@inproceedings{3316,
abstract = {In addition to being correct, a system should be robust, that is, it should behave reasonably even after receiving unexpected inputs. In this paper, we summarize two formal notions of robustness that we have introduced previously for reactive systems. One of the notions is based on assigning costs for failures on a user-provided notion of incorrect transitions in a specification. Here, we define a system to be robust if a finite number of incorrect inputs does not lead to an infinite number of incorrect outputs. We also give a more refined notion of robustness that aims to minimize the ratio of output failures to input failures. The second notion is aimed at liveness. In contrast to the previous notion, it has no concept of recovery from an error. Instead, it compares the ratio of the number of liveness constraints that the system violates to the number of liveness constraints that the environment violates.},
author = {Bloem, Roderick and Chatterjee, Krishnendu and Greimel, Karin and Henzinger, Thomas A and Jobstmann, Barbara},
location = {Vasteras, Sweden},
pages = {176 -- 185},
publisher = {IEEE},
title = {{Specification-centered robustness}},
doi = {10.1109/SIES.2011.5953660},
year = {2011},
}