Engineering PapersSearch

Engineering topics

Guaspari, David

Publications and source records attributed to Guaspari, David.

Timing analysis by model checking

The safety of modern avionics relies on high integrity software that can be verified to meet hard real-time requirements. The limits of verification technology therefore determine acceptable engineering practice. To simplify verification problems, safety-critical systems are commonly implemented under the severe constraints of a cyclic executive, which make design an expensive trial-and-error process highly intolerant of change. Important advances in analysis techniques, such as rate monotonic analysis (RMA), have provided a theoretical and practical basis for easing these onerous restrictions. But RMA and its kindred have two limitations: they apply only to verifying the requirement of schedulability (that tasks meet their deadlines) and they cannot be applied to many common programming paradigms. We address both these limitations by applying model checking, a technique with successful industrial applications in hardware design. Model checking algorithms analyze finite state machines, either by explicit state enumeration or by symbolic manipulation. Since quantitative timing properties involve a potentially unbounded state variable (a clock), our first problem is to construct a finite approximation that is conservative for the properties being analyzed-if the approximation satisfies the properties of interest, so does the infinite model. To reduce the potential for state space explosion we must further optimize this finite model. Experiments with some simple optimizations have yielded a hundred-fold efficiency improvement over published techniques.

Naydich, Dimitri

Applications of Formal Methods to Specification and Safety of Avionics Software

This report treats several topics in applications of formal methods to avionics software development. Most of these topics concern decision tables, an orderly, easy-to-understand format for formally specifying complex choices among alternative courses of action. The topics relating to decision tables include: generalizations fo decision tables that are more concise and support the use of decision tables in a refinement-based formal software development process; a formalism for systems of decision tables with behaviors; an exposition of Parnas tables for users of decision tables; and test coverage criteria and decision tables. We outline features of a revised version of ORA's decision table tool, Tablewise, which will support many of the new ideas described in this report. We also survey formal safety analysis of specifications and software.

Hoover, D. N.

Formal methods in the design of Ada 1995

Formal, mathematical methods are most useful when applied early in the design and implementation of a software system--that, at least, is the familiar refrain. I will report on a modest effort to apply formal methods at the earliest possible stage, namely, in the design of the Ada 95 programming language itself. This talk is an 'experience report' that provides brief case studies illustrating the kinds of problems we worked on, how we approached them, and the extent (if any) to which the results proved useful. It also derives some lessons and suggestions for those undertaking future projects of this kind. Ada 95 is the first revision of the standard for the Ada programming language. The revision began in 1988, when the Ada Joint Programming Office first asked the Ada Board to recommend a plan for revising the Ada standard. The first step in the revision was to solicit criticisms of Ada 83. A set of requirements for the new language standard, based on those criticisms, was published in 1990. A small design team, the Mapping Revision Team (MRT), became exclusively responsible for revising the language standard to satisfy those requirements. The MRT, from Intermetrics, is led by S. Tucker Taft. The work of the MRT was regularly subject to independent review and criticism by a committee of distinguished Reviewers and by several advisory teams--for example, the two User/Implementor teams, each consisting of an industrial user (attempting to make significant use of the new language on a realistic application) and a compiler vendor (undertaking, experimentally, to modify its current implementation in order to provide the necessary new features). One novel decision established the Language Precision Team (LPT), which investigated language proposals from a mathematical point of view. The LPT applied formal mathematical analysis to help improve the design of Ada 95 (e.g., by clarifying the language proposals) and to help promote its acceptance (e.g., by identifying a verifiable subset that would meet the needs of safety-critical applications). The first LPT project, which ran from the fall of 1990 unti the end of 1992, produced studies of several language issues: optimization, sharing and storage, tasking and protected records, overload resolution, the floating point model, distribution, program erros, and object-oriented programming. The second LPT project, in 1994, formally modeled the dynamic semantics of a large part of the (almost) final language definition, looking especially for interactions between language features.

Guaspari, David

Introduction to Penelope

A formal program verification is a (mathematical) proof that a program executed according to its intended model meets some specification. This proves that the algorithm defined by the program is correct in the precise technical sense of being consistent with a particular specification. A program correct in this sense is free from a large and important class of errors, even though its behavior may still produce unintended results--either because the implementation of the programming language itself does not match the model of execution, or because the specification does not correctly express the user's intentions. Penelope is a prototype system for interactively developing and verifying programs that are written in a rich subset of sequential Ada. Penelope can be used to develop a program and its correctness proof incrementally, and in concert with one another. Incrementality is used in a number of ways to help make verification more tractable and more productive. For example, if an already-verified program is modified, one can attempt to prove the modified version by replaying and modifying the original verification. Penelope's specification language, Larch/Ada, belongs to the family of Larch interface languages. Larch/Ada scales up properly, in the sense that it is demonstrably sound to decompose a system hierarchically and reason locally about the implementation of each piece. Penelope has been applied in various demonstration projects--for specification (guidance control, distributed operating systems), verification (of off-the-shelf code), and formal development (by non-expert as well as expert users). Some features of Penelope have been embodied in Ada Wise, a lint-like non-interactive tool that warns of the potential for certain dynamic semantic errors in Ada programs.

Guaspari, David

Towards a formal semantics for Ada 9X

The Ada 9X language precision team was formed during the revisions of Ada 83, with the goal of analyzing the proposed design, identifying problems, and suggesting improvements, through the use of mathematical models. This report defines a framework for formally describing Ada 9X, based on Kahn's 'natural semantics', and applies the framework to portions of the language. The proposals for exceptions and optimization freedoms are also analyzed, using a different technique.

Guaspari, David

Formally specifying the logic of an automatic guidance controller

The following topics are covered in viewgraph form: (1) the Penelope Project; (2) the logic of an experimental automatic guidance control system for a 737; (3) Larch/Ada specification; (4) some failures of informal description; (5) description of mode changes caused by switches; (6) intuitive description of window status (chosen vs. current); (7) design of the code; (8) and specifying the code.

Guaspari, David