Proceedings of the 7th Workshop on Models for Formal Analysis of Real Systems

France); Gregor G\"ossler (INRIA; Grenoble; Italy); Maurice H. ter Beek (CNR-ISTI; Pisa; Univ. Grenoble Alpes

arxiv: 2604.03053 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-03 · 💻 cs.LO · cs.SE

Proceedings of the 7th Workshop on Models for Formal Analysis of Real Systems

Maurice H. ter Beek (CNR-ISTI , Pisa , Italy) , Gregor G\"ossler (INRIA , Univ. Grenoble Alpes , Grenoble , France) This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-13 18:21 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.LO cs.SE

keywords formal modelingreal systemscase studiesMARS workshopcyber-physical systemsformal analysismodeling techniquesverification

0 comments

The pith

Formal modeling workshops must focus on large real-system case studies because papers routinely omit critical modeling details due to space constraints.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

This workshop proceedings document the motivation for MARS, a venue dedicated to sharing formal models of real systems in domains such as networks, cyber-physical systems, hardware/software codesign, and biology. The authors note that while large case studies are essential to demonstrate the applicability of specification formalisms, most research papers rely on toy examples or tiny cases. Accurate modeling of real systems often requires months or years of effort, yet papers skip salient details to accommodate verification results. By prioritizing modeling over verification, MARS aims to preserve these modeling lessons, which can serve as a foundation for future analyses and comparisons across different approaches.

Core claim

MARS collects papers presenting formal models of real systems to retain the lessons learned during the modeling process, which are not usually discussed in other venues because papers must skip details due to lack of space, thereby laying the basis for future analysis and comparison of modeling techniques.

What carries the argument

The retention of lessons learned from formal modelling of real systems through a dedicated workshop format that emphasizes modeling insights over verification methodologies.

If this is right

Modeling details from real systems become available for reference and reuse by other researchers.
Comparison of different modeling techniques becomes possible based on shared large case studies.
Future formal verification work can build directly on preserved modeling foundations rather than reconstructing them.
Interdisciplinary exchange increases among researchers working on complex systems in biology, networks, and embedded systems.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

Such workshops could eventually lead to public repositories of detailed real-system models for benchmarking formal tools.
Researchers might develop standardized modeling templates derived from the accumulated MARS cases.
This approach could reduce redundant modeling effort across the formal methods community.

Load-bearing premise

That retaining lessons learned from formal modelling of real systems will lay the basis for future analysis and comparison even when papers must skip salient details.

What would settle it

A follow-up study finding that the number of papers using detailed real-system models has not increased or that MARS models are rarely referenced in subsequent work.

read the original abstract

These proceedings contain the papers that were presented at the 7th Workshop on Models for Formal Analysis of Real Systems (MARS 2026), which took place on 12 April 2026 in Turin, Italy, as a satellite event of the 29th International Joint Conferences on Theory and Practice of Software (ETAPS 2026). The goal of MARS is to bring together researchers from different communities who are developing formal models of real systems in areas where complex models occur (e.g., networks, cyber-physical systems, hardware/software codesign, biology). The motivation for MARS stems from the following two observations: - Large case studies are essential to show that specification formalisms and modelling techniques are applicable to real systems, whereas many papers only consider toy examples or tiny case studies. - Developing an accurate model of a real system takes a large amount of time, often months or years. In most papers, however, salient details of the model need to be skipped due to lack of space, and to leave room for formal verification methodologies and results. MARS aims at remedying these issues, emphasising modelling over verification, so as to retain lessons learned from formal modelling, which are not usually discussed elsewhere, and which may lay the basis for future analysis and comparison.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

This is just the abstract for a workshop proceedings volume with no new results, data, or technical claims of its own.

read the letter

This is the abstract for the proceedings of the 7th Workshop on Models for Formal Analysis of Real Systems. There are no new technical contributions or results in it. The main thing it does is lay out two observations about formal modeling work. First, that big case studies are needed to show techniques scale to real systems instead of just small examples. Second, that building those models takes a lot of time, but papers often have to cut the details to focus on verification. The workshop tries to fix that by emphasizing the modeling part and keeping the lessons around for later use. That motivation is straightforward and matches what a lot of people in the field complain about. It gives credit to the idea that retaining how models were built can help future comparisons. The soft spot is that this document itself provides no evidence or examples. It just states the problem without showing any models or results from the workshop papers. With only the abstract available, it's impossible to check if the papers actually deliver detailed models or just repeat the same issues. This kind of thing is aimed at researchers who work on formal methods for complex systems like networks or hardware-software combinations. Someone already familiar with the area might skim it for the workshop context, but it won't give them new tools or insights to use in their own work. It doesn't rise to the level of needing peer review as a research paper. The claims are observational rather than something that needs rigorous checking. If the individual papers in the proceedings are strong, they could stand alone, but this overview doesn't add enough to justify referee time. I would not bring it to a reading group or cite it. It's more of an announcement than a contribution.

Referee Report

0 major / 1 minor

Summary. This manuscript is the abstract for the proceedings of the 7th Workshop on Models for Formal Analysis of Real Systems (MARS 2026), held 12 April 2026 in Turin as a satellite of ETAPS 2026. It states the workshop goal of uniting researchers who build formal models of real systems (networks, cyber-physical systems, hardware/software codesign, biology) and motivates the event by two observations: large case studies are needed to demonstrate applicability of specification formalisms beyond toy examples, and detailed modeling lessons are typically omitted from papers due to space limits, so MARS prioritizes modeling discussion to retain those lessons for future comparison.

Significance. If the workshop delivers on its stated aims, the proceedings could provide a useful archival record of modeling practices for complex systems that are otherwise scattered or truncated in the literature, thereby supporting incremental progress in formal methods for realistic applications.

minor comments (1)

The abstract refers to 'the papers that were presented' yet supplies no list, titles, or authors; if this is intended as a standalone document rather than a preface, an explicit statement of scope would improve clarity.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

0 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their supportive review and for recommending acceptance of the manuscript. We appreciate the recognition that the MARS proceedings can serve as a useful archival record of detailed modeling practices for complex systems.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity in workshop proceedings abstract

full rationale

The document is a workshop proceedings abstract containing no derivations, equations, quantitative claims, predictions, or load-bearing arguments. The two observations (need for large case studies; time cost of accurate modeling) are stated as premises motivating the workshop, not derived results. No self-citations, ansatzes, or reductions to fitted inputs exist.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

No free parameters, axioms, or invented entities because the document contains no mathematical derivations or technical claims.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5532 in / 809 out tokens · 26125 ms · 2026-05-13T18:21:58.532803+00:00 · methodology

Proceedings of the 7th Workshop on Models for Formal Analysis of Real Systems

Core claim

What carries the argument

If this is right

Where Pith is reading between the lines

Load-bearing premise

What would settle it

discussion (0)