Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-dvmhs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-30T13:15:58.659Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

9 - Further Reading

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 March 2010

Jonathan Jacky
Affiliation:
University of Washington
Margus Veanes
Affiliation:
Microsoft Research, Redmond, Washington
Colin Campbell
Affiliation:
Modeled Computation LLC, Seattle, Washington
Wolfram Schulte
Affiliation:
Microsoft Research, Redmond, Washington
Get access

Summary

There are many modeling languages based on guarded update rules (or something similar), including Alloy (Jackson, 2006), ASMs (Gurevich, 1995; Börger and Stärk, 2003), B (Abrial, 1996), Promela (Holzmann, 2004), TLA (Lamport, 2002), Unity (Chandy and Misra, 1988), VDM (Fitzgerald and Larsen, 1998), and Z (Woodcock and Loomes, 1989; Spivey, 1992; Davies and Woodcock, 1996; Jacky, 1997). Case studies in these languages show how different kinds of systems can be described in modeling styles similar to ours.

The immediate predecessors of the modeling library and tools described in this book are the AsmL language and the AsmL-T tool (Barnett et al., 2003), and more recently, the SpeC# language and the Spec Explorer tool (Veanes et al., in press; Campbell et al., 2005a). Development on Spec Explorer continues.

Peled (2001) presents an exhaustive exploration algorithm similar to ours. Grieskamp et al. (2002) describe a more complex exploration algorithm.

Exploration has some similarities to model checking, which also generates and explores a finite state machine (FSM), but usually emphasizes verifying (or providing counterexamples to) properties expressed as formulas in temporal logic. This is similar to our checking of temporal properties, but we express them with FSMs instead of formulas. Model checking was originally described by Clarke et al. (1986) in a classic paper and later described in a survey article (Clarke et al., 1994) and a book (Clarke et al., 1999). Some other model checkers are described in the books by Peled (2001) and Holzmann (2004).

Composition of model programs is a generalization of the construction of finite automata for the intersection of regular languages. For example, see the discussion following Theorem 3.3 on pp. 59–60 of Hopcroft and Ullman (1979).

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2007

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×