Formal methods and supporting tools have a long record of successes in the development of safety-critical systems. However, it cannot be said that a single tool has emerged as the dominant solution for system design. Each tool differs from the others in terms of modelling language used, verification capabilities and other complementary features, and each development context has peculiar needs that require different tools. This is particularly problematic for the railway industry, in which formal methods are highly recommended by the norms, but no actual guidance is provided for the selection of tools. To guide companies in the selection of the most appropriate formal tools to adopt for their contexts, a clear assessment of the features of the available tools is required. To address this goal, this paper considers a set of 14 formal tools for system design, and presents a systematic evaluation of the tools and a usability analysis with practitioners. Results are discussed considering the most desired aspects by industry and previous related work. The focus is on the railway domain, but the overall methodology can be applied to similar contexts. Our study contributes with a systematic evaluation of formal tools and shows that despite the poor graphical interfaces, usability and maturity of the tools are not major problems, as claimed by other works. Instead, process integration support is the most relevant pain point for the majority of the platforms.
翻译:正式方法和辅助工具在开发安全关键系统方面有着长期的成功记录,然而,不能说单一工具已成为系统设计的主要解决办法。每个工具在使用的语言建模、核查能力和其他互补特点方面与其他工具不同,每个发展背景都有特殊需要,需要不同的工具。铁路行业尤其有问题,在铁路行业,正式方法是准则高度推荐的,但没有为选择工具提供实际指导。为了指导公司选择适合其具体情况的最适当正式工具,需要明确评估现有工具的特征。为了实现这一目标,本文件考虑一套14种正式工具用于系统设计,对工具进行系统评估,并与从业人员进行可用性分析。正在讨论成果,考虑行业和以往相关工作最理想的方面。重点是铁路领域,但总体方法可以适用于类似的情况。我们的研究对正式工具进行系统评估,并表明,尽管图形界面薄弱,但工具的可用性和成熟性并不是其他工作所称的重大问题。相反,整合平台最相关的是大多数痛苦点。