Advertisement

AADL+: a simulation-based methodology for cyber-physical systems

  • Jing Liu
  • Tengfei Li
  • Zuohua Ding
  • Yuqing Qian
  • Haiying Sun
  • Jifeng HeEmail author
Research Article
  • 6 Downloads

Abstract

AADL (architecture analysis and design language) concentrates on the modeling and analysis of application system architectures. It is quite popular for its simple syntax, powerful functionality and extensibility and has been widely applied in embedded systems for its advantage. However, it is not enough for AADL to model cyber-physical systems (CPS) mainly because it cannot be used to model the continuous dynamic behaviors. This paper proposes an approach to construct a new sublanguage of AADL called AADL+, to facilitate the modeling of not only the discrete and continuous behavior of CPS, but also interaction between cyber components and physical components. The syntax and semantics of the sublanguage are provided to describe the behaviors of the systems. What’s more, we develop a plug-in to OSATE (open-source AADL tool environment) for the modeling of CPS. And the plug-in supports syntax checking and simulation of the system model through linking with modelica. Finally, the AADL+ annex is successfully applied to model a lunar rover control system.

Keywords

AADL cyber-physical systems (CPS) simulation OSATE lunar rover control system 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Supplementary material

11704_2018_7039_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (195 kb)
AADL+ : a simulation‐based methodology for cyber ‐physical systems

References

  1. 1.
    Lee E A, Seshia S A. Introduction to Embedded Systems: a Cyber-Physical Systems Approach. MA: The MIT Press, 2016zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Debbabi M, Hassaïne F, Jarraya Y, Soeanu A, Alawneh L. Unified modeling language. Encyclopedia of Systems Biology, 2010, 20(1): 9Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Selic B, Gerard S. Modeling and Analysis of Real-Time and Embedded Systems with UML and MARTE: Developing Cyber-Physical Systems. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 2013Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cao Y, Liu Y S, Paredis C J J. System-level model integration of design and simulation for mechatronic systems based on SysML. Mechatronics, 2011, 21(6): 1063–1075CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Feiler P H, Lewis B A, Vestal S. The SAE architecture analysis & design language (AADL) a standard for engineering performance critical systems. In: Proceedings of 2006 IEEE International Conference on Control Applications, International Symposium on Intelligent Control. 2006, 1206–1211Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Vestal S. MetaH support for real-time multi-processor avionics. In: Proceedings of the Joint Workshop on Parallel and Distributed Real-Time Systems. 1997, 11–21Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lee E A. The past, present and future of cyber-physicalsystems: a focus on models. Sensors, 2015, 15(3): 4837–4869CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wang Z J, Xie L L. Cyber-physical systems: a survey. Acta Automatica Sinica, 2011, 37(10): 1157–1166Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Feiler P H, Gluch D P. Model-based Eegineering with AADL: an Introduction to the SAE Architecture Analysis & Design Language. New Jexsey: Addison-Wesley, 2012Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Aerospace S A E. SAE AS5506 annex: behavior specification v1.6. New Jersey: SAE International, 2007Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Aerospace S A E. SAE AS5506a: architecture analysis and design language v2.0. Google Scholar, 2009Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Øksendal B. Stochastic Differential Equations - An Introduction with Applications. New York: Springer Science & Business Media, 2003zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Modelica Association. Modelica-a united object-oriented language for systems modeling-language specification version 3.3. PELAB, IDA, Linköpings Universitet, S-58183 Linköping, Sweden, 2014Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Rajhans A, Cheng S W, Schmerl B, Garlan D, Krogh B H, Agbi C, Bhave A. An architectural approach to the design and analysis of cyberphysical systems. Electronic Communications of the EASST, 2009, 21: 14–38Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Banerjee A, Kandula S, Mukherjee T, Gupta S. BAND-AiDe: a tool for cyber-physical oriented analysis and design of body area networks and devices. ACM Transactions on Embedded Computing Systems, 2012, 11(S2): 49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Smith D B, Hanlen L W. Channel Modeling for Wireless Body Area Networks. Ultra-Low-Power Short-Range Radios. New York: Springer International Publishing, 2015, 25–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Singhoff F, Legrand J, Nana L, Marcé L. Cheddar:a flexible real time scheduling framework. ACM SIGAda Ada Letters, 2004, 24(4): 1–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Alur R, Grosu R, Hur Y, Kumar V, Lee I. Modular specification of hybrid systems in Charon. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Workshop on Hybrid Systems: Computation and Control. 2000, 6–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Sokolsky O. The montana toolset: OSATE plugins for analysis and code generation. In: Proceedings of AADL Workshop, 2005Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Zhou Y C, Baras J, Wang S G. Hardware software co-design for automotive CPS using architecture analysis and design language. 2016, arXiv preprint arXiv:1603.05069Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Palachi E, Cohen C, Takashi S. Simulation of cyber physical models using SysML and numerical solvers. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Systems Conference. 2013, 671–675Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Behjati R, Yue T, Nejati S, Briand L, Selic B. Extending SysML with AADL concepts for comprehensive system architecture modeling. In: Proceedings of European Conference on Modelling Foundations and Applications. 2011, 236–252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Bernardeschi C, Domenici A, Masci P. A PVS-simulink integrated environment for model-based analysis of cyber-physical systems. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 2018, 44(6): 512–533CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Prist M, Freddi A, Longhi S, Monteriù A. An integrated simulation module for wireless cyber-physical system. In: Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Environment and Electrical Engineering. 2015, 1397–1402Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Bhasin K, Barnes P, Reinert J, Golden B. Applying model based systems engineering to NASA’s space communications networks. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Systems Conference. 2013, 325–330Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Lee J, Cha R, Han Y H, Nam W, Choi J Y, Kim W T, Park S M. Modeling autonomous military robots using hybrid system framework. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Information and Communication Technology Convergence. 2010, 429–430Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Sokolsky O, Pajic M, Bezzo N, Lee I. Architecture-centric software development for cyber-physical systems. In: Proceedings of the 1st Workshop on Cyber-Physical System Architectures and Design Methodologies. 2014Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Ahmad E, Larson B R, Barrett S C, Zhan N J, Dong Y W. Hybrid annex: an AADL extension for continuous behavior and cyber-physical interaction modeling. ACM SIGAda Ada Letters, 2014, 34(3): 29–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Bujorianu M C, Bujorianu M L, Barringer H. A unifying specification logic for cyber-physical systems. In: Proceedings of Mediterranean Conference on Control and Automation. 2009, 1166–1171Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Zhang Y, Dong Y W, Zhang F, Zhang Y F. Research on modeling and analysis of CPS. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Autonomic and Trusted Computing. 2011, 92–105Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Alur R. Formal verification of hybrid systems. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Embedded Software. 2011, 273–278Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Sun Z H, Zhou X S. Extending and recompiling AADL for CPS modeling. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Green Computing and Communications. 2013, 1225–1230Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Dziwok S, Gerking C, Becker S, Thiele S, Heinzemann C, Pohlmann U. A tool suite for the model-driven software engineering of cyberphysical systems. In: Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Foundations of Software Engineering. 2014, 715–718Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Zhang L C. Aspect-oriented modeling of railway cyber physical systems based on the extension of AADL. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on High Performance Computing and Communications & the 10th IEEE International Conference on Embedded and Ubiquitous Computing. 2013, 2104–2111Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Ehsan A, Dong Y W, Brian L, Tang T, Lü J D, Zhan N J. Behavior modeling and verification of movement authority scenario of Chinese train control system using AADL. Science China Information Sciences, 2015, 58(11): 1–20MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Yang Z B, Hu K, Ma D F, Pi L. Towards a formal semantics for the AADL behavior annex. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Design, Automation and Test in Europe. 2009, 1166–1171Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Kamandi A, Habibi J. A survey of syntax and semantics frameworks of modeling languages. In: Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Computer Science and ITS Applications. 2009, 1–6Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Torlak E, Taghdiri M, Dennis G, Near J P. Applications and extensions of Alloy: past, present and future. Mathematical Structures in Computer Science, 2013, 23(4): 915–933MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Higher Education Press and Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jing Liu
    • 1
  • Tengfei Li
    • 1
  • Zuohua Ding
    • 2
  • Yuqing Qian
    • 1
  • Haiying Sun
    • 1
  • Jifeng He
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Shanghai Key Laboratory of Trustworthy ComputingEast China Normal UniversityShanghaiChina
  2. 2.Zhejiang Sci-Tech University, Xiasha College ParkHangzhouChina

Personalised recommendations