Format:
1 Online-Ressource (67 Seiten)
Content:
Context
Ensuring safety for any sophisticated system is getting more complex due to the rising number of features and functionalities. This calls for formal methods to entrust confidence in such systems. Nevertheless, using formal methods in industry is demanding because of their lack of usability and the difficulty of understanding verification results.
Objective
We evaluate the acceptance of formal methods by Bosch automotive engineers, particularly whether the difficulty of understanding verification results can be reduced.
Method
We perform two different exploratory studies. First, we conduct a user survey to explore challenges in identifying inconsistent specifications and using formal methods by Bosch automotive engineers. Second, we perform a one-group pretest-posttest experiment to collect impressions from Bosch engineers familiar with formal methods to evaluate whether understanding verification results is simplified by our counterexample explanation approach.
Results
The results from the user survey indicate that identifying refinement inconsistencies, understanding formal notations, and interpreting verification results are challenging. Nevertheless, engineers are still interested in using formal methods in real-world development processes because it could reduce the manual effort for verification. Additionally, they also believe formal methods could make the system safer. Furthermore, the one-group pretest-posttest experiment results indicate that engineers are more comfortable understanding the counterexample explanation than the raw model checker output.
Limitations
The main limitation of this study is the generalizability beyond the target group of Bosch automotive engineers.
Content:
Peer Reviewed
In:
Dordrecht [u.a.] : Springer Science + Business Media B.V, 28,5
Language:
English
DOI:
10.1007/s10664-023-10353-4
URN:
urn:nbn:de:kobv:11-110-18452/29148-1
URL:
Volltext
(kostenfrei)
Bookmarklink
