Abstract
The aim of this paper is to discuss what formal support can be given to the process of living with inconsistencies in Z, rather than eradicating them. Logicians have developed a range of logics to continue to reason in the presence of inconsistencies. We present one representative of such paraconsistent logics, namely Hunter’s quasi-classical logic, and apply it to the analysis of inconsistent Zsc hemas. In the presence of inconsistency quasi-classical logic allows us to derive less, but more “useful”, information. Consequently, inconsistent Z specifications can be analysed in more depth than at present. Part of the analysis of a Zoperation is the calculation of the precondition. However, in the presence of an inconsistency, information about the intended application of the operation may be lost. It is our aim to regain this information. We introduce a new classification of precondition areas, based on the notions of definedness, overdefinedness and undefinedness. We then discuss two options to determine these areas both of which are based on restrictions of classical reasoning.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Abrial, J.-R. (1996). The B-Book: Assigning Programs to Meanings. Cambridge University Press.
Arthan, R. D. (1991). Formal Specification of a Proof Tool. In Prehn, S. and Toetenel, H., editors, Proceedings of Formal Software Development Methods (VDM’ 91), Lecture Notes in Computer Science 552, pages 356–370, Berlin, Germany. Springer.
Balzer, R. (1991). Tolerating Inconsistency. In Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Software Engineering, pages 158–165. IEEE Computer Society Press / ACM Press.
Batens, D. (1999). Inconsistency-Adaptive Logics. In Orlowska, E., editor, Logic at Work. Essays Dedicated to the Memory of Helena Rasiowa, Studies in fuzziness and soft computing, Volume 24, pages 445–472, Heidelberg, New York. Physica-Verlag.
Batens, D. (2000). A Survey of Inconsistency-Adaptive Logics. In (Batens et al., 2000), pages 49–73.
Batens, D., Mortensen, C., Priest, G., and Bendegem, J.-P. V., editors (2000). Frontiers of Paraconsistent Logic. Research Studies Press Ltd., Baldock, Hertfordshire, England.
Beckert, B. (1997). Semantic Tableaux with Equality. Journal of Logic and Computation, 7(1):39–58.
Besnard, P. and Hunter, A. (1995). Quasi-Classical Logic: Non-Trivializable Classical Reasoning from Inconsistent Information. In Froidevaux, C. and Kohlas, J., editors, Proceedings of the ECSQARU European Conference on Symbolic and Quantitive Approaches to Reasoning and Uncertainty, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence 946, pages 44–51, Berlin. Springer Verlag.
Boiten, E. A., Derrick, J., Bowman, H., and Steen, M. W. A. (1999). Constructive consistency checking for partial specification in Z. Science of Computer Programming, 35(1):29–75.
da Costa, N. C. (2000). Paraconsistent Mathematics. In (Batens et al., 2000), pages 165–179.
Finkelstein, A., Gabbay, D., Hunter, A., Kramer, J., and Nuseibeh, B. (1994). Inconsistency Handling in Multi-Perspective Specifications. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 20(8):569–578.
Fitting, M. C. (1996). First-Order Logic and Automated Theorem Proving. Graduate Texts in Computer Science. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2nd edition.
Ghezzi, C. and Nuseibeh, B. (1998). Guest Editorial: Introduction to the Special Section: Managing Inconsistency in Software Development. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 24(11):906–907.
Hunter, A. (1998). Paraconsistent Logic. In Besnard, P. and Hunter, A., editors, Reasoning with Actual and Potential Contradictions, Volume II of Handbook of Defeasible Reasoning and Uncertain Information (Gabbay, D. and Smets, Ph., editors), pages 13–44. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dortrecht, The Netherlands.
Hunter, A. (2000). Reasoning with Contradictory Information Using Quasi-Classical Logic. Journal of Logic and Computation, 10(5):677–703.
Hunter, A. (2001). A Semantic Tabeau Version of First-Order Quasi-Classical Logic. In Benferhat, S. and Besnard, P., editors, Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning with Uncertainty, Proceedings of the 6th European Conference, ECSQARU 2001, Toulouse, France, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence 2143, pages 544–555. Springer Verlag.
Hunter, A. and Nuseibeh, B. (1997). Analysing Inconsistent Specifications. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Symposium on Requirements Engineering (RE’97), pages 78–86. Annapolis, USA, IEEE Computer Society Press.
Hunter, A. and Nuseibeh, B. (1998). Managing Inconsistent Specifications: Reasoning, Analysis, and Action. ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology, 7(4):335–367.
Miarka, R., Boiten, E., and Derrick, J. (2000). Guards, Preconditions, and Refinement in Z. In Bowen, J. P., Dunne, S., Galloway, A., and King, S., editors, ZB2000: Formal Specification and Development in Z and B / First International Conference of B and Z Users, Lecture Notes in Computer Science 1878, pages 286–303, Berlin Heidelberg New York. Springer-Verlag Berlin.
Mortensen, C. (1995). Inconsistent Mathematics. Kluwer Academic Publishers Group, Dordrecht, The Netherlands.
Rescher, N. and Manor, R. (1970). On Inference from Inconsistent Premisses. Theory and Decision, 1:179–217.
Saaltink, M. (1997). The Z/EVES User’s Guide. Technical Report TR-97-5493-06, ORA Canada, 267 Richmond Road, Suite 100, Ottawa, Canada.
Schwanke, R. W. and Kaiser, G. E. (1988). Living with Inconsistency in Large Systems. In Proceedings of the International Workshop on Software Version and Configuration Control, pages 98–118, Grassau, Germany.
Smullyan, R. M. (1968). First-Order Logic, Volume 43 of Ergebnisse der Mathematik und ihrer Grenzgebiete. Springer-Verlag, New York.
Valentine, S. H. (1998). Inconsistency and Undefinedness in Z-A Practical Guide. In Bowen, J. P., Fett, A., and Hinchey, M. G., editors, ZUM’98: The Formal Specification Notation, Lecture Notes in Computer Science 1493, pages 233–249, Berlin Heidelberg New York. Springer Verlag.
Woodcock, J. and Davies, J. (1996). Using Z-Specification, Refinement, and Proof. Prentice Hall International Series in Computer Science. Prentice Hall Europe. Online: http://softeng.comlab.ox.ac.uk/usingz/ (last access 18/10/2001).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2002 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Miarka, R., Derrick, J., Boiten, E. (2002). Handling Inconsistencies in Z Using Quasi-Classical Logic. In: Bert, D., Bowen, J.P., Henson, M.C., Robinson, K. (eds) ZB 2002:Formal Specification and Development in Z and B. ZB 2002. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 2272. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45648-1_11
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45648-1_11
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-43166-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-45648-3
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive