Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 1806.09850

Process Network Models for Embedded System Design Based on the Real-Time BIP Execution Engine

Abstract

Existing model-based processes for embedded real-time systems support the analysis of various non-functional properties, most notably schedulability, through model checking, simulation or other means. The analysis results are then used for modifying the system's design, so that the expected properties are satisfied. A rigorous model-based design flow differs in that it aims at a system implementation derived from high-level models by applying a sequence of semantics-preserving transformations. Properties established at any design step are preserved throughout the subsequent steps including the executable implementation. We introduce such a design flow using a process network model of computation for application design at a high level, which combines streaming and reactive control processing with task parallelism. The schedulability of the so-called FPPNs (Fixed Priority Process Networks) is well-studied and various solutions have been presented. This article focuses on the design flow's steps for deriving executable implementations on the BIP (Behavior - Interaction - Priority) runtime environment. FPPNs are designed using the TASTE toolset, a convenient architecture description interface. In this way, the developers do not program explicitly low-level real-time OS services and the schedulability properties are guaranteed throughout the design steps by construction. The approach has been validated on the design of a real spacecraft on-board application that has been scheduled for execution on an industrial multicore platform.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Fotios Gioulekas, Peter Poplavko, Panagiotis Katsaros, Pedro Palomo. 2018-06-26. Process Network Models for Embedded System Design Based on the Real-Time BIP Execution Engine. https://doi.org/10.4204/eptcs.272.7

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Is Vibe Coding Safe? Benchmarking Vulnerability of Agent-Generated Code in Real-World Tasks

Vibe coding is a new software development paradigm in which human engineers prompt a large language model (LLM) agent to complete complex coding tasks with little supervision. Although vibe coding is increasingly adopted, is the generated code really safe to deploy in production? To investigate this question, we propose SUSVIBES, a benchmark consisting of 186 feature-request software engineering tasks from real-world open-source projects, for which, human programmers committed vulnerable implementations. We evaluate 12 widely used coding agentic settings with frontier models on the benchmark. Disturbingly, all agents perform poorly in terms of software security. Although 57% of the solutions from SWE-Agent with Claude 4 Sonnet are functionally correct, only 11.8% are secure. Further experiments demonstrate that preliminary security strategies, such as augmenting the feature request with vulnerability hints, cannot mitigate these security issues. Our findings raise serious concerns about the widespread adoption of vibe coding, particularly in security-sensitive applications. The code and dataset are available at https://github.com/LeiLiLab/susvibes. The leaderboard is at https://leililab.github.io/susvibes-leaderboard.

cs.SE

Why3-py: A Tool for Formal Verification of Hypothesis Testing and Meta-Analysis in Python

The reproducibility crisis in scientific research has received widespread recognition, thereby increasing the importance of meta-analyses that integrate statistical analyses from multiple studies. However, statistical methods often have ambiguous and implicit underlying assumptions, which can lead to their erroneous applications and interpretations. To address this issue, we propose a formal verification framework for statistical Python programs. Specifically, we present Why3-py, a Python front-end for the Why3 verification platform that transforms Python code into verification-oriented WhyML representations, addressing the challenges arising from Python's dynamic typing and runtime polymorphism. Furthermore, we extend the StatWhy tool to support the verification of meta-analysis methods. These tools enable meta-analysts to identify overlooked assumptions and misuse of analyses, and to verify the correct use of hypothesis testing and meta-analysis methods in Python code.

cs.SE

What is the Difference Between Me and You? Benchmarking the Quality Gap Between Human-Written and AI-Generated Code

AI coding assistants are becoming co-authors of production software, yet their evaluation centers on functional correctness, leaving open whether their code differs from human code in the quality dimensions dominating lifecycle cost. We compare human-written and AI-generated code at scale: 787,562 function pairs across Python, Java, and C, each human function mined from open-source repositories paired with implementations generated from its docstring by three AI assistants (OpenAI GPT models, DeepSeek-Coder, Qwen2.5-Coder). We characterize structural complexity and statistical naturalness, and map static-analysis findings onto Orthogonal Defect Classification for defects and the Common Weakness Enumeration for vulnerabilities, making authors and languages directly comparable. AI-generated code is structurally compressed and stylistically templated: roughly half the size and branching of human code, clustering apart at the style level. Defect profiles differ in kind: human code concentrates issues of mature codebases, AI code repetitive boilerplate; security is language-dependent, with LLMs producing more, and more severe, findings in Python and Java but fewer high-severity memory-safety findings than humans in C. Once size is controlled for, complexity metrics carry little signal, while naturalness separates authors. Finally, we release CQBench, a benchmark of 27,346 issue-prone tasks with baselines and an evaluation pipeline for quality assurance and security testing.

cs.SE