No Access

Fuzzy Propositional Configuration Logics

Department of Mathematics, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, 54124, Greece

The research work was supported by the Hellenic Foundation for Research and Innovation (HFRI) under the HFRI PhD Fellowship grant (Fellowship Number: 1200).

Search for more papers by this author

https://doi.org/10.1142/S012905412345003XCited by:0 (Source: Crossref)

This article is part of the issue:

Special Issue: International Colloquium: Recent Advances of Quantitative Models in Computer Science (RAQM 2021)
Guest Editors: Manfred Droste (University of Leipzig, Germany), George Rahonis (University of Thessaloniki, Greece) and Arto Salomaa (University of Turku, Finland)

Abstract

We introduce and investigate a weighted propositional configuration logic over De Morgan algebras. This logic is able to describe software architectures with quantitative features especially the uncertainty of the interactions that occur in the architecture. We deal with the equivalence problem of formulas in our logic by showing that every formula can be written in a specific form. Surprisingly, there are formulas which are equivalent only over specific De Morgan algebras. We provide examples of formulas in our logic which describe well-known software architectures equipped with quantitative features such as the uncertainty and reliability of their interactions.

Communicated by Manfred Droste

Keywords:

References

1. M. Droste, W. Kuich and G. Rahonis , Multi-valued mso logics over words and trees, Fundamenta Informaticae 84(3,4) (2008) 305–327. Web of Science, Google Scholar
2. N. Esfahani, K. Razavi and S. Malek , Dealing with uncertainty in early software architecture, Proceedings of the ACM SIGSOFT 20th International Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering, (2012), pp. 1–4. Crossref, Google Scholar
3. D. Garlan , Software engineering in an uncertain world, Proceedings of the FSE/SDP Workshop on Future of Software Engineering Research, (2010), pp. 125–128. Crossref, Google Scholar
4. M. Gehrke, C. Walker and E. Walker , A mathematical setting for fuzzy logics, International Journal of Uncertainty, Fuzziness and Knowledge-Based Systems 5(03) (1997) 223–238. Link, Google Scholar
5. J. A. Goguen , L-fuzzy sets, Journal of mathematical analysis and applications 18(1) (1967) 145–174. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
6. V. Karyoti and P. Paraponiari , Weighted pcl over product valuation monoids, International Conference on Coordination Languages and Models, Springer (2020), pp. 301–319. Crossref, Google Scholar
7. E. Letier, D. Stefan and E. T. Barr , Uncertainty, risk, and information value in software requirements and architecture, Proceedings of the 36th International Conference on Software Engineering, (2014), pp. 883–894. Crossref, Google Scholar
8. C. Lupafya, A framework for managing uncertainty in software architecture ECSA ’19, (Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 2019), pp. 71–74. Google Scholar
9. A. Mavridou, E. Baranov, S. Bliudze and J. Sifakis , Configuration logics: Modeling architecture styles, Journal of Logical and Algebraic Methods in Programming 86(1) (2017) 2–29. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
10. I. Meedeniya, I. Moser, A. Aleti and L. Grunske , Architecture-based reliability evaluation under uncertainty, Proceedings of the Joint ACM SIGSOFT Conference–QoSA and ACM SIGSOFT symposium–ISARCS on Quality of software architectures–QoSA and architecting critical systems–ISARCS, (2011), pp. 85–94. Crossref, Google Scholar
11. J. Mordeson and D. Malik , Fuzzy automata and languages: theory and applications (CRC Press, 2002). Crossref, Google Scholar
12. P. Paraponiari and G. Rahonis , On weighted configuration logics, International Conference on Formal Aspects of Component Software, (2017), pp. 98–116. Crossref, Google Scholar
13. P. Paraponiari and G. Rahonis , Weighted propositional configuration logics: a specification language for architectures with quantitative features, Information and Computation 282 (2020), p. 104647. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
14. G. Rahonis , Fuzzy languages, Handbook of Weighted Automata, eds. M. Droste, W. Kuich and H. Vogler (Springer, 2009), pp. 481–517. Crossref, Google Scholar
15. R. Schollmeier , A definition of peer-to-peer networking for the classification of peer-to-peer architectures and applications, Proceedings First International Conference on Peer-to-Peer Computing, IEEE (2001), pp. 101–102. Google Scholar
16. S. Tayyaba, M. W. Ashraf, T. Alquthami, Z. Ahmad and S. Manzoor , Fuzzy-based approach using iot devices for smart home to assist blind people for navigation, Sensors 20(13) (2020), p. 3674. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
17. J. Whittle, P. Sawyer, N. Bencomo, B. H. C. Cheng and J. Bruel , Relax: Incorpo- rating uncertainty into the specification of self-adaptive systems, 2009 17th IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference, IEEE (2009), pp. 79–88. Crossref, Google Scholar