skip to main content
research-article

Event-B Hybridation: A Proof and Refinement-based Framework for Modelling Hybrid Systems

Published:13 May 2021Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

Hybrid systems are complex systems where a software controller interacts with a physical environment, usually named a plant, through sensors and actuators. The specification and design of such systems usually rely on the description of both continuous and discrete behaviours. From complex embedded systems to autonomous vehicles, these systems became quite common, including in safety critical domains. However, their formal verification and validation as a whole is still a challenge.

To address this challenge, this article contributes to the definition of a reusable and tool supported formal framework handling the design and verification of hybrid system models that integrate both discrete (the controller part) and continuous (the plant part) behaviours. This framework includes the development of a process for defining a class of basic theories and developing domain theories and then the use of these theories to develop a generic model and system-specific models. To realise this framework, we present a formal proof tool chain, based on the Event-B correct-by-construction method and its integrated development environment Rodin, to develop a set of theories, a generic model, proof processes, and the required properties for designing hybrid systems in Event-B.

Our approach relies on hybrid automata as basic models for such systems. Discrete and continuous variables model system states and behaviours are given using discrete state changes and continuous evolution following a differential equation. The proposed approach is based on refinement and proof using the Event-B method and the Rodin toolset. Two case studies borrowed from the literature are used to illustrate our approach. An assessment of the proposed approach is provided for evaluating its extensibility, effectiveness, scalability, and usability.

References

  1. Jean-Raymond Abrial. 1996. The B-Book: Assigning Programs to Meanings. Cambridge University Press.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Jean-Raymond Abrial. 2010. Modeling in Event-B: System and Software Engineering (1st ed.). Cambridge University Press, New York, NY.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Jean-Raymond Abrial, Michael Butler, Stefan Hallerstede, Michael Leuschel, Matthias Schmalz, and Laurent Voisin. 2009. Proposals for Mathematical Extensions for Event-B. Technical Report.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Ilge Akkaya, Patricia Derler, Shuhei Emoto, and Edward Ashford Lee. 2016. Systems engineering for industrial cyber-physical systems using aspects. Proc. IEEE 104, 5 (May 2016), 997--1012.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Rajeev Alur, Costas Courcoubetis, Nicolas Halbwachs, Thomas A. Henzinger, Pei-Hsin Ho, Xavier Nicollin, Alfredo Olivero, Joseph Sifakis, and Sergio Yovine. 1995. The algorithmic analysis of hybrid systems. Theor. Comp. Sci. 138, 1 (1995), 3--34. Hybrid Systems.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. James M. Anderson, Kalra Nidhi, Karlyn D. Stanley, Paul Sorensen, Constantine Samaras, and Oluwatobi A. Oluwatola. 2014. Autonomous Vehicle Technology: A Guide for Policymakers. Rand Corporation.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Manamiary Bruno Andriamiarina, Dominique Méry, and Neeraj Kumar Singh. 2013. Integrating proved state-based models for constructing correct distributed algorithms. In Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Integrated Formal Methods (IFM’13). 268--284. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-38613-8_19Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. N. Aréchiga, S. M. Loos, A. Platzer, and B. H. Krogh. 2012. Using theorem provers to guarantee closed-loop system properties. In Proceedings of the 2012 American Control Conference. 3573--3580.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Eugene Asarin, Thao Dang, and Oded Maler. 2002. The d/dt tool for verification of hybrid systems. In Computer Aided Verification, Ed Brinksma and Kim Guldstrand Larsen (Eds.). Springer, Berlin, 365--370.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Guillaume Babin, Yamine Aït-Ameur, Neeraj Kumar Singh, and Marc Pantel. 2016. A system substitution mechanism for hybrid systems in Event-B. In Formal Methods and Software Engineering, Kazuhiro Ogata, Mark Lawford, and Shaoying Liu (Eds.), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 10009. Springer International Publishing, Cham, 106--121.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Ralph-Johan Back, Luigia Petre, and Ivan Porres. 2000. Generalizing action systems to hybrid systems. In Formal Techniques in Real-Time and Fault-Tolerant Systems, Mathai Joseph (Ed.). Springer, Berlin, 202--213.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Ralph-Johan Back, Luigia Petre, and Ivan Porres. 2001. Continuous action systems as a model for hybrid systems. Nord. J. Comput. 8, 1 (2001), 2--21.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Frédéric Badeau and Arnaud Amelot. 2005. Using B as a high level programming language in an industrial project: Roissy VAL. In Proceedings of the Formal Specification and Development in Z and B (ZB’05), Helen Treharne, Steve King, Martin Henson, and Steve Schneider (Eds.). Springer, Berlin, 334--354.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Richard Banach. 2013. Pliant modalities in hybrid Event-B. In Theories of Programming and Formal Methods, Zhiming Liu, Jim Woodcock, and Huibiao Zhu (Eds.). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 8051. Springer, Berlin, 37--53.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Richard Banach. 2016. Formal refinement and partitioning of a fuel pump system for small aircraft in hybrid Event-B. In Proceedings of the 10th International Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Software Engineering. 65--72.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. Richard Banach. 2016. Hemodialysis machine in hybrid Event-B. In Abstract State Machines, Alloy, B, TLA, VDM, and Z, Michael Butler, Klaus-Dieter Schewe, Atif Mashkoor, and Miklos Biro (Eds.), Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer International Publishing, Cham, 376--393.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Richard Banach, Michael Butler, Shengchao Qin, Nitika Verma, and Huibiao Zhu. 2015. Core hybrid Event-B I: Single hybrid Event-B machines. Science of Computer Programming (2015).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Richard Banach, Huibiao Zhu, Wen Su, and Runlei Huang. 2011. Formalising the continuous/discrete modeling step. In Proceedings of the 15th International Refinement Workshop (Refine’11)(Electronic Proceedings in Theoretical Computer Science), John Derrick, Eerke A. Boiten, and Steve Reeves (Eds.), Electronic Proceedings in Theoretical Computer Science, Vol. 55. 121--138.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. Richard Banach, Huibiao Zhu, Wen Su, and Xiaofeng Wu. 2012. ASM and controller synthesis. In Abstract State Machines, Alloy, B, VDM, and Z, John Derrick, John Fitzgerald, Stefania Gnesi, Sarfraz Khurshid, Michael Leuschel, Steve Reeves, and Elvinia Riccobene (Eds.). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 7316. Springer, Berlin, 51--64.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Richard Banach, Huibiao Zhu, Wen Su, and Xiaofeng Wu. 2014. A continuous ASM modelling approach to pacemaker sensing. ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. 24, 1, Article 2 (Oct. 2014), 40 pages.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Patrick Behm, Paul Benoit, Alain Faivre, and Jean-Marc Meynadier. 1999. Météor: A Successful Application of B in a Large Project. Springer, Berlin, 369--387.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Nazim Benaissa and Dominique Méry. 2010. Cryptographic protocols analysis in Event B. In Perspectives of Systems Informatics, Amir Pnueli, Irina Virbitskaite, and Andrei Voronkov (Eds.). Springer, Berlin, 282--293.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Sarah Benyagoub, Yamine Aït Ameur, Meriem Ouederni, Atif Mashkoor, and Ahmed Medeghri. 2020. Formal design of scalable conversation protocols using Event-B: Validation, experiments, and benchmarks. J. Softw. Evol. Process. 32, 2 (2020).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Yves Bertot and Pierre Castéran. 2004. Interactive Theorem Proving and Program Development: Coq’Art: The Calculus of Inductive Constructions. Springer Verlag.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Sylvie Boldo, François Clément, Jean-Christophe Filliâtre, Micaela Mayero, Guillaume Melquiond, and Pierre Weis. 2014. Trusting computations: A mechanized proof from partial differential equations to actual program. Comput. Math. Appl. 68, 3 (2014), 325--352.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. Sylvie Boldo, Catherine Lelay, and Guillaume Melquiond. 2015. Coquelicot: A user-friendly library of real analysis for Coq. Math. Comput. Sci. 9, 1 (2015), 41--62.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  27. Michael Butler, Jean-Raymond Abrial, and Richard Banach. 2016. Modelling and Refining Hybrid Systems in Event-B and Rodin. In From Action Systems to Distributed Systems: The Refinement Approach. Chapman & Hall/CRC, 29--42.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Michael Butler and Issam Maamria. 2013. Practical theory extension in Event-B. In Theories of Programming and Formal Methods, Zhiming Liu, Jim Woodcock, and Huibiao Zhu (Eds.), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 8051. Springer, Berlin, 67--81.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Michael J. Butler, Philipp Körner, Sebastian Krings, Thierry Lecomte, Michael Leuschel, Luis-Fernando Mejia, and Laurent Voisin. 2020. The first twenty-five years of industrial use of the B-method. In Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Formal Methods for Industrial Critical Systems (FMICS’20), Maurice H. ter Beek and Dejan Nickovic (Eds.),Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 12327. Springer, 189--209.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. Xin Chen, Erika Ábrahám, and Sriram Sankaranarayanan. 2013. Flow*: An analyzer for non-linear hybrid systems. In Computer Aided Verification, Natasha Sharygina and Helmut Veith (Eds.). Springer, Berlin, 258--263.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Edmund M. Clarke, Orna Grumberg, and Doron Peled. 1999. Model Checking. The MIT Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Armando. W. Colombo, Stamatis Karnouskos, Okyay Kaynak, Yang Shi, and Shen Yin. 2017. Industrial cyberphysical systems: A backbone of the fourth industrial revolution. IEEE Industr. Electr. Mag. 11, 1 (2017), 6--16.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  33. Nilanjan Dey, Amira S. Ashour, Fuqian Shi, Simon James Fong, and João Manuel Tavares. 2018. Medical cyber-physical systems: A survey. J. Med. Syst. 42, 4 (Apr. 2018), 1--13. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10916-018-0921-xGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. Guillaume Dupont, Yamine Aït-Ameur, Marc Pantel, and Neeraj Kumar Singh. 2018. Hybrid systems and Event-B: A formal approach to signalised left-turn assist. In New Trends in Model and Data Engineering. Springer International Publishing, 153--158.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. Guillaume Dupont, Yamine Aït-Ameur, Marc Pantel, and Neeraj Kumar Singh. 2018. Proof-based approach to hybrid systems development: Dynamic logic and Event-B. In Abstract State Machines, Alloy, B, TLA, VDM, and Z, Michael Butler, Alexander Raschke, Thai Son Hoang, and Klaus Reichl (Eds.). Springer International Publishing, Cham, 155--170.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. Guillaume Dupont, Yamine Aït-Ameur, Marc Pantel, and Neeraj Kumar Singh. 2020. An Event-B based generic framework for hybrid systems formal modelling. In Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on integrated Formal Methods (iFM’20), Brijesh Dongol and Elena Troubitsyna (Eds.), Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. Guillaume Dupont, Yamine Aït-Ameur, Marc Pantel, and Neeraj Kumar Singh. 2020. Formally verified architecture patterns of hybrid systems using proof and refinement with Event-B. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Rigorous State Based Methods, Alexander Rashke and Dominique Méry (Eds.), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 12071. Springer, 155--170.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. Guillaume Dupont, Yamine Aït-Ameur, Neeraj K. Singh, Fuyuki Ishikawa, Tsutomu Kobayashi, and Marc Pantel. 2020. Embedding approximation in Event-B: Safe hybrid system design using proof and refinement. In Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on Formal Engineering Methods (ICFEM’20), Jin Song Dong and Jim McCarthy (Eds.), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 12531. Springer, 251--267. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-63406-3_15Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  39. Guillaume Dupont, Yamine Aït Ameur, Marc Pantel, and Neeraj Kumar Singh. 2019. Handling refinement of continuous behaviors: A proof based approach with Event-B. In Proceedings of the 13th International Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Software Engineering, Dominique Méry and Shengchao Qin (Eds.). IEEE Computer Society, 9--16.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  40. Andreas Eggers, Nacim Ramdani, Nedialko Nedialkov, and Martin Fränzle. 2011. Improving SAT Modulo ODE for Hybrid Systems Analysis by Combining Different Enclosure Methods. Springer, Berlin, 172--187.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  41. Janaka Ekanayake, Nick Jenkins, Kithsiri Liyanage, Jianzhong Wu, and Akihiko Yokoyama. 2012. Smart Grid: Technology and Applications (1st ed.). Wiley Publishing.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  42. Didier Essamé and Daniel Dollé. 2006. B in large-scale projects: The canarsie line CBTC experience. In B 2007: Formal Specification and Development in B, Jacques Julliand and Olga Kouchnarenko (Eds.). Springer, Berlin, 252--254.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  43. Jean-Christophe Filliâtre and Claude Marché. 2007. The Why/Krakatoa/Caduceus Platform for Deductive Program Verification. Springer, Berlin, 173--177.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  44. Goran Frehse. 2008. PHAVer: Algorithmic verification of hybrid systems past HyTech. Int. J. Softw. Tools Technol. Transfer 10, 3 (2008), 263--279.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  45. Goran Frehse, Colas Le Guernic, Alexandre Donzé, Scott Cotton, Rajarshi Ray, Olivier Lebeltel, Rodolfo Ripado, Antoine Girard, Thao Dang, and Oded Maler. 2011. SpaceEx: Scalable verification of hybrid systems. In Computer Aided Verification, Ganesh Gopalakrishnan and Shaz Qadeer (Eds.). Springer, Berlin, 379--395.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  46. Martin Fränzle, Christian Herde, Tino Teige, Stefan Ratschan, and Tobias Schubert. 2007. Efficient solving of large non-linear arithmetic constraint systems with complex Boolean structure. J. Satisfiabil. Bool. Model. Comput. 1, 3-4 (2007), 209--236.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  47. Nathan Fulton, Stefan Mitsch, Jan-David Quesel, Marcus Völp, and André Platzer. 2015. KeYmaera X: An axiomatic tactical theorem prover for hybrid systems. In Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Automated Deduction, Amy P. Felty and Aart Middeldorp (Eds.), Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer International Publishing, 527--538.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  48. Antoine Girard and George J. Pappas. 2007. Approximate bisimulation relations for constrained linear systems. Automatica 43, 8 (2007), 1307--1317.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  49. Christoph Grimm, Peter Neumann, and Stefan Mahlknecht. 2014. Embedded Systems for Smart Appliances and Energy Management. Springer.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  50. Thomas A. Henzinger. 2000. The theory of hybrid automata. In Verification of Digital and Hybrid Systems, M. Kemal Inan and Robert P. Kurshan (Eds.). NATO ASI Series, Vol. 170. Springer, Berlin, 265--292.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  51. Thomas A. Henzinger, Pei-Hsin Ho, and Howard Wong-Toi. 1997. HyTech: A model checker for hybrid systems. Int. J. Softw. Tools Technol. Transfer 1, 1-2 (1997), 110--122.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  52. C. A. R. Hoare. 1985. Communicating Sequential Processes. Prentice Hall.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  53. Fabian Immler. 2018. A verified ODE solver and the lorenz attractor. J. Autom. Reason. 61, 1-4 (2018), 73--111.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  54. Fabian Immler, Matthias Althoff, Luis Benet, Alexandre Chapoutot, Xin Chen, Marcelo Forets, Luca Geretti, Niklas Kochdumper, David P. Sanders, and Christian Schilling. 2019. ARCH-COMP19 category report: Continuous and hybrid systems with nonlinear dynamics. In Proceedings of the 6th International Workshop on Applied Verification of Continuous and Hybrid Systemsi (ARCH’19), Goran Frehse and Matthias Althoff (Eds.), EPiC Series in Computing, Vol. 61. EasyChair, 41--61.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  55. Fabian Immler, Matthias Althoff, Xin Chen, Chuchu Fan, Goran Frehse, Niklas Kochdumper, Yangge Li, Sayan Mitra, Mahendra Singh Tomar, and Majid Zamani. 2018. ARCH-COMP18 category report: Continuous and hybrid systems with nonlinear dynamics. In Proceedings of the 5th International Workshop on Applied Verification of Continuous and Hybrid Systems ([email protected]’18), Goran Frehse, Matthias Althoff, Sergiy Bogomolov, and Taylor T. Johnson (Eds.), EPiC Series in Computing, Vol. 54. EasyChair, 53--70.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  56. Fabian Immler and Christoph Traut. 2019. The flow of ODEs: Formalization of variational equation and Poincaré map. J. Autom. Reason. 62, 2 (2019), 215--236.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  57. He Jifeng. 1994. From CSP to hybrid systems. In A Classical Mind. Prentice Hall International (UK) Ltd.,, 171--189.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  58. Yanni Kouskoulas, David Renshaw, André Platzer, and Peter Kazanzides. 2013. Certifying the safe design of a virtual fixture control algorithm for a surgical robot. In Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Hybrid Systems: Computation and Control (HSCC’13). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, 263--272. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/2461328.2461369Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  59. Linas Laibinis, Elena Troubitsyna, Inna Pereverzeva, Ian Oliver, and Silke Holtmanns. 2016. A formal approach to identifying security vulnerabilities in telecommunication networks. In Formal Methods and Software Engineering, Kazuhiro Ogata, Mark Lawford, and Shaoying Liu (Eds.). Springer International Publishing, Cham, 141--158.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  60. Edward Ashford Lee. 2014. Constructive Models of Discrete and Continuous Physical Phenomena. Technical Report UCB/EECS-2014-15. EECS Department, University of California, Berkeley.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  61. Edward Ashford Lee. 2015. The past, present and future of cyber-physical systems: A focus on models. Sensors 15, 3 (2015), 4837.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  62. Edward Ashford Lee and Sanjit Arunkumar Seshia. 2014. Introduction to Embedded Systems—A Cyber-Physical Systems Approach (1.5 ed.). LeeSeshia.org.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  63. Jiang Liu, Jidong Lv, Zhao Quan, Naijun Zhan, Hengjun Zhao, Chaochen Zhou, and Liang Zou. 2010. A calculus for hybrid CSP. In Programming Languages and Systems, Kazunori Ueda (Ed.), Lecture Notes in Computer Science,Vol. 6461. Springer, Berlin, 1--15.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  64. Sarah M. Loos and André Platzer. 2016. Differential refinement logic. In Proceedings of the 31st Annual ACM/IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science (LICS’16). ACM, New York, NY, 505--514.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  65. Simon Lunel, Benoît Boyer, and Jean-Pierre Talpin. 2017. Compositional proofs in differential dynamic logic dL. In Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Application of Concurrency to System Design (ACSD’17). IEEE Computer Society, 19--28.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  66. Simon Lunel, Stefan Mitsch, Benoît Boyer, and Jean-Pierre Talpin. 2019. Parallel composition and modular verification of computer controlled systems in differential dynamic logic. In Proceedings of the 3rd World Congress on Formal Methods: The Next 30 Years (FM’19), Maurice H. ter Beek, Annabelle McIver, and José N. Oliveira (Eds.), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 11800. Springer, 354--370.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  67. Claude Marché. 2007. Jessie: An intermediate language for Java and C verification. In Proceedings of the 2007 Workshop on Programming Languages Meets Program Verification (PLPV’07). ACM, New York, NY, 1--2.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  68. Larissa Meinicke and Ian J. Hayes. 2006. Continuous action system refinement. In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Mathematics of Program Construction (MPC’06). Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 316--337.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  69. Dominique Méry and Neeraj Kumar Singh. 2011. Analysis of DSR protocol in Event-B. InProceedings of the International Symposium on Stabilization, Safety, and Security of Distributed Systems (SSS’11). Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 401--415.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  70. Tobias Nipkow, Markus Wenzel, and Lawrence C. Paulson. 2002. Isabelle/HOL: A Proof Assistant for Higher-order Logic. Springer-Verlag.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  71. André Platzer. 2008. Differential dynamic logic for hybrid systems. J. Autom. Reason. 41, 2 (2008), 143--189.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  72. André Platzer. 2015. A uniform substitution calculus for differential dynamic logic. In Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Automated Deduction, Amy P. Felty and Aart Middeldorp (Eds.), Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springe International Publishing, 467--481.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  73. André Platzer and Edmund M. Clarke. 2009. Formal verification of curved flight collision avoidance maneuvers: A case study. In Proceedings of the Annual Conference on Formal Methods (FM’09), Ana Cavalcanti and Dennis R. Dams (Eds.). Springer, Berlin, 547--562.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  74. André Platzer and Jan-David Quesel. 2008. KeYmaera: A hybrid theorem prover for hybrid systems. In Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on Automated Reasoning (IJCAR’08), Alessandro Armando, Peter Baumgartner, and Gilles Dowek (Eds.), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 5195. Springer, 171--178.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  75. André Platzer and Jan-David Quesel. 2009. European train control system: A case study in formal verification. In Formal Methods and Software Engineering, Karin Breitman and Ana Cavalcanti (Eds.). Springer, Berlin, 246--265.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  76. Claudius Ptolemaeus (Ed.). 2014. System Design, Modeling, and Simulation Using Ptolemy II. Ptolemy.org.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  77. Jan-David Quesel, Stefan Mitsch, Sarah Loos, Nikos Aréchiga, and André Platzer. 2016. How to model and prove hybrid systems with KeYmaera: A tutorial on safety. Int. J. Softw. Tools Technol. Transfer 18, 1 (2016), 67--91.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  78. Klaus Schwab. 2017. The Fourth Industrial Revolution. Crown Publishing Group, USA.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  79. Neeraj Kumar Singh. 2013. Using Event-B for Critical Device Software Systems. Springer. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-5260-6Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  80. Neeraj Kumar Singh, Yamine Aït Ameur, Marc Pantel, Arnaud Dieumegard, and Eric Jenn. 2016. Stepwise formal modeling and verification of self-adaptive systems with Event-B. The automatic rover protection case study. In Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Engineering of Complex Computer Systems (ICECCS’16). 43--52. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/ICECCS.2016.015Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  81. Neeraj Kumar Singh, Hao Wang, Mark Lawford, Thomas Stephen Edward Maibaum, and Alan Wassyng. 2015. Stepwise formal modelling and reasoning of insulin infusion pump requirements. In Proceedings of the Conference on Digital Human Modeling: Applications in Health, Safety, Ergonomics and Risk Management: Ergonomics and Health (DHM’15). 387--398. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-21070-4_39Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  82. Paulius Stankaitis, Andrei Iliasov, Yamine Ait-Ameur, Tsutomu Kobayashi, Fuyuki Ishikawa, and Alexander Romanovsky. 2019. A refinement based method for developing distributed protocols. In Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE 19th International Symposium on High Assurance Systems Engineering (HASE’19). 90--97.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  83. Wen Su and Jean-Raymond Abrial. 2014. Aircraft Landing Gear System: Approaches with Event-B to the Modeling of an Industrial System. Springer International Publishing, 19--35.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  84. Wen Su and Jean-Raymond Abrial. 2017. Aircraft landing gear system: Approaches with Event-B to the modeling of an industrial system. Int. J. Softw. Tools Technol. Transf. 19, 2 (Apr. 2017), 141--166. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10009-015-0400-3Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  85. Wen Su, Jean-Raymond Abrial, and Huibiao Zhu. 2014. Formalizing hybrid systems with Event-B and the Rodin platform. Sci. Comput. Program. 94, 2 (2014), 164--202.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  86. Sebastian Thrun, Mike Montemerlo, Hendrik Dahlkamp, David Stavens, Andrei Aron, James Diebel, Philip Fong, John Gale, Morgan Halpenny, Gabriel Hoffmann, Kenny Lau, Celia Oakley, Mark Palatucci, Vaughan Pratt, Pascal Stang, Sven Strohband, Cedric Dupont, Lars-Erik Jendrossek, Christian Koelen, Charles Markey, Carlo Rummel, Joe van Niekerk, Eric Jensen, Philippe Alessandrini, Gary Bradski, Bob Davies, Scott Ettinger, Adrian Kaehler, Ara Nefian, and Pamela Mahoney. 2007. Stanley: The Robot That Won the DARPA Grand Challenge. Springer, Berlin, 1--43. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-73429-1_1Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  87. Shuling Wang, Naijun Zhan, and Liang Zou. 2015. An improved HHL prover: An interactive theorem prover for hybrid systems. In Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Formal Engineering Methods (ICFEM’15), Michael J. Butler, Sylvain Conchon, and Fatiha Zaïdi (Eds.), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 9407. Springer, 382--399.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  88. Hengjun Zhao, Mengfei Yang, Naijun Zhan, Bin Gu, Liang Zou, and Yao Chen. 2014. Formal verification of a descent guidance control program of a lunar lander. In Proceedings of the Annual Conference on Formal Methods (FM’14), Cliff Jones, Pekka Pihlajasaari, and Jun Sun (Eds.). Springer International Publishing, Cham, 733--748.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  89. Chaochen Zhou, Ji Wang, and Anders P. Ravn. 1996. A formal description of hybrid systems. In Hybrid Systems III, Rajeev Alur, Thomas A. Henzinger, and Eduardo D. Sontag (Eds.), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 1066. Springer, Berlin, 511--530.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  90. Liang Zou, Jidong Lv, Shuling Wang, Naijun Zhan, Tao Tang, Lei Yuan, and Yu Liu. 2014. Verifying Chinese train control system under a combined scenario by theorem proving. In Verified Software: Theories, Tools, Experiments, Ernie Cohen and Andrey Rybalchenko (Eds.). Springer, Berlin, 262--280.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  91. Farah Zoubeyr, Yamine Aït Ameur, Meriem Ouederni, and Abdelkamel Tari. 2017. A correct-by-construction model for asynchronously communicating systems. Int. J. Softw. Tools Technol. Transf. 19, 4 (2017), 465--485.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Event-B Hybridation: A Proof and Refinement-based Framework for Modelling Hybrid Systems

              Recommendations

              Comments

              Login options

              Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

              Sign in

              Full Access

              PDF Format

              View or Download as a PDF file.

              PDF

              eReader

              View online with eReader.

              eReader

              HTML Format

              View this article in HTML Format .

              View HTML Format
              About Cookies On This Site

              We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website.

              Learn more

              Got it!