 2011. Master for co-simulation using FMI. In Proceedings of the 8th International Modelica Conference. Citeseer. Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Marcin Baszyński. 2016. Low cost, high accuracy real-time simulation used for rapid prototyping and testing control algorithms on example of BLDC motor. Arch. Electr. Eng. 65, 3 (2016), 463--479. Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- R. Bednar and R. E. Crosbie. 2007. Stability of multi-rate simulation algorithms. In Proceedings of Summer Computer Simulation Conference (SCSC’07). 189--194.Google Scholar
- J. Bélanger, P. Venne, and J. N. Paquin. 2010. The what, where, and why of real-time simulation. Planet RT 1.1: 25--29.Google Scholar
- T. Blochwitz, M. Otter, J. Åkesson, M. Arnold, C. Clauss, H. Elmqvist, and others. 2012. Functional mockup interface 2.0: The standard for tool independent exchange of simulation models. In Proceedings of the 9th International Modelica Conference. 173--184. Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- H. X. Chen. 2010. Simulink and VC-based hardware-in-the-loop real-time simulation for EV. In Proceedings of Electric Vehicle Symposium (EVS-25’10).Google Scholar
- L. Dagum and R. Enon. 1998. OpenMP: An industry standard API for shared-memory programming. Comput. Sci. Eng. IEEE 5, 1 (1998), 46--55. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Robocup Federation. Robocup Normal League. Retrieved at http://www.robocup.org/leagues/5.Google Scholar
- C. Fetzer and F. Cristian. 1995. An optimal internal clock synchronization algorithm. In Proceedings of the Conference on Computer Assurance (COMPASS’95). Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- A. Gholkar, A. Isaacs, and H. Arya. 2004. Hardware-in-loop simulator for mini aerial vehicle. In Proceedings of the Real-Time Linux Workshop.Google Scholar
- D. Goswami, R. Schneider, and S. Chakraborty. 2011. Co-design of cyber-physical systems via controllers with flexible delay constraints. In Proceedings of the Asia and South pacific design Automation Conference (ASP-DAC’11). Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- M. Harakawa et al. 2005. Real-time simulation of a complete PMSM drive at 10 μs time step. In Proceedings of the International Symposium on Parameterized and Exact Computation (IPEC’05).Google Scholar
- T. A. Henzinger, P. W. Kopke, A. Puri, and P. Varaiya. 1995. What’s decidable about hybrid automata? In Proceedings of the Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC’95). Google Scholar
Digital Library
- B. Horling, V. Lesser, R. Vincent, and T. Wagner. 2006. The soft real-time agent control architecture. Auton. Agents Multi-Agent Syst. 12, 1 (2006), 35--91. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- U. Hunkeler, H. L. Truong, and A. Stanford-Clark. 2008. MQTT-SâĂŤA publish/subscribe protocol for wireless sensor networks. In Proceedings of Comsware. IEEE, 791--798.Google Scholar
- Xiaoqing Jin, Alexandre Donzé, Jyotirmoy V. Deshmukh, and Sanjit A. Seshia. 2015. Mining requirements from closed-loop control models. IEEE Trans. Comput.-Aided Design Integr. Circ. Syst. 34, 11 (2015), 1704--1717. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- T. Jones and G. A. Koenig. 2010. A clock synchronization strategy for minimizing clock variance at runtime in high-end computing environments. In Proceedings of the Symposium on Computer Architecture and High Performance Computing (SBAC-PAD’10). Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Michele L. Joyner, Chelsea R. Ross, Colton Watts, and Thomas C. Jones. 2014. A stochastic simulation model for anelosimus studiosus during prey capture: A case study for determination of optimal spacing. Math. Biosci. Eng. 11, 9 (2014). Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- A. B. Khaled, M. B. Gaid, N. Pernet, and D. Simon. 2014. Fast multi-core co-simulation of cyber-physical systems: Application to internal combustion engines. Simulat. Model. Pract. Theory 47 (2014), 79--91. Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- G. Kiczales, J. Lamping, A. Mendhekar, C. Maeda, C. Lopes, J. M. Loingtier, and J. Irwin. 1997. Aspect-oriented programming. In Proceedings of the European Conference on Object Oriented Programming (ECOOP’97). Springer, 220--242. Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- M. Kinsy, O. Khan, I. Celanovic, D. Majstorovic, N. Celanovic, and S. Devadas. 2011. Time-predictable computer architecture for cyber-physical systems: Digital emulation of power electronics systems. In Proceedings of the Real Time Systems Symposium (RTSS’11). IEEE, 305--316. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- W. H. Kwon and S.-G. Choi. 1999. Real-time distributed software-in-the-loop simulation for distributed control systems. In Proceedings of International Symposium on Computer Aided Control System Design. IEEE, 115--119.Google Scholar
- LabVIEW RealTime. 2016. LabVIEW RealTime. Retrieved from http://www.ni.com/labview/realtime/. (2016).Google Scholar
- LabViewManual. 2016. LabView User Manual. Retrieved from http://autnt.fme.vutbr.cz/lab/FAQ/labview/SimulationModule_UserManual_371013c.pdf (2016).Google Scholar
- V. Lesser et al. 2004. Evolution of the GPGP/TAEMS domain-independent coordination framework. Auton. Agents Multi-Agent Syst. 9, 1 (July 2004), 87--143. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- B. Miller, F. Vahid, and T. Givargis. 2011. Application-specific codesign platform generation for digital mockups in cyber-physical systems. In Proceedings of the Electronic System Level Synthesis Conference (ESLsyn’11). Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- D. L. Mills. 1991. Internet time synchronization: The network time protocol. IEEE Trans. Comm. 39, 10 (October 1991), 1482--1493. Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Modelisar 2016. Modelisar. Retrived at http://www.modelisar.org. (2016).Google Scholar
- PXI 2016. What’s PXI. Retrived at http://www.ni.com/pxi/whatis/. (2016).Google Scholar
- PXIPrice. 2016. PXI Sample Price. Retrived at http://sine.ni.com/nips/cds/view/p/lang/en/nid/210825. (2016).Google Scholar
- Camille Alain Rabbath, M. Abdoune, and Jay Belanger. 2000. Real-time simulations: Effective real-time simulations of event-based systems. In Proceedings of the 32nd Conference on Winter Simulation. Society for Computer Simulation International, 232--238.Google Scholar
- J. J. Sanchez-G., R. D’Aquila, W. W. Price, and J. J. Paserba. 1995. Variable time step, implicit integration for extended-term power system dynamic simulation. In Proceedings of the Conference on Power Industry Computer Applications (PICA’95). Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Wei Yan, Yuan Xue, Xiaowei Li, Jiannian Weng, Timothy Busch, and Janos Sztipanovits. 2012. Integrated simulation and emulation platform for cyber-physical system security experimentation. In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on High Confidence Networked Systems. ACM, 81--88. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Z. Zhang et al. 2013. Co-simulation framework for design of time-triggered cyber physical systems. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Cyber-Physical Systems (ICCPS’13). Google Scholar
Digital Library
- X. Zheng, C. Julien, R. Podorozhny, and F. Cassez. 2015. BraceAssertion: Runtime Verification of Cyber-Physical Systems. In Proceedings of the Conference on Mobile Ad Hoc and Sensor Systems (MASS’15). Google Scholar
Digital Library
- X. Zheng, D. E. Perry, and C. Julien. 2014. Braceforce: A middleware to enable sensing integration in mobile applications for novice programmers. In Proceedings of International Conference on Mobile Software Engineering and Systems. ACM, 8--17. Google Scholar
Digital Library
Index Terms
Real-Time Simulation Support for Runtime Verification of Cyber-Physical Systems
Recommendations
A Predictive Runtime Verification Framework for Cyber-Physical Systems
SERE-C '14: Proceedings of the 2014 IEEE Eighth International Conference on Software Security and Reliability-CompanionRuntime verification with a predictive semantics defines how to monitor a temporal property in a predictive manner. In this paper, we propose a predictive runtime verification framework for Cyber-Physical Systems (CPS), which are usually open embedded ...
Verification and Validation in Cyber Physical Systems: Research Challenges and a Way Forward
SESCPS '15: Proceedings of the 2015 IEEE/ACM 1st International Workshop on Software Engineering for Smart Cyber-Physical SystemsIt is widely held that debugging cyber-physical systems (CPS) is challenging, to date, empirical studies investigating research challenges in CPS verification and validation have not been done. As a result, the exact challenges facing CPS developers in ...
Cyber/Physical Co-verification for Developing Reliable Cyber-physical Systems
COMPSAC '13: Proceedings of the 2013 IEEE 37th Annual Computer Software and Applications ConferenceCyber-Physical Systems (CPS) tightly integrate cyber and physical components and transcend discrete and continuous domains. It is greatly desired that the physical components being controlled and the software implementation of control algorithms can be ...






Comments