A case for specification validation

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference contribution

3 Scopus citations


As we are moving from a traditional software development process to a new development paradigm where the process it largely driven by tools and automation, new challenges for verification and validation (V&V) emerge. Productivity improvements will in this new paradigm be achieved through reduced emphasis on testing of implementations, increased reliance on automated analysis tools applied in the specification domain, verifiability correct generation of source-code, and verifiably correct compilation. The V&V effort will now be largely focused on assuring that the formal specifications are correct and that the tools are trustworthy so we can rely on the results of the analysis and code generation without extensive additional testing of the resulting implementation. Most effort has traditionally been devoted to the verification problem. In this position paper we point out the importance of validation and argue that if we fail to adequately address the validation problem problem the impact of verifying code generation and compilation will be limited.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Title of host publicationVerified Software
Subtitle of host publicationTheories, Tools, Experiments - First IFIP TC 2/WG 2.3 Conference, VSTTE 2005, Revised Selected Papers and Discussions
Number of pages11
StatePublished - Dec 1 2008
Event1st IFIP TC 2/WG 2.3 Conference on Verified Software: Theories, Tools, Experiments, VSTTE 2005 - Zurich, Switzerland
Duration: Oct 10 2005Oct 13 2005

Publication series

NameLecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics)
Volume4171 LNCS
ISSN (Print)0302-9743
ISSN (Electronic)1611-3349


Other1st IFIP TC 2/WG 2.3 Conference on Verified Software: Theories, Tools, Experiments, VSTTE 2005


Dive into the research topics of 'A case for specification validation'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this