Typestate-oriented programming
Proceedings of the 24th ACM SIGPLAN conference companion on Object oriented programming systems languages and applications
Modular composition and state update in Plaid
Proceedings of the 4th Workshop on MechAnisms for SPEcialization, Generalization and inHerItance
Clara: partially evaluating runtime monitors at compile time tutorial supplement
RV'10 Proceedings of the First international conference on Runtime verification
Clara: a framework for partially evaluating finite-state runtime monitors ahead of time
RV'10 Proceedings of the First international conference on Runtime verification
Lattice-Based Sampling for Path Property Monitoring
ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology (TOSEM)
Partially Evaluating Finite-State Runtime Monitors Ahead of Time
ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems (TOPLAS)
OCL-based runtime monitoring of applications with protocol state machines
ECMFA'12 Proceedings of the 8th European conference on Modelling Foundations and Applications
A case for "Piggyback" Runtime Monitoring
ISoLA'12 Proceedings of the 5th international conference on Leveraging Applications of Formal Methods, Verification and Validation: technologies for mastering change - Volume Part I
A unified approach for static and runtime verification: framework and applications
ISoLA'12 Proceedings of the 5th international conference on Leveraging Applications of Formal Methods, Verification and Validation: technologies for mastering change - Volume Part I
Optimized temporal monitors for SystemC
Formal Methods in System Design
| Hi-index | 0.00 |
Perfect pre-deployment test coverage is notoriously difficult to achieve for large applications. Given enough end users, however, many more test cases will be encountered during an application's deployment than during testing. The use of runtime verification after deployment would enable developers to detect unexpected situations. Unfortunately, the prohibitive performance cost of runtime monitors prevents their use in deployed code. In this work, we study the feasibility of collaborative runtime verification, a verification approach which can distribute the burden of runtime verification among multiple users and over multiple runs. Each user executes a partially instrumented program and therefore suffers only a fraction of the instrumentation overhead. We focus on runtime verification using tracematches. Tracematches are a specification formalism that allows users to specify runtime verification properties via regular expressions with free variables over the dynamic execution trace. We propose two techniques for soundly partitioning the instrumentation required for tracematches: spatial partitioning, where different copies of a program monitor different program points for violations, and temporal partitioning, where monitoring is switched on and off over time. We evaluate the relative impact of partitioning on a user's runtime overhead by applying each partitioning technique to a collection of benchmarks that would otherwise incur significant instrumentation overhead. Our results show that spatial partitioning almost completely eliminates runtime overhead (for any particular benchmark copy) on many of our test cases, and that temporal partitioning scales well and provides runtime verification on a ‘pay as you go’ basis.