Arne Nordmann

SE
6papers
90citations
Novelty22%
AI Score19

6 Papers

ROMar 16, 2018Code
Oncilla robot: a versatile open-source quadruped research robot with compliant pantograph legs

Alexander Spröwitz, Alexandre Tuleu, Mostafa Ajallooeian et al.

We present Oncilla robot, a novel mobile, quadruped legged locomotion machine. This large-cat sized, 5.1 robot is one of a kind of a recent, bioinspired legged robot class designed with the capability of model-free locomotion control. Animal legged locomotion in rough terrain is clearly shaped by sensor feedback systems. Results with Oncilla robot show that agile and versatile locomotion is possible without sensory signals to some extend, and tracking becomes robust when feedback control is added (Ajaoolleian 2015). By incorporating mechanical and control blueprints inspired from animals, and by observing the resulting robot locomotion characteristics, we aim to understand the contribution of individual components. Legged robots have a wide mechanical and control design parameter space, and a unique potential as research tools to investigate principles of biomechanics and legged locomotion control. But the hardware and controller design can be a steep initial hurdle for academic research. To facilitate the easy start and development of legged robots, Oncilla-robot's blueprints are available through open-source. [...]

SEJan 9, 2022
A systematic literature review on counterexample explanation

Arut Prakash Kaleeswaran, Arne Nordmann, Thomas Vogel et al.

Context: Safety is of paramount importance for cyber-physical systems in domains such as automotive, robotics, and avionics. Formal methods such as model checking are one way to ensure the safety of cyber-physical systems. However, adoption of formal methods in industry is hindered by usability issues, particularly the difficulty of understanding model checking results. Objective: We want to provide an overview of the state of the art for counterexample explanation by investigating the contexts, techniques, and evaluation of research approaches in this field. This overview shall provide an understanding of current and guide future research. Method: To provide this overview, we conducted a systematic literature review. The survey comprises 116 publications that address counterexample explanations for model checking. Results: Most primary studies provide counterexample explanations graphically or as traces, minimize counterexamples to reduce complexity, localize errors in the models expressed in the input formats of model checkers, support linear temporal logic or computation tree logic specifications, and use model checkers of the Symbolic Model Verifier family. Several studies evaluate their approaches in safety-critical domains with industrial applications. Conclusion: We notably see a lack of research on counterexample explanation that targets probabilistic and real-time systems, leverages the explanations to domain-specific models, and evaluates approaches in user studies. We conclude by discussing the adequacy of different types of explanations for users with varying domain and formal methods expertise, showing the need to support laypersons in understanding model checking results to increase adoption of formal methods in industry.

SEAug 13, 2021
A User-Study Protocol for Evaluation of Formal Verification Results and their Explanation

Arut Prakash Kaleeswaran, Arne Nordmann, Thomas Vogel et al.

Context: The complexity of modern safety-critical systems in industries keep on increasing due to the rising number of features and functionalities. This calls for formal methods in order to entrust confidence in such systems. Nevertheless, using formal methods in industry is demanding because of usability issues, e.g., the difficulty of understanding model checking results. Thus the hypothesis is, presenting the result of model checker results in a user-friendly manner could promote formal methods usage in industries. Objective: We aim to evaluate the acceptance of formal methods by engineers if the complexity of understanding verification results is made easy. Method: We perform two different exploratory studies. First, we conduct an online survey to explore challenges in identifying inconsistent specifications and using formal methods from engineers. Second, we perform a one group pretest and posttest experiment to collect impressions from engineers using formal methods if understanding verification results is eased. Limitations: The main limitation of this study is the generalization because the survey focuses on a particular target group and it uses a pre-experimental design.

SEMay 31, 2021
Model-Based Reliability and Safety: Reducing the Complexity of Safety Analyses Using Component Fault Trees

Kai Hoefig, Andreas Joanni, Marc Zeller et al.

The importance of mission or safety critical software systems in many application domains of embedded systems is continuously growing, and so is the effort and complexity for reliability and safety analysis. Model driven development is currently one of the key approaches to cope with increasing development complexity, in general. Applying similar concepts to reliability, availability, maintainability and safety (RAMS) analysis activities is a promising approach to extend the advantages of model driven development to safety engineering activities aiming at a reduction of development costs, a higher product quality and a shorter time-to-market. Nevertheless, many model-based safety or reliability engineering approaches aim at reducing the analysis complexity but applications or case studies are rare. Therefore we present here a large scale industrial case study which shows the benefits of the application of component fault trees when it comes to complex safety mechanisms. We compare the methodology of component fault trees against classic fault trees and summarize benefits and drawbacks of both modeling methodologies.

SEJul 23, 2019
Proof of Compositionality of CFT Correctness

Simon Greiner, Peter Munk, Arne Nordmann

In the paper Compositionality of Component Fault Trees, we present a discussion of the compositionality of correctness of component fault trees. In this technical report, we present the formal proof of the central theorem of the aforementioned publication.

ROFeb 26, 2013
A Domain-Specific Language for Rich Motor Skill Architectures

Arne Nordmann, Sebastian Wrede

Model-driven software development is a promising way to cope with the complexity of system integration in advanced robotics, as it already demonstrated its benefits in domains with comparably challenging system integration requirements. This paper reports on work in progress in this area which aims to improve the research and experimentation process in a collaborative research project developing motor skill architectures for compliant robots. Our goal is to establish a model-driven development process throughout the project around a domain-specific language (DSL) facilitating the compact description of adaptive modular architectures for rich motor skills. Incorporating further languages for other aspects (e.g. mapping to a technical component architecture) the approach allows not only the formal description of motor skill architectures but also automated code-generation for experimentation on technical robot platforms. This paper reports on a first case study exemplifying how the developed AMARSi DSL helps to conceptualize different architectural approaches and to identify their similarities and differences.