Proceedings Article10.1109/ICSMC.2010.5641711
Using task analytic models to visualize model checker counterexamples
Matthew L. Bolton,Ellen J. Bass +1 more
- 22 Nov 2010
- pp 2069-2074
TL;DR: An operational concept and design is presented showing how the task modeling visual notation and system modeling architecture can be exploited to visualize counterexamples produced by the Symbolic Analysis Laboratory (SAL).
read more
Abstract: Model checking is a type of automated formal verification that searches a system model's entire state space in order to mathematically prove that the system does or does not meet desired properties. An output of most model checkers is a counterexample: an execution trace illustrating exactly how a specification was violated. In most analysis environments, this output is a list of the model variables and their values at each step in the execution trace. We have developed a language for modeling human task behavior and an automated method which translates instantiated models into a formal system model implemented in the language of the Symbolic Analysis Laboratory (SAL). This allows us to use model checking formal verification to evaluate human-automation interaction. In this paper we present an operational concept and design showing how our task modeling visual notation and system modeling architecture can be exploited to visualize counterexamples produced by SAL. We illustrate the use of our design with a model related to the operation of an automobile with a simple cruise control.
read more
Chat with Paper
AI Agents for this Paper
Find similar papers on Google Scholar, PubMed and Arxiv
Write a critical review of this paper
Analyze citations of this paper to find unaddressed research gaps
Citations
Using Formal Verification to Evaluate Human-Automation Interaction: A Review
Matthew L. Bolton,Ellen J. Bass,Radu I. Siminiceanu +2 more
- 07 Mar 2013
TL;DR: This paper discusses how formal verification has been used to evaluate HAI, using it to evaluate human-automation interfaces for usability properties and to find potential mode confusion.
A Systematic Approach to Model Checking Human–Automation Interaction Using Task Analytic Models
Matthew L. Bolton,Radu I. Siminiceanu,Ellen J. Bass +2 more
- 01 Sep 2011
TL;DR: The enhanced operator function model (EOFM) is developed as an Extensible Markup Language-based, platform- and analysis-independent language for describing task analytic models and an automated process for translating an instantiated EOFM into the model checking language Symbolic Analysis Laboratory is presented.
118
Uppaal: Now, Next, and Future
Tobias Amnell,Gerd Behrmann,Johan Bengtsson,Pedro R. D'Argenio,Alexandre David,Ansgar Fehnker,T. Hune,Bertrand Jeannet,Kim Guldstrand Larsen,M. O. Möller,Paul Pettersson,Carsten Weise,Wang Yi +12 more
- 01 Jan 2001
TL;DR: New directions that extends UPPAAL with cost-optimal exploration, parametric modeling, stop-watches, probablistic modeling, hierachical modeling, executable timed automata, and a hybrid automata animator are reported on.
74
Automatically Generating Specification Properties From Task Models for the Formal Verification of Human–Automation Interaction
TL;DR: A method for automatically generating specification properties from task models that enables analysts to use formal verification to check for system HAI problems they may not have anticipated is presented.
Properties for formally assessing the performance level of human-human collaborative procedures with miscommunications and erroneous human behavior ☆
Dan Pan,Matthew L. Bolton +1 more
TL;DR: This paper creates specification properties to evaluate the level of success of a collaborative procedure formally and demonstrates the use of these properties to formally evaluate realistic collaborative procedures from a nuclear power plant with and without both generated miscommunications and erroneous human behavior.
32
References
Statecharts: A visual formalism for complex systems
TL;DR: It is intended to demonstrate here that statecharts counter many of the objections raised against conventional state diagrams, and thus appear to render specification by diagrams an attractive and plausible approach.
7.5K
STATEMATE: a working environment for the development of complex reactive systems
David Harel,H. Lachover,A. Naamad,Amir Pnueli,M. Politi,R. Sherman,A. Shtull-Trauring,Mark B. Trakhtenbrot +7 more
TL;DR: The main novelty of STATEMATE is in the fact that it `understands` the entire descriptions perfectly, to the point of being able to analyze them for crucial dynamic properties, to carry out rigorous animated executions and simulations of the described system, and to create running code automatically.
Cognitive task analysis
Jan Maarten Schraagen,Susan F. Chipman,Valerie L. Shalin +2 more
- 01 Jan 2000
TL;DR: Cognitive task analysis is defined as the extension of traditional task analysis techniques to yield information about the knowledge, thought processes, and goal structures that underlie observable task performance as discussed by the authors.
918
Cognitive task analysis
David F. Feldon
- 01 Jan 2009
TL;DR: This chapter presents an overview of the current state of cognitive task analysis (CTA) in research and practice, and describes research on the impact of CTA and synthesizes a number of studies and reviews pertinent to issues underlying knowledge elicitation.
479
The SAL Language Manual
Leonardo de Moura,Sam Owre,Natarajan Shankar +2 more
- 01 Jan 2003
TL;DR: The SAL language was originally designed in collaboration with David Dill of Stanford University and Thomas Henzinger of the University of California at Berkeley and the version presented here is the one currently accepted by the tools developed at SRI.
Related Papers (5)
Leonardo de Moura,Sam Owre,Natarajan Shankar +2 more
- 01 Jan 2003
Matthew L. Bolton,Ellen J. Bass +1 more
- 01 Oct 2009