Write a Blog >>
ICSE 2020
Wed 24 June - Thu 16 July 2020
Tue 7 Jul 2020 16:17 - 16:29 at Baekje - A4-Cyber-Physical Systems Chair(s): Joanne M. Atlee

Formal methods and tools have a long history of successful applications in the design of safety-critical railway products. However, most of the experiences focused on the application of a single method at once, and little work has been performed to compare the applicability of the different available frameworks to the railway context. As a result, companies willing to introduce formal methods in their development process have little guidance on the selection of tools that could fit their needs. To address this goal, this paper presents a comparison between 9 different formal tools, namely Atelier B, CADP, FDR4, NuSMV, ProB, Simulink, SPIN, UMC, and UPPAAL SMC. We performed a judgment study, involving 17 experts with experience in formal methods applied to railways. In the study, part of the experts were required to model a railway signalling problem (the moving-block train distancing system) with the different tools, and to provide feedback on their experience. The information produced was then synthesised, and the results were validated by the remaining experts. Based on the outcome of this process, we provide a synthesis that describes when to use a certain tool, and what are the problems that may be faced by modellers. Our experience shows that the different tools serve different purposes, and multiple formal methods are required to fully cover the needs of the railway system design process.

Tue 7 Jul

Displayed time zone: (UTC) Coordinated Universal Time change

16:05 - 17:05
A4-Cyber-Physical SystemsSoftware Engineering in Practice / Technical Papers / Demonstrations at Baekje
Chair(s): Joanne M. Atlee University of Waterloo
16:05
12m
Talk
Adapting Requirements Models to Varying EnvironmentsTechnical
Technical Papers
Dalal Alrajeh Imperial College London, Antoine Cailliau ICTEAM, UCLouvain, Axel van Lamsweerde Université catholique de Louvain
16:17
12m
Talk
Comparing Formal Tools for System Design: a Judgment StudyTechnical
Technical Papers
Alessio Ferrari CNR-ISTI, Franco Mazzanti ISTI-CNR, Davide Basile University of Florence, Maurice H. ter Beek ISTI-CNR, Alessandro Fantechi University of Florence
DOI Pre-print
16:29
3m
Talk
Demo: SLEMI: Finding Simulink Compiler Bugs through Equivalence Modulo Input (EMI)Demo
Demonstrations
Shafiul Azam Chowdhury University of Texas at Arlington, Sohil Lal Shrestha The University of Texas at Arlington, Taylor T Johnson Vanderbilt University, Christoph Csallner University of Texas at Arlington
Link to publication DOI Media Attached
16:32
12m
Talk
The Forgotten Case of the Dependency Bugs: On the Example of the Robot Operating SystemSEIP
Software Engineering in Practice
Anders Fischer-Nielsen IT University of Copenhagen, Zhoulai Fu IT University of Copenhagen, Denmark, Ting Su ETH Zurich, Switzerland, Andrzej Wąsowski IT University of Copenhagen, Denmark
Pre-print
16:44
3m
Talk
PROMISE: High-Level Mission Specification for Multiple RobotsDemo
Demonstrations
Sergio Garcia Chalmers | University of Gothenburg, Patrizio Pelliccione University of L'Aquila and Chalmers | University of Gothenburg, Claudio Menghi University of Luxembourg, Thorsten Berger Chalmers | University of Gothenburg, Tomas Bures Charles University, Czech Republic
16:47
12m
Talk
How do you Architect your Robots? State of the Practice and Guidelines for ROS-based SystemsArtifact ReusableArtifact AvailableSEIP
Software Engineering in Practice
Ivano Malavolta Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Grace Lewis Carnegie Mellon Software Engineering Institute, Bradley Schmerl Carnegie Mellon University, USA, Patricia Lago Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, David Garlan Carnegie Mellon University