3.1 Hybrid Systems Modeling

Systems industries today make extensive use of mathematical modeling tools to design computer controlled physical systems. This class of tools addresses the modeling of physical systems with models that are simpler than usual scientific computing problems by using only Ordinary Differential Equations (ODE) and Difference Equations but not Partial Differential Equations (PDE). This family of tools first emerged in the 1980's with SystemBuild by MatrixX (now distributed by National Instruments) followed soon by Simulink by Mathworks, with an impressive subsequent development.

In the early 90's control scientists from the University of Lund (Sweden) realized that the above approach did not support component based modeling of physical systems with reuse 1. For instance, it was not easy to draw an electrical or hydraulic circuit by assembling component models of the various devices. The development of the Omola language by Hilding Elmqvist was a first attempt to bridge this gap by supporting some form of Differential Algebraic Equations (DAE) in the models. Modelica quickly emerged from this first attempt and became in the 2000's a major international concerted effort with the Modelica Consortium 2. A wider set of tools, both industrial and academic, now exists in this segment 3. In the EDA sector, VHDL-AMS was developed as a standard  52 and also allows for differential algebraic equations. Several domain-specific languages and tools for mechanical systems or electronic circuits also support some restricted classes of differential algebraic equations. Spice is the historic and most striking instance of these domain-specific languages/tools  4. The main difference is that equations are hidden and the fixed structure of the differential algebraic results from the physical domain covered by these languages.

Despite these tools are now widely used by a number of engineers, they raise a number of technical difficulties. The meaning of some programs, their mathematical semantics, is indeed ambiguous. A main source of difficulty is the correct simulation of continuous-time dynamics, interacting with discrete-time dynamics: How the propagation of mode switchings should be handled? How to avoid artifacts due to the use of a global ODE solver causing unwanted coupling between seemingly non interacting subsystems? Also, the mixed use of an equational style for the continuous dynamics with an imperative style for the mode changes and resets is a source of difficulty when handling parallel composition. It is therefore not uncommon that tools return complex warnings for programs with many different suggested hints for fixing them. Yet, these “pathological” programs can still be executed, if wanted so, giving surprising results — See for instance the Simulink examples in  24, 20 and  21.

Indeed this area suffers from the same difficulties that led to the development of the theory of synchronous languages as an effort to fix obscure compilation schemes for discrete time equation based languages in the 1980's. Our vision is that hybrid systems modeling tools deserve similar efforts in theory as synchronous languages did for the programming of embedded systems.

3.2 Background on non-standard analysis

Non-Standard analysis plays a central role in our research on hybrid systems modeling  20, 24, 22, 21. The following text provides a brief summary of this theory and gives some hints on its usefulness in the context of hybrid systems modeling. This presentation is based on our paper 2, a chapter of Simon Bliudze's PhD thesis  30, and a recent presentation of non-standard analysis, not axiomatic in style, due to the mathematician Lindström  58.

Non-standard numbers allowed us to reconsider the semantics of hybrid systems and propose a radical alternative to the super-dense time semantics developed by Edward Lee and his team as part of the Ptolemy II project, where cascades of successive instants can occur in zero time by using ${ℝ}_{+}\times \mathbb{N}$ as a time index. In the non-standard semantics, the time index is defined as a set $𝕋=\{n\partial \mid n\in {}^{*}\mathbb{N}\}$, where $\partial$ is an infinitesimal and ${}^{*}\mathbb{N}$ is the set of non-standard integers. Remark that (1) $𝕋$ is dense in ${ℝ}_{+}$, making it “continuous”, and (2) every $t\in 𝕋$ has a predecessor in $𝕋$ and a successor in $𝕋$, making it “discrete”. Although it is not effective from a computability point of view, the non-standard semantics provides a framework that is familiar to the computer scientist and at the same time efficient as a symbolic abstraction. This makes it an excellent candidate for the development of provably correct compilation schemes and type systems for hybrid systems modeling languages.

Non-standard analysis was proposed by Abraham Robinson in the 1960s to allow the explicit manipulation of “infinitesimals” in analysis  67, 45, 41. Robinson's approach is axiomatic; he proposes adding three new axioms to the basic Zermelo-Fraenkel (ZFC) framework. There has been much debate in the mathematical community as to whether it is worth considering non-standard analysis instead of staying with the traditional one. We do not enter this debate. The important thing for us is that non-standard analysis allows the use of the non-standard discretization of continuous dynamics “as if” it was operational.

Not surprisingly, such an idea is quite ancient. Iwasaki et al.  53 first proposed using non-standard analysis to discuss the nature of time in hybrid systems. Bliudze and Krob  29, 30 have also used non-standard analysis as a mathematical support for defining a system theory for hybrid systems. They discuss in detail the notion of “system” and investigate computability issues. The formalization they propose closely follows that of Turing machines, with a memory tape and a control mechanism.

3.3 Structural Analysis of DAE Systems

The Modelica language is based on Differential Algebraic Equations (DAE). The general form of a DAE is given by:

where $F$ is a system of $n_e$ equations $\{f_1,\cdots ,f_{n_e}\}$ and $x$ is a finite list of $n_v$ independent real-valued, smooth enough, functions $\{x_1,\cdots ,x_{n_v}\}$ of the independent variable $t$. We use $x^{\text{'}}$ as a shorthand for the list of first-order time derivatives of $x_j$, $j=1,\cdots ,n_v$. High-order derivatives are recursively defined as usual, and $x^{\left(k\right)}$ denotes the list formed by the $k$-th derivatives of the functions $x_j$. Each $f_i$ depends on the scalar $t$ and some of the functions $x_j$ as well as a finite number of their derivatives.

Let ${\sigma }_{i,j}$ denote the highest differentiation order of variable $x_j$ effectively appearing in equation $f_i$, or $-\infty$ if $x_j$ does not appear in $f_i$. The leading variables of $F$ are the variables in the set

The state variables of $F$ are the variables in the set

A leading variable $x_j^{\left({\sigma }_j\right)}$ is said to be algebraic if ${\sigma }_j=0$ (in which case, neither $x_j$ nor any of its derivatives are state variables). In the sequel, $v$ and $u$ denote the leading and state variables of $F$, respectively.

DAE are a strict generalization of ordinary differential equations (ODE), in the sense that it may not be immediate to rewrite a DAE as an explicit ODE of the form $v=G\left(u\right)$. The reason is that this transformation relies on the Implicit Function Theorem, requiring that the Jacobian matrix $\frac{\partial F}{\partial v}$ have full rank. This is, in general, not the case for a DAE. Simple examples, like the two-dimensional fixed-length pendulum in Cartesian coordinates  64, exhibit this behaviour.

For a square DAE of dimension $n$ (i.e., we now assume $n_e=n_v=n$) to be solved in the neighborhood of some $(v^{*},u^{*})$, one needs to find a set of non-negative integers $C=\{c_1,\cdots ,c_n\}$ such that system

can locally be made explicit, i.e., the Jacobian matrix of $F^{\left(C\right)}$ with respect to its leading variables, evaluated at $(v^{*},u^{*})$, is nonsingular. The smallest possible value of ${max}_i{c}_i$ for a set $C$ that satisfies this property is the differentiation index  35 of $F$, that is, the minimal number of time differentiations of all or part of the equations $f_i$ required to get an ODE.

In practice, the problem of automatically finding a ”minimal” solution $C$ to this problem quickly becomes intractable. Moreover, the differentiation index may depend on the value of $(v^{*},u^{*})$. This is why, in lieu of numerical nonsingularity, one is interested in the structural nonsingularity of the Jacobian matrix, i.e., its almost certain nonsingularity when its nonzero entries vary over some neighborhood. In this framework, the structural analysis (SA) of a DAE returns, when successful, values of the $c_i$ that are independent from a given value of $(v^{*},u^{*})$.

A renowned method for the SA of DAE is the Pantelides method; however, Pryce's $\Sigma$-method is introduced also in what follows, as it is a crucial tool for our works.

3.4 Contract-Based Design, Interfaces Theories, and Requirements Engineering

System companies such as automotive and aeronautic companies are facing significant difficulties due to the exponentially raising complexity of their products coupled with increasingly tight demands on functionality, correctness, and time-to-market. The cost of being late to market or of imperfections in the products is staggering as witnessed by the recent recalls and delivery delays that many major car and airplane manufacturers had to bear in the recent years. The specific root causes of these design problems are complex and relate to a number of issues ranging from design processes and relationships with different departments of the same company and with suppliers, to incomplete requirement specification and testing.

We believe the most promising means to address the challenges in systems engineering is to employ structured and formal design methodologies that seamlessly and coherently combine the various viewpoints of the design space (behavior, space, time, energy, reliability, ...), that provide the appropriate abstractions to manage the inherent complexity, and that can provide correct-by-construction implementations. The following technology issues must be addressed when developing new approaches to the design of complex systems:

• The overall design flows for heterogeneous systems and the associated use of models across traditional boundaries are not well developed and understood. Relationships between different teams inside a same company, or between different stake-holders in the supplier chain, are not well supported by solid technical descriptions for the mutual obligations.
• System requirements capture and analysis is in large part a heuristic process, where the informal text and natural language-based techniques in use today are facing significant challenges 9. Formal requirements engineering is in its infancy: mathematical models, formal analysis techniques and links to system implementation must be developed.
• Dealing with variability, uncertainty, and life-cycle issues, such as extensibility of a product family, are not well-addressed using available systems engineering methodologies and tools.

The challenge is to address the entire process and not to consider only local solutions of methodology, tools, and models that ease part of the design.

Contract-based design has been proposed as a new approach to the system design problem that is rigorous and effective in dealing with the problems and challenges described before, and that, at the same time, does not require a radical change in the way industrial designers carry out their task as it cuts across design flows of different types. Indeed, contracts can be used almost everywhere and at nearly all stages of system design, from early requirements capture, to embedded computing infrastructure and detailed design involving circuits and other hardware. Contracts explicitly handle pairs of properties, respectively representing the assumptions on the environment and the guarantees of the system under these assumptions. Intuitively, a contract is a pair $C=(A,G)$ of assumptions and guarantees characterizing in a formal way 1) under which context the design is assumed to operate, and 2) what its obligations are. Assume/Guarantee reasoning has been known for a long time, and has been used mostly as verification mean for the design of software  62. However, contract based design with explicit assumptions is a philosophy that should be followed all along the design, with all kinds of models, whenever necessary. Here, specifications are not limited to profiles, types, or taxonomy of data, but also describe the functions, performances of various kinds (time and energy), and reliability. This amounts to enrich a component's interface with, on one hand, formal specifications of the behavior of the environment in which the component may be instantiated and, on the other hand, of the expected behavior of the component itself. The consideration of rich interfaces is still in its infancy. So far, academic researchers have addressed the mathematics and algorithmics of interfaces theories and contract-based reasoning. To make them a technique of choice for system engineers, we must develop:

• mathematical foundations for interfaces and requirements engineering that enable the design of frameworks and tools;
• a system engineering framework and associated methodologies and toolsets that focus on system requirements modeling, contract specification, and verification at multiple abstraction layers.

A detailed bibliography on contract and interface theories for embedded system design can be found in 3. In a nutshell, contract and interface theories fall into two main categories:

• Assume/guarantee contracts. By explicitly relying on the notions of assumptions and guarantees, A/G-contracts are intuitive, which makes them appealing for the engineer. In A/G-contracts, assumptions and guarantees are just properties regarding the behavior of a component and of its environment. The typical case is when these properties are formal languages or sets of traces, which includes the class of safety properties  55, 38, 61, 19, 40. Contract theories were initially developed as specification formalisms able to refuse some inputs from the environment  46. A/G-contracts were advocated in  23 and are is still a very active research topic, with several contributions dealing with the timed  28 and probabilistic  32, 33 viewpoints in system design, and even mixed-analog circuit design  63.
• Automata theoretic interfaces. Interfaces combine assumptions and guarantees in a single, automata theoretic specification. Most interface theories are based on Lynch's Input/Output Automata  60, 59. Interface Automata  70, 69, 71, 36 focus primarily on parallel composition and compatibility: Two interfaces can be composed and are compatible if there is at least one environment where they can work together. The idea is that the resulting composition exposes as an interface the needed information to ensure that incompatible pairs of states cannot be reached. This can be achieved by using the possibility, for an Interface Automaton, to refuse selected inputs from the environment in a given state, which amounts to the implicit assumption that the environment will never produce any of the refused inputs, when the interface is in this state. Modal Interfaces  66 inherit from both Interface Automata and the originally unrelated notion of Modal Transition System  57, 18, 31, 56. Modal Interfaces are strictly more expressive than Interface Automata by decoupling the I/O orientation of an event and its deontic modalities (mandatory, allowed or forbidden). Informally, a must transition is available in every component that realizes the modal interface, while a may transition needs not be. Research on interface theories is still very active. For instance, timed  72, 25, 27, 43, 42, 26, probabilistic  32, 44 and energy-aware  37 interface theories have been proposed recently.

Requirements Engineering is one of the major concerns in large systems industries today, particularly so in sectors where certification prevails  68. Most requirements engineering tools offer a poor structuring of the requirements and cannot be considered as formal modeling frameworks today. They are nothing less, but nothing more than an informal structured documentation enriched with hyperlinks. As examples, medium size sub-systems may have a few thousands requirements and the Rafale fighter aircraft has above 250,000 of them. For the Boeing 787, requirements were not stable while subcontractors were working on the development of the fly-by-wire and of the landing gear subsystems, leading to a long and cahotic convergence of the design process.

We see Contract-Based Design and Interfaces Theories as innovative tools in support of Requirements Engineering. The Software Engineering community has extensively covered several aspects of Requirements Engineering, in particular:

• the development and use of large and rich ontologies; and
• the use of Model Driven Engineering technology for the structural aspects of requirements and resulting hyperlinks (to tests, documentation, PLM, architecture, and so on).

Behavioral models and properties, however, are not properly encompassed by the above approaches. This is the cause of a remaining gap between this phase of systems design and later phases where formal model based methods involving behavior have become prevalent—see the success of Matlab/Simulink/Scade technologies. We believe that our work on contract based design and interface theories is best suited to bridge this gap.

4.1 Modelica

Mathematical modeling tools are a considerable business, with major actors such as MathWorks, with Matlab/Simulink, or Wolfram, with Mathematica. However, none of these prominent tools are suitable for the engineering of large systems. The Modelica language has been designed with this objective in mind, making the best of the advantages of DAEs to support a component-based approach. Several industries in the energy sector have adopted Modelica as their main systems engineering language.

Although multimode features have been introduced in version 3.3 of the language  48, proper tool support of multimode models is still lagging behind. The reason is not a lack of interest from tool vendors and academia, but rather that multimode DAE systems poses several fundamental difficulties, such as a proper definition of a concept of solutions for multimode DAEs, how to handle mode switchings that trigger a change of system structure, or how impulsive variables should be handled. Our work on multimode DAEs focuses on these crucial issues 6.

Thanks to the experimental coupling of Dymola (Dassault Systèmes' commercial implementation of the Modelica language) with our IsamDAE prototype (https://team.inria.fr/hycomes/software/isamdae/) 8, 17, that is being tested at the time of writing of this activity report, a larger class of Modelica models are expected to be compiled and simulated correctly. This should enable industrial users to have cleaner and simpler multimode Modelica models, with dynamically changing structure of cyberphysical systems. On the longer term, our ambition is to provide efficient code-generation techniques for the Modelica language, supporting, in full generality, multimode DAE systems, with dynamically changing differentiation index, structure and dimension.

4.2 Dynamical Systems Verification

In addition to well-defined operational semantics for hybrid systems, one often needs to provide formal guarantees about the behavior of some critical components of the system, or at least its main underlying logic. To do so, we are actively developing new techniques to automatically verify whether a hybrid system complies with its specifications, and/or to infer automatically the envelope within which the system behaves safely. The approaches we developed have been already successfully used to formally verify the intricate logic of the ACAS X, a mid-air collision avoidance system that advises the pilot to go upward or downward to avoid a nearby airplane which requires mixing the continuous motion of the aircraft with the discrete decisions to resolve the potential conflict  54. This challenging example is nothing but an instance of the kind of systems we are targeting: autonomous smart systems that are designed to perform sophisticated tasks with an internal tricky logic. What is even more interesting perhaps is that such techniques can be often "reverted" to actually synthesize missing components so that some property holds, effectively helping the design of such complex systems.

5.1 Impact of research results

The expected impact of our research is to allow both better designs and better exploitation of energy production units and distribution networks, enabling large-scale energy savings. At least, this is what we can observe in the context of the FUI ModeliScale collaborative project, which is focused on electric grids, urban heat networks and building thermal modeling.

The rationale is as follows: system engineering models are meant to assess the correctness, safety and optimality of a system under design. However, system models are still useful after the system has been put in operation. This is especially true in the energy sector, where systems have an extremely long lifespan (for instance, more than 50 years for some nuclear power plants) and are upgraded periodically, to integrate new technologies. Exactly like in software engineering, where a software and its model co-evolve throughout the lifespan of the software, a co-evolution of the system and its physical models has to be maintained. This is required in order to maintan the safety of the system, but also its optimality.

Moreover, physical models can be instrumental to the optimal exploitation of a system. A typical example are model-predictive control (MPC) techniques, where the model is simulated, during the exploitation of the system, in order to predict system trajectories up to a bounded-time horizon. Optimal control inputs can then be computed by mathematical programming methods, possibly using multiple simulation results. This has been proved to be a practical solution  50, whenever classical optimal control methods are ineffective, for instance, when the system is non-linear or discontinuous. However, this requires the generation of high-performance simulation code, capable of simulating a system much faster than real-time.

The structural analysis techniques implemented in IsamDAE 8 generate a conditional block dependency graph, that can be used to generate high-performance simulation code : static code can be generated for each block of equations, and a scheduling of these blocks can be computed, at runtime, at each mode switching, thanks to an inexpensive topological sort algorithm. Contrarily to other approaches (such as  49), no structural analysis, block-trangular decompositions, or automatic differentiation has to be performed at runtime.

7.1 New software

8.1 Mathematical Foundations of Physical Systems Modeling Languages

Participants: Albert Benveniste, Benoît Caillaud, Mathias Malandain.

Modern modeling languages for general physical systems, such as Modelica or Simscape, rely on Differential Algebraic Equations (DAE), i.e., constraints of the form $f(\dot{x},x,u)=0$, when only first-order derivatives are considered. This facilitates modeling from first principles of the physics. This year we completed and published in the Annual Reviews in Control 6 the development of the mathematical theory needed to sound, on solid mathematical bases, the design of compilers and tools for DAE based physical modeling languages.

Unlike Ordinary Differential Equations (ODE, of the form $\dot{x}=g(x,u)$), DAE exhibit subtle issues because of the notion of differentiation index and related latent equations—ODE are DAE of index zero for which no latent equation needs to be considered. Prior to generating execution code and calling solvers, the compilation of such languages requires a nontrivial structural analysis step that reduces the differentiation index to a level acceptable by DAE solvers.

Multimode DAE systems, having multiple modes with mode-dependent dynamics and state-dependent mode switching, are much harder to deal with. The main difficulty is the handling of the events of mode change. Unfortunately, the large literature devoted to the numerical analysis of DAEs does not cover the multimode case, typically saying nothing about mode changes. This lack of foundations causes numerous difficulties to the existing modeling tools. Some models are well handled, others are not, with no clear boundary between the two classes. Basically, no tool exists that performs a correct structural analysis taking multiple modes and mode changes into account.

In our work, we developed a comprehensive mathematical approach supporting compilation and code generation for this class of languages. Its core is the structural analysis of multimode DAE systems, taking both multiple modes and mode changes into account. As a byproduct of this structural analysis, we propose well sound criteria for accepting or rejecting models at compile time.

For our mathematical development, we rely on nonstandard analysis, which allows us to cast hybrid systems dynamics to discrete time dynamics with infinitesimal step size, thus providing a uniform framework for handling both continuous dynamics and mode change events.

8.2 An implicit structural analysis method for multimode DAE systems

Participants: Albert Benveniste, Benoît Caillaud, Mathias Malandain, Joan Thibault.

Modeling languages and tools based on Differential Algebraic Equations (DAE) bring several specific issues that do not exist with modeling languages based on Ordinary Differential Equations. The main problem is the determination of the differentiation index and latent equations. Prior to generating simulation code and calling solvers, the compilation of a model requires a structural analysis step, which reduces the differentiation index to a level acceptable by numerical solvers.

The Modelica language, among others, allows hybrid models with multiple modes, mode-dependent dynamics and state-dependent mode switching. These multimode DAE (mDAE) systems are much harder to deal with. The main difficulties are (i) the combinatorial explosion of the number of modes, and (ii) the correct handling of mode switchings.

The focus of the paper  34 is on the first issue, namely: How can one perform a structural analysis of an mDAE in all possible modes, without enumerating these modes? A structural analysis algorithm for mDAE systems is presented, based on an implicit representation of the varying structure of an mDAE. It generalizes J. Pryce's $\Sigma$-method  65 to the multimode case and uses Binary Decision Diagrams (BDD) to represent the mode-dependent structure of an mDAE. The algorithm determines, as a function of the mode, the set of latent equations, the leading variables and the state vector. This is then used to compute a mode-dependent block-triangular decomposition of the system, that can be used to generate simulation code with a mode-dependent scheduling of the blocks of equations.

This method has been implemented in the IsamDAE software. This has allowed the Hycomes team to evaluate the performance and scalability of the method on several examples. In particular, it has been possible to perform the structural analysis of systems with more than 2300 equations and ${10}^{77}$ modes.

8.3 Ordered Functional Decision Diagrams: A Functional Semantics For Binary Decision Diagrams

Participants: Joan Thibault, Khalil Ghorbal.

We introduce a novel framework, termed λDD, that revisits Binary Decision Diagrams from a purely functional point of view. The framework allows to classify the already existing variants, including the most recent ones like Chain-DD and ESRBDD, as implementations of a special class of ordered models. We enumerate, in a principled way, all the models of this class and isolate its most expressive model. This new model, termed λDD-O-NUCX, is suitable for both dense and sparse Boolean functions, and is moreover invariant by negation. The canonicity of λDD-O-NUCX is formally verified using the Coq proof assistant. We furthermore give bounds on the size of the different diagrams: the potential gain achieved by more expressive models can be at most linear in the number of variables n.

8.4 Functional Decision Diagrams: A Unifying Data Structure For Binary Decision Diagrams

Participants: Joan Thibault, Khalil Ghorbal.

We present concise and canonical representations of Boolean functions akin to Binary Decision Diagrams, a versatile data structure with several applications beyond computer science. Our approach is functional: we encode the process that constructs the Boolean function of interest starting from the constant function zero (or False). This point of view makes the data structure more resilient to variable ordering, a well-known problem in standard representations. The experiments on both dense and sparse formulas are very encouraging and show not only a better compression rate of the final representation than all existing related variants but also a lower memory peak.

8.5 Characterizing Positively Invariant Sets: Inductive and Topological Methods

Participants: Khalil Ghorbal.

Set positive invariance is an important concept in the theory of dynamical systems and one which also has practical applications in areas of computer science, such as formal verification, as well as in control theory. Great progress has been made in understanding positively invariant sets in continuous dynamical systems and powerful computational tools have been developed for reasoning about them; however, many of the insights from recent developments in this area have largely remained folklore and are not elaborated in existing literature. This article contributes an explicit development of modern methods for checking positively invariant sets of ordinary differential equations and describes two possible characterizations of positive invariants: one based on the real induction principle, and a novel alternative based on topological notions. The two characterizations, while in a certain sense equivalent, lead to two different decision procedures for checking whether a given semi-algebraic set is positively invariant under the flow of a system of polynomial ordinary differential equations.

8.6 Characterizing Q-matrices

Participants: Khalil Ghorbal, Christelle Kozaily.

We show that the existence of solutions for linear complementarity problems amounts to a covering of the entire space by a set of finite cones defined by the involved vectors as well as the standard basis. We give several full characterizations for the case $n=2$ and detail how these could be used to derive several necessary conditions for higher dimensions. The local existence of solutions is also investigated. It is shown that the positivity condition on the determinant, or equivalently, the orientation of the vectors forming the complementarity cones cannot be captured purely structurally.

10.1 International research visitors

The visit of Inigo Incer Romeo, PhD student at U. Berkeley, initially planned in the Summer 2020 had to be postponed to 2021. This visit is supported by a Chateaubriand Fellowship grant of the French Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The topics of the visit is on the use of Contract-based Reasoning to support the design of CPS systems.

10.2 National initiatives

11.1 Promoting scientific activities

11.2 Teaching - Supervision - Juries

12.1 Major publications

• 1 articleAlbertA. Benveniste, TimothyT. Bourke, BenoîtB. Caillaud, Jean-LouisJ.-L. Colaço, CédricC. Pasteur and MarcM. Pouzet. Building a Hybrid Systems Modeler on Synchronous Languages PrinciplesProceedings of the IEEE1069September 2018, 1568--1592
  HALDOI
• 2 articleAlbertA. Benveniste, TimothyT. Bourke, BenoîtB. Caillaud and MarcM. Pouzet. Non-standard semantics of hybrid systems modelersJournal of Computer and System Sciences783This work was supported by the SYNCHRONICS large scale initiative of INRIA2012, 877-910
  HALDOIback to text
• 3 articleAlbertA. Benveniste, BenoîtB. Caillaud, DejanD. Nickovic, RobertoR. Passerone, Jean-BaptisteJ.-B. Raclet, PhilippP. Reinkemeier, AlbertA. Sangiovanni-Vincentelli, WernerW. Damm, ThomasT. Henzinger and Kim G.K. Larsen. Contracts for System DesignFoundations and Trends in Electronic Design Automation122-32018, 124-400
  HALDOIback to text
• 4 articleJean-BaptisteJ.-B. Jeannin, KhalilK. Ghorbal, YanniY. Kouskoulas, AuroraA. Schmidt, RyanR. Gardner, StefanS. Mitsch and AndréA. Platzer. A Formally Verified Hybrid System for Safe Advisories in the Next-Generation Airborne Collision Avoidance SystemInternational Journal on Software Tools for Technology Transfer196November 2017, 717-741
  HALDOI
• 5 articleAndrewA. Sogokon, KhalilK. Ghorbal and Taylor TT. Johnson. Operational Models for Piecewise-Smooth SystemsACM Transactions on Embedded Computing Systems (TECS)165sOctober 2017, 185:1--185:19
  HALDOI

12.2 Publications of the year

12.3 Cited publications

• 18 article AdamA. Antonik, MichaelM. Huth, Kim G.K. Larsen, UlrikU. Nyman and AndrzejA. Wasowski. 20 Years of Modal and Mixed Specifications Bulletin of European Association of Theoretical Computer Science 1 94 2008
  back to text
• 19 book ChristelC. Baier and Joost-PieterJ.-P. Katoen. Principles of Model Checking MIT Press, Cambridge 2008
  back to text
• 20 articleAlbertA. Benveniste, TimothyT. Bourke, BenoîtB. Caillaud, Jean-LouisJ.-L. Colaço, CédricC. Pasteur and MarcM. Pouzet. Building a Hybrid Systems Modeler on Synchronous Languages PrinciplesProceedings of the IEEE1069September 2018, 1568--1592
  HALDOIback to textback to text
• 21 misc AlbertA. Benveniste, TimothyT. Bourke, BenoîtB. Caillaud, BrunoB. Pagano and MarcM. Pouzet. A Type-Based Analysis of Causality Loops In Hybrid Systems Modelers Deliverable D3.1_1 v 1.0 of the Sys2soft collaborative project ''Physics Aware Software'' December 2013
  HAL back to text back to text
• 22 misc AlbertA. Benveniste, TimothyT. Bourke, BenoîtB. Caillaud and MarcM. Pouzet. Semantics of multi-mode DAE systems Deliverable D.4.1.1 of the ITEA2 Modrio collaborative project August 2013
  HAL back to text
• 23 inproceedings AlbertA. Benveniste, BenoîtB. Caillaud, AlbertoA. Ferrari, LeonardoL. Mangeruca, RobertoR. Passerone and ChristosC. Sofronis. Multiple Viewpoint Contract-Based Specification and Design Proceedings of the Software Technology Concertation on Formal Methods for Components and Objects (FMCO'07) 5382 Revised Lectures, Lecture Notes in Computer Science Amsterdam, The Netherlands Springer October 2008
  back to text
• 24 inproceedingsAlbertA. Benveniste, BenoîtB. Caillaud, BrunoB. Pagano and MarcM. Pouzet. A type-based analysis of causality loops in hybrid modelersHSCC '14: International Conference on Hybrid Systems: Computation and ControlProceedings of the 17th international conference on Hybrid systems: computation and control (HSCC '14)Berlin, GermanyACM PressApril 2014, 13
  HALDOIback to textback to text
• 25 inproceedingsNathalieN. Bertrand, AxelA. Legay, SophieS. Pinchinat and Jean-BaptisteJ.-B. Raclet. A Compositional Approach on Modal Specifications for Timed Systems11th International Conference on Formal Engineering Methods (ICFEM'09)5885LNCSRio de Janeiro, BrazilSpringerDecember 2009, 679-697URL: http://hal.inria.fr/inria-00424356/en
  back to text
• 26 articleNathalieN. Bertrand, AxelA. Legay, SophieS. Pinchinat and Jean-BaptisteJ.-B. Raclet. Modal event-clock specifications for timed component-based designScience of Computer Programming2011, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scico.2011.01.007
  DOIback to text
• 27 inproceedingsNathalieN. Bertrand, SophieS. Pinchinat and Jean-BaptisteJ.-B. Raclet. Refinement and Consistency of Timed Modal Specifications3rd International Conference on Language and Automata Theory and Applications (LATA'09)5457LNCSTarragona, SpainSpringerApril 2009, 152-163URL: http://hal.inria.fr/inria-00424283/en
  DOIback to text
• 28 inproceedingsPurandarP. Bhaduri and IngoI. Stierand. A proposal for real-time interfaces in SPEEDSDesign, Automation and Test in Europe (DATE'10)IEEE2010, 441-446
  back to text
• 29 articleS. Bliudze and D. Krob. Modelling of Complex Systems: Systems as Dataflow MachinesFundam. Inform.9122009, 251--274
  back to text
• 30 phdthesis S. Bliudze. Un cadre formel pour l'étude des systèmes industriels complexes: un exemple basé sur l'infrastructure de l'UMTS Ecole Polytechnique 2006
  back to text back to text
• 31 articleGérardG. Boudol and Kim G.K. Larsen. Graphical Versus Logical SpecificationsTheor. Comput. Sci.10611992, 3-20
  back to text
• 32 inproceedingsBenoîtB. Caillaud, BenoîtB. Delahaye, Kim G.K. Larsen, AxelA. Legay, Mikkel L.M. Pedersen and AndrzejA. Wasowski. Compositional design methodology with constraint Markov chainsQEST 2010Williamsburg, Virginia, United StatesSeptember 2010, URL: http://hal.inria.fr/inria-00591578/en
  DOIback to textback to text
• 33 articleBenoîtB. Caillaud, BenoîtB. Delahaye, Kim G.K. Larsen, AxelA. Legay, Mikkel L.M. Pedersen and AndrzejA. Wasowski. Constraint Markov ChainsTheoretical Computer Science41234May 2011, 4373-4404URL: http://hal.inria.fr/hal-00654003/en
  DOIback to text
• 34 inproceedings B. Caillaud, M. Malandain and J. Thibault. Implicit Structural Analysis of Multimode DAE Systems 23rd ACM International Conference on Hybrid Systems: Computation and Control (HSCC 2020) to appear Sydney, Australia April 2020
  back to text back to text
• 35 articleS. L.S. Campbell and C. W.C. Gear. The index of general nonlinear DAEsNumerische Mathematik722dec 1995, 173--196URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s002110050165
  DOIback to text
• 36 phdthesisArindamA. Chakrabarti. A Framework for Compositional Design and Analysis of SystemsEECS Department, University of California, BerkeleyDec 2007, URL: http://www.eecs.berkeley.edu/Pubs/TechRpts/2007/EECS-2007-174.html
  back to text
• 37 inproceedingsArindamA. Chakrabarti, LucaL. de Alfaro, Thomas A.T. Henzinger and MariëlleM. Stoelinga. Resource InterfacesEMSOFT2003, 117-133
  back to text
• 38 inproceedingsEdward Y.E. Chang, ZoharZ. Manna and AmirA. Pnueli. Characterization of Temporal Property ClassesICALP1992, 474-486
  back to text
• 39 inproceedingsKoenK. Claessen and JohnJ. Hughes. QuickCheck: a lightweight tool for random testing of Haskell programsProceedings of the Fifth ACM SIGPLAN International Conference on Functional Programming (ICFP '00), Montreal, Canada, September 18-21, 2000.2000, 268--279URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/351240.351266
  DOIback to text
• 40 book E. Clarke, O. Grumberg and D. Peled. Model Checking MIT Press 1999
  back to text
• 41 book N. Cutland Nonstandard analysis and its applications Cambridge Univ. Press 1988
  back to text
• 42 inproceedingsAlexandreA. David, Kim G.K. Larsen, AxelA. Legay, UlrikU. Nyman and AndrzejA. Wasowski. ECDAR: An Environment for Compositional Design and Analysis of Real Time SystemsAutomated Technology for Verification and Analysis - 8th International Symposium, ATVA 2010, Singapore, September 21-24, 2010. Proceedings2010, 365-370
  back to text
• 43 inproceedingsAlexandreA. David, Kim G.K. Larsen, AxelA. Legay, UlrikU. Nyman and AndrzejA. Wasowski. Timed I/O automata: a complete specification theory for real-time systemsProceedings of the 13th ACM International Conference on Hybrid Systems: Computation and Control, HSCC 2010, Stockholm, Sweden, April 12-15, 20102010, 91-100
  back to text
• 44 inproceedingsBenoîtB. Delahaye, Joost-PieterJ.-P. Katoen, Kim G.K. Larsen, AxelA. Legay, Mikkel L.M. Pedersen, FalakF. Sher and AndrzejA. Wasowski. Abstract Probabilistic AutomataVMCAI2011, 324-339
  back to text
• 45 book F. Diener and G. Reeb. Analyse non standard Hermann 1989
  back to text
• 46 book David L.D. Dill. Trace Theory for Automatic Hierarchical Verification of Speed-Independent Circuits ACM Distinguished Dissertations MIT Press 1989
  back to text
• 47 articleJ. Edmonds and R. M.R. Karp. Theoretical improvements in algorithmic efficiency for network flow problemsJournal of the ACM1921972, 248--264URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/321694.321699
  DOIback to text
• 48 inproceedings H. Elmqvist, S. E.S. Mattsson and M. Otter. Modelica extensions for Multi-Mode DAE Systems Proceedings of the 10th International Modelica Conference, March 10-12, 2014, Lund, Sweden Linköping University Electronic Press mar 2014
  DOI back to text
• 49 inproceedings HildingH. Elmqvist, AndreaA. Neumayr and MartinM. Otter. Modia-dynamic modeling and simulation with julia Juliacon'18 University College London, UK August 2018
  back to text
• 50 inproceedingsH. J.H. Ferreau, S. Almér, H. Peyrl, J. L.J. Jerez and A. Domahidi. Survey of industrial applications of embedded model predictive control2016 European Control Conference (ECC)2016, 601-601
  DOIback to text
• 51 inproceedingsA. V.A. Goldberg and R. E.R. Tarjan. A new approach to the maximum flow problemProceedings of the eighteenth annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing (STOC'86)1986, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/12130.12144
  DOIback to text
• 52 miscIEEE Standard VHDL Analog and Mixed-Signal Extensions, Std 1076.1-19991999, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/IEEESTD.1999.90578
  DOIback to text
• 53 inproceedingsY. Iwasaki, A. Farquhar, V.A.V. Saraswat, D.G.D. Bobrow and V. Gupta. Modeling Time in Hybrid Systems: How Fast Is ``Instantaneous''?IJCAI1995, 1773--1781
  back to text
• 54 inproceedingsJean-BaptisteJ.-B. Jeannin, KhalilK. Ghorbal, YanniY. Kouskoulas, RyanR. Gardner, AuroraA. Schmidt, ErikE. Zawadzki and AndréA. Platzer. Formal verification of ACAS X, an industrial airborne collision avoidance system2015 International Conference on Embedded Software, EMSOFT 2015, Amsterdam, Netherlands, October 4-9, 20152015, 127--136
  back to text
• 55 articleLeslieL. Lamport. Proving the Correctness of Multiprocess ProgramsIEEE Trans. Software Eng.321977, 125-143
  back to text
• 56 inproceedingsKim G.K. Larsen, UlrikU. Nyman and AndrzejA. Wasowski. On Modal Refinement and ConsistencyProc. of the 18th International Conference on Concurrency Theory (CONCUR'07)Springer2007, 105--119
  back to text
• 57 inproceedingsKim G.K. Larsen and BentB. Thomsen. A Modal Process LogicProceedings of the Third Annual Symposium on Logic in Computer Science (LICS'88)IEEE1988, 203-210
  back to text
• 58 incollectionT. Lindstr\om. An Invitation to Nonstandard AnalysisNonstandard Analysis and its ApplicationsCambridge Univ. Press1988, 1--105
  back to text
• 59 inproceedingsNancy A.N. Lynch. Input/Output Automata: Basic, Timed, Hybrid, Probabilistic and DynamicCONCUR2003, 187-188
  back to text
• 60 articleNancy A.N. Lynch and Eugene W.E. Stark. A Proof of the Kahn Principle for Input/Output AutomataInf. Comput.8211989, 81-92
  back to text
• 61 book ZoharZ. Manna and AmirA. Pnueli. Temporal verification of reactive systems: Safety Springer 1995
  back to text
• 62 articleBertrandB. Meyer. Applying "Design by Contract"Computer2510October 1992, 40--51URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/2.161279
  DOIback to text
• 63 articleP. Nuzzo, Alberto L.A. Sangiovanni-Vincentelli, X. Sun and A. Puggelli. Methodology for the Design of Analog Integrated Interfaces Using ContractsIEEE Sensors Journal1212Dec. 2012, 3329--3345
  back to text
• 64 articleC. Pantelides. The consistent initialization of differential-algebraic systemsSIAM J. Sci. Stat. Comput.921988, 213--231
  back to textback to text
• 65 articleJ. D.J. Pryce. A Simple Structural Analysis Method for DAEsBIT Numerical Mathematics412March 2001, 364--394URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/a:1021998624799
  DOIback to textback to textback to text
• 66 articleJean-BaptisteJ.-B. Raclet, EricE. Badouel, AlbertA. Benveniste, BenoîtB. Caillaud, AxelA. Legay and RobertoR. Passerone. A Modal Interface Theory for Component-based DesignFundamenta Informaticae1081-22011, 119-149URL: http://hal.inria.fr/inria-00554283/en
  DOIback to text
• 67 book A. Robinson. Non-Standard Analysis ISBN 0-691-04490-2 Princeton Landmarks in Mathematics 1996
  back to text
• 68 articleErnstE. Sikora, BastianB. Tenbergen and KlausK. Pohl. Industry needs and research directions in requirements engineering for embedded systemsRequirements Engineering172012, 57--78URL: http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00766-011-0144-x
  DOIback to text
• 69 inproceedingsLucaL. de Alfaro. Game Models for Open SystemsVerification: Theory and Practice2772Lecture Notes in Computer ScienceSpringer2003, 269-289
  back to text
• 70 inproceedingsLucaL. de Alfaro and Thomas A.T. Henzinger. Interface automataProc. of the 9th ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Foundations of Software Engineering (FSE'01)ACM Press2001, 109--120
  back to text
• 71 inproceedings LucaL. de Alfaro and Thomas A.T. Henzinger. Interface-based design In Engineering Theories of Software Intensive Systems, proceedings of the Marktoberdorf Summer School Kluwer 2004
  back to text
• 72 inproceedingsLucaL. de Alfaro, Thomas A.T. Henzinger and MariëlleM. Stoelinga. Timed InterfacesProc. of the 2nd International Workshop on Embedded Software (EMSOFT'02)2491Lecture Notes in Computer ScienceSpringer2002, 108--122
  back to text