Trial 6: Formal Verification Sample Clauses

Trial 6: Formal Verification. As a system architecture description language, EAST-ADL plays an important role for consolidating various kinds of behaviour concerns in the engineering of automotive EE systems. In MAENAD, an investigation of the EAST-ADL support for formal verification of behaviour centric system properties, based on the regenerative braking system case, will be carried out. The aim is to validate the EAST-ADL support for formalizing various temporal concerns, such as during requirements engineering, function and execution design, safety engineering, etc. By aligning the EAST-ADL semantics with existing mature formalisms, one can then allow formal verification of such concerns through the corresponding external analysis engines. One advantage is that the EAST-ADL users will then obtain analysis leverage by model-checking. Compared to those standalone analytical models in external tools, EAST-ADL models complement with detailed architecture information and facilitate the integration of many related architectural aspects for the purpose of architecture design, safety engineering, reuse and change management. Key points for the analysis The most important objective of this case study is to validate the EAST-ADL support for temporal constraints as well as the claimed advantages to be brought in by EAST-ADL. This will be achieved through two existing mature formalisms: UPPAAL and SPIN. Both UPPAAL and SPIN allow exhaustive reasoning of the compositional consequence of behaviours. They are considered as two representative technologies in the area of formal verification. UPPAAL is a timed model checker for formal verification of real-time embedded systems (xxxx://xxx.xxxxxx.xxx/). Based on timed-automata theory, UPPAAL provides support for modelling and simulating system behaviours in the form of compositional automata. The tool has been used in several industrial cases and is recently commercialized. SPIN is a model checker for formal verification of distributed and concurrent systems (xxxx://xxxxxxxx.xxx). Compare to UPPAAL, the SPIN approach emphasizes the logical aspects of temporal behaviours. It deliberatively avoids the quantitative notion of time, but focuses on the interaction and synchronization of asynchronous processes. This simplification allows SPIN to verify the functional or logical properties of more complex system than timed model checkers usually do. The intended language validation through UPPAAL and SPIN will be performed in the context of FEV development. ...
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs

Related to Trial 6: Formal Verification

  • Medical Verification The Town may require medical verification of an employee’s absence if the Town perceives the employee is abusing sick leave or has used an excessive amount of sick leave. The Town may require medical verification of an employee’s absence to verify that the employee is able to return to work with or without restrictions.

  • E-Verification If applicable, Contractor represents and warrants that it will ensure its compliance with the Mississippi Employment Protection Act of 2008, and will register and participate in the status verification system for all newly hired employees. Mississippi Code Annotated §§ 71-11-1 et seq. The term “employee” as used herein means any person that is hired to perform work within the State of Mississippi. As used herein, “status verification system” means the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigration Responsibility Act of 1996 that is operated by the United States Department of Homeland Security, also known as the E-Verify Program, or any other successor electronic verification system replacing the E-Verify Program. Contractor agrees to maintain records of such compliance. Upon request of the State and after approval of the Social Security Administration or Department of Homeland Security when required, Contractor agrees to provide a copy of each such verification. Contractor further represents and warrants that any person assigned to perform services hereafter meets the employment eligibility requirements of all immigration laws. The breach of this agreement may subject Contractor to the following:

  • Seniority Verification Process i. The new school district shall provide the employee with the necessary verification form at the time the employee achieves continuing contract status.

  • Third Party Verification 4.8.1 The SPD shall be further required to provide entry to the site of the Power Project free of all encumbrances at all times during the Term of the Agreement to SECI and a third Party nominated by any Indian Governmental Instrumentality for inspection and verification of the works being carried out by the SPD at the site of the Power Project.

  • Employee Verification In accordance with Neb. Rev.

  • Account Verification Whether or not a Default or Event of Default exists, Agent shall have the right at any time, in the name of Agent, any designee of Agent or any Borrower, to verify the validity, amount or any other matter relating to any Accounts of Borrowers by mail, telephone or otherwise. Borrowers shall cooperate fully with Agent in an effort to facilitate and promptly conclude any such verification process.

  • Search, Enquiry, Investigation, Examination And Verification a. The Property is sold on an “as is where is basis” subject to all the necessary inspection, search (including but not limited to the status of title), enquiry (including but not limited to the terms of consent to transfer and/or assignment and outstanding charges), investigation, examination and verification of which the Purchaser is already advised to conduct prior to the auction and which the Purchaser warrants to the Assignee has been conducted by the Purchaser’s independent legal advisors at the time of execution of the Memorandum.

  • Sick Leave Verification Process a. The new school district shall provide the employee with the necessary verification form at the time the employee receives confirmation of employment in the school district.

  • Texas Education Code Chapter 22 Contractor Certification for Contractor Employees Introduction Texas Education Code Chapter 22 requires entities that contract with school districts to provide service s to obtain criminal history record information regarding covered employees. Contractors must certify to the district t hat they have complied. Covered employees with disqualifying criminal histories are prohibited from serving at a sch ool district. Definitions: Covered employees: Employees of a contractor or subcontractor who have or will have continuing dutie s related to the service to be performed at the District and have or will have direct contact with students. The District will be the final arbiter of what constitutes direct contact with students. Disqualifying criminal history: Any conviction or other criminal history information designated by the District, or one of the following offenses, if at the time of the o ffense, the victim was under 18 or enrolled in a public school: (a) a felony offense under Title 5, Texas Penal Code; (b) an offense for which a defendant is required to register as a sex offender under Chapter 62, Texas Code of Criminal Procedure; or (c) an equivalent offense under federal law or the laws of another state. I certify that: NONE (Section A) of the employees of Contractor and any subcontractors are covered employees, as defined abo ve. If this box is checked, I further certify that Contractor has taken precautions or imposed conditions to ensure tha t the employees of Contractor and any subcontractor will not become covered employees. Contractor will maintain t hese precautions or conditions throughout the time the contracted services are provided. OR SOME (Section B) or all of the employees of Contractor and any subcontractor are covered employees. If this box is checked, I further certify that: (1) Contractor has obtained all required criminal history record information regarding its covered employees. None of the covered employees has a disqualifying criminal history. (2) If Contractor receives information that a covered employee subsequently has a reported criminal history, Contra ctor will immediately remove the covered employee from contract duties and notify the District in writing within 3 busi ness days. (3) Upon request, Contractor will provide the District with the name and any other requested information of covered employees so that the District may obtain criminal history record information on the covered employees. (4) If the District objects to the assignment of a covered employee on the basis of the covered employee's criminal h istory record information, Contractor agrees to discontinue using that covered employee to provide services at the District. Noncompliance or misrepresentation regarding this certification may be grounds for contract termination. None Texas Business and Commerce Code § 272 Requirements as of 9-1-2017 SB 807 prohibits construction contracts to have provisions requiring the contract to be subject to the laws of anothe r state, to be required to litigate the contract in another state, or to require arbitration in another state. A contract wit h such provisions is voidable. Under this new statute, a “construction contract” includes contracts, subcontracts, or agreements with (among others) architects, engineers, contractors, construction managers, equipment lessors, or materials suppliers. “Construction contracts” are for the design, construction, alteration, renovation, remodeling, or repair of any building or improvement to real property, or for furnishing materials or equipment for the project. The t erm also includes moving, demolition, or excavation. BY RESPONDING TO THIS SOLICITATION, AND WHEN APPLI CABLE, THE PROPOSER AGREES TO COMPLY WITH THE TEXAS BUSINESS AND COMMERCE CODE § 272 WH EN EXECUTING CONTRACTS WITH TIPS MEMBERS THAT ARE TEXAS GOVERNMENT ENTITIES. 7 5 Texas Government Code 2270 Verification Form Texas Government Code 2270 Verification Form Texas 2017 House Xxxx 89 has been signed into law by the governor and as of September 1, 2017 will be codified as Texas Government Code § 2270 and 808 et seq. The relevant section addressed by this form reads as follows: Texas Government Code Sec. 2270.002. PROVISION REQUIRED IN CONTRACT. A governmental entity may not ent er into a contract with a company for goods or services unless the contract contains a written verification from the c ompany that it: (1) does not boycott Israel; and (2) will not boycott Israel during the term of the contract.engaged by ESC Region 8/The Interlocal Purchasing System (TIPS) 0000 Xxxxxxx 000 Xxxxx Xxxxxxxxx,XX,00000 verify by this writing that the above-named company affirms that it (1) does not boycott Israel; and (2) will not boycot t Israel during the term of this contract, or any contract with the above-named Texas governmental entity in the futur e. I further affirm that if our company’s position on this issue is reversed and this affirmation is no longer valid, that t he above-named Texas governmental entity will be notified in writing within one (1) business day and we understand that our company’s failure to affirm and comply with the requirements of Texas Government Code 2270 et seq. shall be grounds for immediate contract termination without penalty to the above-named Texas governmental entity. AND our company is not listed on and we do not do business with companies that are on the the Texas Comptroller of Pu blic Accounts list of Designated Foreign Terrorists Organizations per Texas Gov't Code 2270.0153 found at xxxxx://x xxxxxxxxxx.xxxxx.xxx/xxxxxxxxxx/xxxx/xxxxxxx-xxxxxxxxx.xxx I swear and affirm that the above is true and correct. YES

  • Anti-Boycott Verification To the extent this Agreement constitutes a contract for goods or services within the meaning of Section 2270.002 of the Texas Government Code, as amended, solely for purposes of compliance with Chapter 2270 of the Texas Government Code, and subject to applicable Federal law, the Developer represents that neither the Developer nor any wholly owned subsidiary, majority-owned subsidiary, parent company or affiliate of Developer (i) boycotts Israel or (ii) will boycott Israel through the term of this Agreement. The terms “boycotts Israel” and “boycott Israel” as used in this paragraph have the meanings assigned to the term “boycott Israel” in Section 808.001 of the Texas Government Code, as amended.

Draft better contracts in just 5 minutes Get the weekly Law Insider newsletter packed with expert videos, webinars, ebooks, and more!