|
|
Federico Mari, Igor Melatti, Ivano Salvo, and Enrico Tronci. "Control Software Visualization." In Proceedings of INFOCOMP 2012, The Second International Conference on Advanced Communications and Computation, 15–20. ThinkMind, 2012. ISSN: 978-1-61208-226-4.
|
|
|
|
Giuseppe Della Penna, Benedetto Intrigila, Daniele Magazzeni, Igor Melatti, and Enrico Tronci. "CGMurphi: Automatic synthesis of numerical controllers for nonlinear hybrid systems." European Journal of Control 19, no. 1 (2013): 14–36. Elsevier North-Holland, Inc.. ISSN: 0947-3580. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejcon.2013.02.001.
|
|
|
|
Igor Melatti, Robert Palmer, Geoffrey Sawaya, Yu Yang, Robert Mike Kirby, and Ganesh Gopalakrishnan. "Parallel and distributed model checking in Eddy." Int. J. Softw. Tools Technol. Transf. 11, no. 1 (2009): 13–25. Springer-Verlag. ISSN: 1433-2779. DOI: 10.1007/s10009-008-0094-x.
Abstract: Model checking of safety properties can be scaled up by pooling the CPU and memory resources of multiple computers. As compute clusters containing 100s of nodes, with each node realized using multi-core (e.g., 2) CPUs will be widespread, a model checker based on the parallel (shared memory) and distributed (message passing) paradigms will more efficiently use the hardware resources. Such a model checker can be designed by having each node employ two shared memory threads that run on the (typically) two CPUs of a node, with one thread responsible for state generation, and the other for efficient communication, including (1) performing overlapped asynchronous message passing, and (2) aggregating the states to be sent into larger chunks in order to improve communication network utilization. We present the design details of such a novel model checking architecture called Eddy. We describe the design rationale, details of how the threads interact and yield control, exchange messages, as well as detect termination. We have realized an instance of this architecture for the Murphi modeling language. Called Eddy_Murphi, we report its performance over the number of nodes as well as communication parameters such as those controlling state aggregation. Nearly linear reduction of compute time with increasing number of nodes is observed. Our thread task partition is done in such a way that it is modular, easy to port across different modeling languages, and easy to tune across a variety of platforms.
|
|
|
|
T. Mancini, F. Mari, A. Massini, I. Melatti, and E. Tronci. "Anytime system level verification via parallel random exhaustive hardware in the loop simulation." Microprocessors and Microsystems 41 (2016): 12–28. ISSN: 0141-9331. DOI: 10.1016/j.micpro.2015.10.010.
Abstract: Abstract System level verification of cyber-physical systems has the goal of verifying that the whole (i.e., software + hardware) system meets the given specifications. Model checkers for hybrid systems cannot handle system level verification of actual systems. Thus, Hardware In the Loop Simulation (HILS) is currently the main workhorse for system level verification. By using model checking driven exhaustive HILS, System Level Formal Verification (SLFV) can be effectively carried out for actual systems. We present a parallel random exhaustive HILS based model checker for hybrid systems that, by simulating all operational scenarios exactly once in a uniform random order, is able to provide, at any time during the verification process, an upper bound to the probability that the System Under Verification exhibits an error in a yet-to-be-simulated scenario (Omission Probability). We show effectiveness of the proposed approach by presenting experimental results on SLFV of the Inverted Pendulum on a Cart and the Fuel Control System examples in the Simulink distribution. To the best of our knowledge, no previously published model checker can exhaustively verify hybrid systems of such a size and provide at any time an upper bound to the Omission Probability.
Keywords: Model Checking of Hybrid Systems; Model checking driven simulation; Hardware in the loop simulation
|
|
|
|
Federico Mari, Igor Melatti, Ivano Salvo, and Enrico Tronci. "Model Based Synthesis of Control Software from System Level Formal Specifications." ACM TRANSACTIONS ON SOFTWARE ENGINEERING AND METHODOLOGY 23, no. 1 (2014): Article 6. ACM. ISSN: 1049-331X. DOI: 10.1145/2559934.
|
|
|
|
Giuseppe Della Penna, Daniele Magazzeni, Alberto Tofani, Benedetto Intrigila, Igor Melatti, and Enrico Tronci. "Automatic Synthesis of Robust Numerical Controllers." In Icas '07, 4. IEEE Computer Society, 2007. ISSN: 0-7695-2859-5. DOI: 10.1109/CONIELECOMP.2007.59.
Abstract: A major problem of numerical controllers is their robustness, i.e. the state read from the plant may not be in the controller table, although it may be close to some states in the table. For continuous systems, this problem is typically handled by interpolation techniques. Unfortunately, when the plant contains both continuous and discrete variables, the interpolation approach does not work well. To cope with this kind of systems, we propose a general methodology that exploits explicit model checking in an innovative way to automatically synthesize a (time-) optimal numerical controller from a plant specification and apply an optimized strengthening algorithm only on the most significant states, in order to reach an acceptable robustness degree. We implemented all the algorithms within our CGMurphi tool, an extension of the well-known CMurphi verifier, and tested the effectiveness of our approach by applying it to the well-known truck and trailer obstacles avoidance problem.
|
|
|
|
Corrado Böhm, and Enrico Tronci. "About Systems of Equations, X-Separability, and Left-Invertibility in the lambda-Calculus." Inf. Comput. 90, no. 1 (1991): 1–32. DOI: 10.1016/0890-5401(91)90057-9.
|
|
|
|
Federico Mari, Igor Melatti, Ivano Salvo, Enrico Tronci, Lorenzo Alvisi, Allen Clement, and Harry Li. "Model Checking Nash Equilibria in MAD Distributed Systems." In FMCAD '08: Proceedings of the 2008 International Conference on Formal Methods in Computer-Aided Design, edited by A. Cimatti and R. Jones, 1–8. Piscataway, NJ, USA: IEEE Press, 2008. ISSN: 978-1-4244-2735-2. DOI: 10.1109/FMCAD.2008.ECP.16.
Abstract: We present a symbolic model checking algorithm for verification of Nash equilibria in finite state mechanisms modeling Multiple Administrative Domains (MAD) distributed systems. Given a finite state mechanism, a proposed protocol for each agent and an indifference threshold for rewards, our model checker returns PASS if the proposed protocol is a Nash equilibrium (up to the given indifference threshold) for the given mechanism, FAIL otherwise. We implemented our model checking algorithm inside the NuSMV model checker and present experimental results showing its effectiveness for moderate size mechanisms. For example, we can handle mechanisms which corresponding normal form games would have more than $10^20$ entries. To the best of our knowledge, no model checking algorithm for verification of mechanism Nash equilibria has been previously published.
Keywords: Model Checking, MAD Distributed System, Nash Equilibrium
|
|
|
|
Y. Driouich, M. Parente, and E. Tronci. "Modeling cyber-physical systems for automatic verification." In 14th International Conference on Synthesis, Modeling, Analysis and Simulation Methods and Applications to Circuit Design (SMACD 2017), 1–4., 2017. DOI: 10.1109/SMACD.2017.7981621.
Keywords: cyber-physical systems;formal verification;maximum power point trackers;power engineering computing;Modelica;automatic verification;complex power electronics systems;cyber-physical systems modeling;distributed maximum power point tracking system;open standard modeling language;Computational modeling;Control systems;Integrated circuit modeling;Mathematical model;Maximum power point trackers;Object oriented modeling;Radiation effects;Automatic Formal Verification;Cyber-Physical Systems;DMPPT;Modeling;Photovoltaic systems;Simulation;System Analysis and Design
|
|
|
|
Y. Driouich, M. Parente, and E. Tronci. "A methodology for a complete simulation of Cyber-Physical Energy Systems." In EESMS 2018 – Environmental, Energy, and Structural Monitoring Systems, Proceedings, 1–5., 2018. DOI: 10.1109/EESMS.2018.8405826.
|
|
