ConStaBL -- A Fresh Look at Software Engineering with State Machines

AI-generated keywords: State Machines Software Engineering Local Variables Fuzz Testing Operational Semantics

AI-generated Key Points

The license of the paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the key points are generated using the paper metadata rather than the full article.

  • Paper introduces an extended version of statechart visual modeling language for systems
  • Incorporates local variables into statecharts and presents updated operational semantics with concurrency
  • Strict semantics ensures no transition conflicts in simulations, allowing for more precise modeling and upstream analysis
  • Supports arbitrary interleaving of concurrently executing action code, enhancing system modeling and analysis accuracy
  • Presents operational semantics in the form of a simulation algorithm
  • Defines conflicting transitions and valid simulations based on their semantics, establishing criteria for these definitions
  • Executable semantics can be used to simulate statechart models and verify correctness
  • Introduces fuzz testing of Statechart models as a novel concept lacking precedence in literature
  • Preliminary setup using simulator and fuzzer successfully identifies issues challenging to discover through manual inspection alone
  • Expands on existing research by incorporating local variables into modular statecharts and presenting updated operational semantics for concurrent statecharts
  • Offers stricter constraints on transition conflicts while allowing flexible interleaving of action code execution
  • Introduces fuzz testing as a means to identify potential issues in statechart models, providing valuable insights into system correctness beyond traditional inspection methods.
Also access our AI generated: Comprehensive summary, Lay summary, Blog-like article; or ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant.

Authors: Karthika Venkatesan, Sujit Kumar Chakrabarti

25 pages

Abstract: Statechart is a visual modelling language for systems. In this paper, we extend our earlier work on modular statecharts with local variables and present an updated operational semantics for statecharts with concurrency. Our variant of the statechart has local variables, which interact significantly with the remainder of the language semantics. Our semantics does not allow transition conflicts in simulations and is stricter than most other available semantics of statecharts in that sense. It allows arbitrary interleaving of concurrently executing action code, which allows more precise modelling of systems and upstream analysis of the same. We present the operational semantics in the form of the simulation algorithm. We also establish the criteria based on our semantics for defining conflicting transitions and valid simulations. Our semantics is executable and can be used to simulate statechart models and verify their correctness. We present a preliminary setup to carry out fuzz testing of Statechart models, an idea that does not seem to have a precedent in literature. We have used our simulator in conjunction with a well-known fuzzer to do fuzz testing of statechart models of non-trivial sizes and have found issues in them that would have been hard to find through inspection.

Submitted to arXiv on 07 Jul. 2023

Ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant

You can also chat with multiple papers at once here.

The license of the paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the AI assistant only knows about the paper metadata rather than the full article.

AI assistant instructions?

Results of the summarizing process for the arXiv paper: 2307.03790v1

This paper's license doesn't allow us to build upon its content and the summarizing process is here made with the paper's metadata rather than the article.

The paper titled "ConStaBL -- A Fresh Look at Software Engineering with State Machines" by Karthika Venkatesan and Sujit Kumar Chakrabarti introduces an extended version of the statechart visual modeling language for systems. Building upon their previous work on modular statecharts, the authors incorporate local variables into their variant of statecharts and present an updated operational semantics that includes concurrency. The addition of local variables in the statechart significantly impacts the interaction with the rest of the language semantics. The authors' semantics ensures that there are no transition conflicts in simulations, making it stricter compared to other available semantics for statecharts. This strictness allows for more precise modeling of systems and facilitates upstream analysis. One notable feature of the proposed semantics is its support for arbitrary interleaving of concurrently executing action code. This capability enhances system modeling and enables more accurate analysis. To demonstrate their approach, the authors present the operational semantics in the form of a simulation algorithm. In addition to defining conflicting transitions and valid simulations based on their semantics, the authors establish criteria for these definitions. Their executable semantics can be used to simulate statechart models and verify their correctness. Furthermore, this paper introduces a novel concept that lacks precedence in literature: fuzz testing of Statechart models. The authors describe a preliminary setup using their simulator in conjunction with a well-known fuzzer to test non-trivial-sized statechart models. Through this approach, they have successfully identified issues that would have been challenging to discover through manual inspection alone. Overall, this paper expands on existing research by incorporating local variables into modular statecharts and presenting an updated operational semantics for concurrent statecharts. The proposed approach offers stricter constraints on transition conflicts while allowing flexible interleaving of action code execution. Additionally, it introduces fuzz testing as a means to identify potential issues in statechart models, providing valuable insights into system correctness beyond traditional inspection methods.
Created on 16 Nov. 2023

Assess the quality of the AI-generated content by voting

Score: 0

Why do we need votes?

Votes are used to determine whether we need to re-run our summarizing tools. If the count reaches -10, our tools can be restarted.

Similar papers summarized with our AI tools

Navigate through even more similar papers through a

tree representation

Look for similar papers (in beta version)

By clicking on the button above, our algorithm will scan all papers in our database to find the closest based on the contents of the full papers and not just on metadata. Please note that it only works for papers that we have generated summaries for and you can rerun it from time to time to get a more accurate result while our database grows.

Disclaimer: The AI-based summarization tool and virtual assistant provided on this website may not always provide accurate and complete summaries or responses. We encourage you to carefully review and evaluate the generated content to ensure its quality and relevance to your needs.