Conference article

Verifying Consistency Between Models

August Schwerdfeger
Adventium Labs, USA

Hazel Shackleton
Adventium Labs, USA

Steve Vestal
Adventium Labs, USA

Download articlehttp://dx.doi.org/10.3384/ecp13090003

Published in: Proceedings of the 4th Analytic Virtual Integration of Cyber-Physical Systems Workshop; December 3; Vancouver; Canada

Linköping Electronic Conference Proceedings 90:3, s. 13-20

Show more +

Published: 2013-11-13

ISBN: 978-91-7519-451-6

ISSN: 1650-3686 (print), 1650-3740 (online)

Abstract

Numerous aircraft development programs have suffered cost and schedule delays due in part to unplanned rework that occurred during integration and acceptance testing. Many of the errors that required rework can be traced back to inconsistencies between different specifications and models developed by or for different disciplines and suppliers early in the development process. We describe a novel method for specifying and verifying complex consistency properties between different kinds of models. This method makes use of a gray-box model integration framework and an SMT verification tool. We report on the application of this method to one specific challenge problem; verifying that a logical computer system architecture specified in AADL and a solid model specified in Creo together satisfy a particular consistency property.

Keywords

Model consistency; virtual integration; model integration; SMT; verification; defect detection

References

[1] Airbus A380. online; September 2013. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A380.

[2] Autodesk Annual Report. online; April 2012. http://investors.autodesk.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=117861&p=irolreportsAnnual.

[3] Boeing Reschedules Initial 787 Deliveries and First Flight. online; September 2013. http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/2007/q4/071010d_nr.html.

[4] Steven Bankes; Daniel Challou; David Cooper; Todd Haynes; Hillary Holloway; Paul Pukite; Jorge Tierno; and Christopher Wetland. META Adaptive; Reflective; Robust Workflow (ARRoW) Phase 1b Final Report. Technical Report TR-2742; BAE Systems; October 2011.

[5] Ajinkya Bhave; Bruce H. Krough; David Garlan; and Bradley Schmerl. View Consistency in Architectures for Cyber-Physical Systems. International Conference on Cyber-Physical Systems; 2011.

[6] Mars Climate Orbiter Mishap Investigation Board. Phase I Report; 1999.ftp://ftp.hq.nasa.gov/pub/pao/reports/1999/MCO_report.pdf.

[7] Mark Boddy; Martin Michalowski; August Schwerdfeger; Hazel Shackleton; and Steve Vestal. FUSED: A Tool Integration Framework for Collaborative System Engineering. Analytic Virtual Integration of Cyber-Physical Systems Workshop; 2011.

[8] David R. Cok. The SMT-LIBv2 Language and Tools: A Tutorial; March 2013. http://www.grammatech.com/resource/smt/SMTLIBTutorial.pdf.

[9] K. Czarnecki and S. Helsen. Feature-based survey of model transformation approaches. IBM SYstems Journal; 2006.

[10] iSight and the SIMULEA Simulation Engine. online; September 2013. http://www.3ds.com/products-services/simulia/portfolio/isightsimulia-execution-engine/latest-release.

[11] David N. Card. Learning From Our Mistakes with Defect Causal Analysis. IEEE Software; January 1998.

[12] Peter H. Feiler; Jorgen Hansson; Dionisio de Niz; and Lutz Wrange. System Architecture Virtual Integration: An Industrial Case Study. Technical Report CMU/SEI-2009-TR-017; Software Engineering Institute; November 2009.

[13] GAO. Joint Strike Fighter Restructuring Places Program on Firmer Footing; but Progress Still Lags. Technical Report GAO-11-325; General Accounting Office; April 2011.

[14] Jimin Gao; Mats Heimdahl; and Eric VanWyk. Flexible and Extensible Notations for Modeling Languages. Proceedings of Conference on Fundamental Approaches to Software Engineering; 2007.

[15] Paul Gustavson; Ali Nikolai; Roy Scrudder; Curtis Blaise; and Richard Daehler-Wilking. Discovery and Reuse of Modeling and Simulation Assets. online; September 2013. The M&S Journal; http://www.msco.mi.

[16] Simon Frederick Königs; Grischa Beier; Asmus Figge; and Rainer Stark. Traceability in Systems Engineering – Review of industrial practices; state-of-the-art technologies and new research solutions. Advanced Engineering Informatics; 2012. doi: https://wiki.sei.cmu.edu/aadl/index.php/Osate_2.

[22] Charles Simonya; Magnus Christerson; and Shane Clifford. Intentional Software. OOPSLA; 2006.

[23] Minnesota Extensible Language Tools; September 2013. http://melt.cs.umn.edu/index.html

[24] Don Ward; Steve Helton; and Greg Polari. RoI Estimates from SAVI’s Feasibility Demonstration; 2011. Systems Engineering Conference.

[25] Scott Woyak. Simulation Driven Design: Creating an Environment for Managing Simulation Tools; Processes; and Data. Technical report; Phoenix Integration; March 2010. http://www.phoenix-int.com/documents/pdf/white_papers/simulation-driven-design.pdf.

Citations in Crossref