The Modeling and Analysis of Mixed-Criticality Systems

Extended Abstract
  • Sanjoy Baruah
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8711)


Methodologies that are currently widely used in the design and implementation of safety-critical real-time application systems are primarily focused on ensuring correctness. This, in conjunction with the trend towards implementing such systems using COTS components, may lead to very poor utilization of the implementation platform resources during run-time. Mixed-criticality implementations have been proposed as one means of achieving more efficient resource utilization upon such platforms. The real-time scheduling community has been developing a theory of mixed-criticality scheduling that seeks to solve resource allocation problems for mixed-criticality systems. There is a need for the formal methods and analysis community to work on developing methodologies for the design and analysis of mixed-criticality systems; such methodologies, in conjunction with the work on mixed-criticality scheduling currently being done in the real-time scheduling community, has the potential to significantly enhance our ability to design and implement large, complex, real-time systems in a manner that is both provably correct and resource-efficient.


Preemptive Schedule Critical Functionality Implementation Platform Integrate Modular Avionics Solve Resource Allocation Problem 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Slide-show: Introduction to aiT, (accessed on June 23, 2014)
  2. 2.
    Benveniste, A., Berry, G.: The synchronous approach to reactive and real-time systems. Proceedings of the IEEE 79(9), 1270–1282 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Burns, A., Davis, R.: Mixed-criticality systems: A review (2013),
  4. 4.
    Prisaznuk, P.J.: Integrated modular avionics. In: Proceedings of the IEEE 1992 National Aerospace and Electronics Conference (NAECON 1992), vol. 1, pp. 39–45 (May 1992)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Real, J., Crespo, A.: Mode change protocols for real-time systems: A survey and a new proposal. Real-Time Syst. 26(2), 161–197 (2004)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Sha, L., Rajkumar, R., Lehoczky, J., Ramamritham, K.: Mode change protocols for priority-driven preemptive scheduling. Real-Time Systems 1, 243–264 (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Vestal, S.: Preemptive scheduling of multi-criticality systems with varying degrees of execution time assurance. In: Proceedings of the Real-Time Systems Symposium, pp. 239–243. IEEE Computer Society Press, Tucson (2007)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sanjoy Baruah
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceThe University of North CarolinaChapel HillUSA

Personalised recommendations