Interactive Component Property Verification via Oriented Graphs
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Current methods for verifying properties in interactive software are costly, time-consuming, and inefficient, particularly when dealing with complex interactions and large software systems, as they struggle to cover a wide range of properties and require manual effort from skilled reviewers or end-users.
Innovation Solution
A method for automatically verifying properties of interactive components represented as trees of child components, using oriented graphs to check the presence or absence of specific properties, which allows for the definition and validation of properties at various levels of detail and supports recursive architectures, enabling the verification of interaction-oriented properties.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Reliability
If testing is performed on interactive software with complex interactions, then verification reliability is improved, but testing cost and time increase dramatically
Solution Approach 1:
The patent segments the interactive software into a hierarchical tree structure of components, where each component can be verified independently. This allows the verification process to be divided into smaller, manageable units rather than testing the entire system at once, reducing overall testing time while maintaining reliability through systematic component-level verification.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent performs preliminary verification by checking properties at the component level before full system integration. By verifying individual components and their interactions in advance, the system identifies and corrects issues early in the development process, preventing the need for extensive retesting later and reducing total verification time.
2Reliability
If reviewing is performed to increase desired reliability level, then verification quality is improved, but reviewing cost increases dramatically
Solution Approach 1:
The patent implements automated verification mechanisms that allow the system to verify its own properties without requiring extensive manual review. The automated property checking and model validation perform verification tasks that would otherwise require skilled reviewers, reducing reviewing cost while maintaining high verification quality through systematic automated analysis.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent replaces manual reviewing processes with automated computational verification methods. Instead of relying on human reviewers to manually examine complex software interactions, the system uses automated model checking and property verification algorithms to systematically validate software behavior, reducing both cost and complexity of the reviewing process.
3Reliability
If analysis is performed on full software products, then property verification coverage is improved, but complexity requires specialist intervention
Solution Approach 1:
The patent divides the full software product into a hierarchical tree of manageable components, each with defined properties that can be verified independently. This segmentation allows verification to be performed on individual components and their interactions without requiring specialists to analyze the entire complex system at once, improving ease of operation while maintaining comprehensive property verification coverage.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent enables verification of essential properties at appropriate levels of the hierarchy without requiring complete analysis of all software aspects. By focusing verification efforts on critical properties and components rather than attempting exhaustive analysis of the entire system, the patent achieves sufficient verification coverage for safety-critical properties while keeping the process accessible to non-specialists.
4Adaptability or versatility
If software is organized as non-structured collection of small low-level components, then development flexibility is improved, but verification of high-level properties becomes difficult
Solution Approach 1:
The patent organizes the non-structured collection of low-level components into a hierarchical tree structure that preserves development flexibility while enabling systematic verification. Each component retains its independence and reusability, but the hierarchical organization groups components into meaningful structures that make it feasible to verify high-level properties by composing verification results from lower levels rather than analyzing the entire unstructured system.
Data Source
AI summary
The invention relates to the verification of properties of an interactive component having a recursive tree structure of subcomponents. The verification comprises creating an oriented graph from the tree, said oriented graph comprising arcs for the child relationships of the tree, and arcs for couplings creating upon couplings between the components. The verification comprises creating a second graph representative of the property, and verifying if the second graph is exhibited within the first oriented graph.