Download Full Version ebook - Visit ebookmeta.

com

Advanced Computing and Systems for Security Volume

14 Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems 242 1st
Edition Rituparna Chaki (Editor)

https://ebookmeta.com/product/advanced-computing-and-
systems-for-security-volume-14-lecture-notes-in-networks-
and-systems-242-1st-edition-rituparna-chaki-editor/

OR CLICK HERE

DOWLOAD NOW

Discover More Ebook - Explore Now at ebookmeta.com

 Instant digital products (PDF, ePub, MOBI) ready for you
Download now and discover formats that fit your needs...

Start reading on any device today!

Advanced Computing and Systems for Security Volume 13 1st

Edition Rituparna Chaki

https://ebookmeta.com/product/advanced-computing-and-systems-for-
security-volume-13-1st-edition-rituparna-chaki/

ebookmeta.com

Intelligent Computing Proceedings of the 2021 Computing

Conference Volume 2 Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems
284 Kohei Arai (Editor)
https://ebookmeta.com/product/intelligent-computing-proceedings-of-
the-2021-computing-conference-volume-2-lecture-notes-in-networks-and-
systems-284-kohei-arai-editor/
ebookmeta.com

Intelligent Computing Proceedings of the 2021 Computing

Conference Volume 3 Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems
285 Kohei Arai (Editor)
https://ebookmeta.com/product/intelligent-computing-proceedings-of-
the-2021-computing-conference-volume-3-lecture-notes-in-networks-and-
systems-285-kohei-arai-editor/
ebookmeta.com

Not Forgetting Contemporary Art and the Interrogation of

Mastery 1st Edition Rosalyn Deutsche

https://ebookmeta.com/product/not-forgetting-contemporary-art-and-the-
interrogation-of-mastery-1st-edition-rosalyn-deutsche/

ebookmeta.com
Secrets of the Moon Understanding and Analysing the Lunar
Surface 1st Edition Fielder Gilbert

https://ebookmeta.com/product/secrets-of-the-moon-understanding-and-
analysing-the-lunar-surface-1st-edition-fielder-gilbert/

ebookmeta.com

Zefs Guide to Deep Learning 1st Edition Roy Keyes

https://ebookmeta.com/product/zefs-guide-to-deep-learning-1st-edition-
roy-keyes/

ebookmeta.com

Management of Snoring and Obstructive Sleep Apnea A

Practical Guide 1st Edition D. S. Deenadayal & Vyshanavi
Bommakanti
https://ebookmeta.com/product/management-of-snoring-and-obstructive-
sleep-apnea-a-practical-guide-1st-edition-d-s-deenadayal-vyshanavi-
bommakanti/
ebookmeta.com

Business Accounting and Finance 5th Edition Catherine

Gowthorpe

https://ebookmeta.com/product/business-accounting-and-finance-5th-
edition-catherine-gowthorpe/

ebookmeta.com

Viscount Maua and the Empire of Brazil A Biography of

Irineu Evangelista De Sousa 1813 1889 Anyda Marchant

https://ebookmeta.com/product/viscount-maua-and-the-empire-of-brazil-
a-biography-of-irineu-evangelista-de-sousa-1813-1889-anyda-marchant/

ebookmeta.com
Bear s Nature Shifters of Bearclaw Team 3 1st Edition
Catrina Maddox

https://ebookmeta.com/product/bear-s-nature-shifters-of-bearclaw-
team-3-1st-edition-catrina-maddox/

ebookmeta.com
Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems 242

Rituparna Chaki
Nabendu Chaki
Agostino Cortesi
Khalid Saeed Editors

Advanced
Computing
and Systems
for Security:
Volume 14
Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems

Volume 242

Series Editor
Janusz Kacprzyk, Systems Research Institute, Polish Academy of Sciences,
Warsaw, Poland

Advisory Editors
Fernando Gomide, Department of Computer Engineering and Automation—DCA,
School of Electrical and Computer Engineering—FEEC, University of Campinas—
UNICAMP, São Paulo, Brazil
Okyay Kaynak, Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering,
Bogazici University, Istanbul, Turkey
Derong Liu, Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University
of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, USA; Institute of Automation, Chinese Academy
of Sciences, Beijing, China
Witold Pedrycz, Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of
Alberta, Alberta, Canada; Systems Research Institute, Polish Academy of
Sciences, Warsaw, Poland
Marios M. Polycarpou, Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering,
KIOS Research Center for Intelligent Systems and Networks, University of Cyprus,
Nicosia, Cyprus
Imre J. Rudas, Óbuda University, Budapest, Hungary
Jun Wang, Department of Computer Science, City University of Hong Kong,
Kowloon, Hong Kong
The series “Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems” publishes the latest
developments in Networks and Systems—quickly, informally and with high quality.
Original research reported in proceedings and post-proceedings represents the core
of LNNS.
Volumes published in LNNS embrace all aspects and subfields of, as well as new
challenges in, Networks and Systems.
The series contains proceedings and edited volumes in systems and networks,
spanning the areas of Cyber-Physical Systems, Autonomous Systems, Sensor
Networks, Control Systems, Energy Systems, Automotive Systems, Biological
Systems, Vehicular Networking and Connected Vehicles, Aerospace Systems,
Automation, Manufacturing, Smart Grids, Nonlinear Systems, Power Systems,
Robotics, Social Systems, Economic Systems and other. Of particular value to both
the contributors and the readership are the short publication timeframe and the
world-wide distribution and exposure which enable both a wide and rapid
dissemination of research output.
The series covers the theory, applications, and perspectives on the state of the art
and future developments relevant to systems and networks, decision making, control,
complex processes and related areas, as embedded in the fields of interdisciplinary
and applied sciences, engineering, computer science, physics, economics, social, and
life sciences, as well as the paradigms and methodologies behind them.
Indexed by SCOPUS, INSPEC, WTI Frankfurt eG, zbMATH, SCImago.
All books published in the series are submitted for consideration in Web of Science.

More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/15179

Rituparna Chaki · Nabendu Chaki ·
Agostino Cortesi · Khalid Saeed
Editors

Advanced Computing
and Systems for Security:
Volume 14
Editors
Rituparna Chaki Nabendu Chaki
University of Calcutta Department of Computer Science
Kolkata, India and Engineering
University of Calcutta
Agostino Cortesi Kolkata, West Bengal, India
Ca Foscari University
Venice, Italy Khalid Saeed
Bialystok University of Technology
Bialystok, Poland

ISSN 2367-3370 ISSN 2367-3389 (electronic)

Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems
ISBN 978-981-16-4293-7 ISBN 978-981-16-4294-4 (eBook)
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-4294-4

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature
Singapore Pte Ltd. 2021
This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether
the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse
of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and
transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar
or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication
does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant
protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book
are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or
the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any
errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional
claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
The registered company address is: 152 Beach Road, #21-01/04 Gateway East, Singapore 189721,
Singapore
Preface

This book collects the deeply revised version of papers accepted for oral presentation
at the Eighth International Doctoral Symposium on Applied Computation and Secu-
rity Systems (ACSS 2021). ACSS 2021 took place in Kolkata, India, on April 9–
10, 2021. The Doctoral Symposium was organized by the University of Calcutta in
collaboration with Ca Foscari University of Venice, Italy, and Bialystok University
of Technology, Poland.
This unique symposium is aimed specially to facilitate budding researchers in
pursuing their doctoral degree. Each contributed paper was required to have at least
one enrolled Ph.D. student as one of the authors. This has given an opportunity
to each Ph.D. student to express their innovative ideas and to discuss them with a
qualified scientific community of peers.
Over the years, the overall quality of the papers submitted to ACSS has been
improving dramatically, and their subjects reflect and somehow anticipate the
emerging research trends in the area of applied computation and security. In the
call for papers, the following topics of interest related to Applied Computation have
been listed: Security Systems, Software Engineering, Internet of Things, Artificial
Intelligence, Data Science, Computer Vision, and Algorithms.
The editors are greatly indebted to the members of the international program
committee for sharing their expertise and completing their careful review of the
papers in due time. Their reviews have allowed the authors not only to improve their
articles but also to get new hints toward the completion of their Ph.D. thesis.
The dissemination initiatives from Springer have drawn a large number of high-
quality submissions from scholars primarily but not exclusively from India. ACSS
used a double-blind review process and each paper received at least three reviews
either from the PC members or by external reviewers. The reviewers mainly consid-
ered the technical quality and the originality of each paper. As ACSS is a doctoral
symposium, special emphasis was given to assess the clarity of presentation. The
entire process of paper submission, review, and acceptance process was done online.
After carefully considering the reviews, the Program Committee selected only 27
papers for publication out of 45 submissions.

v
vi Preface

We thank the members of Program Committee and Organizing Committee, whose

sincere efforts before and during the symposium have resulted in strong technical
program and in effective discussions. We thank Springer Nature for sponsoring the
best paper award. In particular, we appreciate the initiative from Mr. Aninda Bose and
his colleagues in Springer Nature for their strong support toward publishing this post-
symposium book in the series “Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing”.
We would also like to thank ACM for the continuous support toward the success
of the symposium. Last but not least, we thank all the authors without whom the
symposium would not have reached up to this standard.
On behalf of the editorial team of ACSS 2021, we sincerely hope this volume will
be beneficial to all its readers and motivate them toward better research works.

Kolkata, India Rituparna Chaki

Kolkata, India Nabendu Chaki
Venezia, Italy Agostino Cortesi
Bialystok, Poland Khalid Saeed
Contents

Security
Parallel Simulation of Cyber-Physical-Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Kamal Das, Amit Gurung, and Rajarshi Ray
Attack Detection Scheme Using Deep Learning Approach for IoT . . . . . . 17
Vikash Kumar, Sidra Kalam, Ayan Kumar Das, and Ditipriya Sinha
An Efficient Authentication Scheme for Mobile Online Social
Networks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
Munmun Bhattacharya, Sandip Roy, and Samiran Chattopadhyay
GAN-Based Data Generation Approach for IDS: Evaluation
on Decision Tree . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
Sudhir Kumar Pandey, Vikash Kumar, Ditipriya Sinha, and Ayan Kumar Das

Software Engineering
Conceptualizing Re-configurable Business Process:
A Context-Driven Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
Priyanka Chakraborty and Anirban Sarkar
Dcube N N : Tool for Dynamic Design Discovery from Multi-threaded
Applications Using Neural Sequence Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
Srijoni Majumdar, Nachiketa Chatterjee, Partha Pratim Das,
and Amlan Chakrabarti
Construction of Materialized Views in Non-Binary Data Space . . . . . . . . 93
Santanu Roy, Bibekananda Shit, Soumya Sen, and Agostino Cortesi
Dynamic Prioritization of Software Requirements for Incremental
Software Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111
Mandira Roy, Novarun Deb, Agostino Cortesi, Rituparna Chaki,
and Nabendu Chaki

vii
viii Contents

Systems Biology
A Framework for Translation and Validation of Digital
Microfluidic Protocols . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135
Pushpita Roy, Ansuman Banerjee, and Bhargab B. Bhattacharya
Disease-Relevant Gene Selection Using Mean Shift Clustering . . . . . . . . . 151
Srirupa Dasgupta, Sharmistha Bhattacharya, Abhinandan Khan,
Anindya Halder, Goutam Saha, and Rajat Kumar Pal
Multiple Fault Identification and Diagnosis in Cross-Referencing
Digital Microfluidic Biochips . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165
Sagarika Chowdhury, Kazi Amrin Kabir, Debasis Dhal,
Rajat Kumar Pal, and Goutam Saha
Brain Tumor Detection: A Comparative Study Among Fast Object
Detection Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 179
Sunita Roy, Sanchari Sen, Ranjan Mehera, Rajat Kumar Pal,
and Samir Kumar Bandyopadhyay
MicroRNA-Based Cancer Classification Using Feature Selection
Wrapper . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197
Shib Sankar Bhowmick and Debotosh Bhattacharjee
Editors and Contributors

About the Editors

Rituparna Chaki is a Full Professor in the A K Choudhury School of Information

Technology, University of Calcutta, India since June 2015. She joined academia as
faculty member in the West Bengal University of Technology in 2005. Before that she
has served under Government of India in maintaining industrial production database.
Besides, she has served as a Visiting Professor in the AGH University of Science
& Technology, Cracow, Poland since 2013 for consecutive years. Rituparna did her
Ph.D. from Jadavpur University in 2002. She has been associated in organizing
many conferences in India and abroad as Program Chair, OC Chair or as member
of Technical Program Committee. She has published more than 60 research papers
in reputed journals and peer-reviewed conference proceedings. Her research interest
is primarily in Adhoc networking and its security. She is a professional member of
IEEE and ACM. Currently, Rituparna is the Secretary for ACMW-India.

Nabendu Chaki is a Professor in the Department Computer Science & Engineering,

University of Calcutta, Kolkata, India. He is the Editor in Chief of the Springer Nature
book series on Services and Business Process Reengineering. Besides editing about
40 conference proceedings with Springer, Dr. Chaki has authored 8 text and research
books with CRC Press, Springer Nature, etc. He has published more than 200 Scopus
Indexed research articles in Journals and International conferences. Prof. Chaki has
served as a Visiting Professor in different places including US Naval Postgraduate
School, California, and in different Universities in Italy and Poland. He is the founder
Chair of ACM Professional Chapter in Kolkata and served in that capacity for 3
years since January 2014. He has been active during 2009-2015 towards developing
several international standards in Software Engineering and Service Science as a
Global (GD) member for ISO-IEC.

Agostino Cortesi, Ph.D. is a Full Professor of Computer Science at Ca’ Foscari

University, Venice, Italy, and Dean of the PhD programme in Computer Science.
He has previously served as Department head, and as Vice-Rector for quality

ix
x Editors and Contributors

assessment and institutional affairs. His research interests include programming

languages theory, software engineering, and static analysis techniques, with partic-
ular emphasis on security applications. He serves as coordinator of the H2020 Euro-
pean project “Families_Share” and of the ITALY-INDIA project “Formal Specifica-
tion for Secured Software System”. He published more than 150 papers in interna-
tional journals and proceedings of international conferences. According to Scopus,
his h-index is 19 and his i-10 index is 39. He serves as co-Editor in Chief of the book
series “Services and Business Process Reengineering” edited by Springer-Nature.

Khalid Saeed is a full Professor of Computer Science in the Faculty of Computer

Science at Bialystok University of Technology. He was with Faculty of Mathematics
and Information Sciences at Warsaw University of Technology in 2014-2019. He
was with AGH Krakow in 2008-2014. He received the BSc Degree in Electrical and
Electronics Engineering from Baghdad University in 1976, the MSc and PhD (distin-
guished) Degrees from Wroclaw University of Technology in Poland in 1978 and
1981, respectively. He received his DSc Degree (Habilitation) in Computer Science
from the Polish Academy of Sciences in Warsaw in 2007. He was nominated by the
President of Poland for the title of Professor in 2014. He has published more than 245
publications including 98 journal papers and book chapters, 87 peer reviewed confer-
ence papers, edited 48 books, journals and Conference Proceedings, written 12 text
and reference books (h-index 15 in WoS base and 12 in SCOPUS base). He super-
vised more than 15 PhD and 130 MSc theses from and outside Poland. He gave 50
invited lectures and keynotes in different universities in Canada, China, Colombia,
Czech, Germany, India, Japan, Serbia, Slovakia and South Korea on Biometrics,
Image Processing and Analysis. He received more than 30 academic awards.
Khalid Saeed is a member of more than 15 editorial boards of international journals
and conferences. He is an IEEE Senior Member and has been selected as IEEE Distin-
guished Speaker for 2011-2016. Khalid Saeed is the Editor-in-Chief of International
Journal of Biometrics with Inderscience Publishers.

Contributors

Samir Kumar Bandyopadhyay Department of Computer Science and Engi-

neering, University of Calcutta, Kolkata, West Bengal, India
Ansuman Banerjee Indian Statistical Institute, Kolkata, India
Debotosh Bhattacharjee Department of Computer Science and Engineering,
Jadavpur University, Kolkata, West Bengal, India
Bhargab B. Bhattacharya IIT Kharagpur, Kharagpur, India
Munmun Bhattacharya Department of Information Technology, Jadavpur Univer-
sity, Salt Lake City, Kolkata, India
Editors and Contributors xi

Sharmistha Bhattacharya University of Calcutta, Acharya Prafulla Chandra Roy

Shiksha Prangan, Saltlake, Kolkata, India
Shib Sankar Bhowmick Department of Electronics and Communication Engi-
neering, Heritage Institute of Technology, Kolkata, India
Nabendu Chaki University of Calcutta, Kolkata, India
Rituparna Chaki University of Calcutta, Kolkata, India
Amlan Chakrabarti University of Calcutta, Kharagpur, West Bengal, India
Priyanka Chakraborty Department of Computer Science and Engineering,
National Institute of Technology, Durgapur, West Bengal, India
Nachiketa Chatterjee University of Calcutta, Kharagpur, West Bengal, India
Samiran Chattopadhyay Department of Information Technology, Jadavpur
University, Salt Lake City, Kolkata, India
Sagarika Chowdhury Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Univer-
sity of Calcutta, Kolkata, India
Agostino Cortesi DAIS, Ca’ Fosacari University, Venice, Italy
Ayan Kumar Das Birla Institute of Technology Mesra, Patna, Bihar, India
Kamal Das National Institute of Technology Meghalaya, Shillong, Meghalaya,
India
Srirupa Dasgupta Government College of Engineering and Leather Technology,
Saltlake, Kolkata, India
Novarun Deb Indian Institute of Information Technology, Vadodara (IIIT-V),
Gandhinagar, India
Debasis Dhal Department of Computer Science and Engineering, University of
Calcutta, Kolkata, India
Amit Gurung Martin Luther Christian University, Shillong, Meghalaya, India
Anindya Halder North-Eastern Hill University, Tura Campus, Tura, Meghalaya,
India
Kazi Amrin Kabir Department of Computer Science and Engineering, University
of Calcutta, Kolkata, India
Sidra Kalam Birla Institute of Technology, Mesra, Patna, India
Abhinandan Khan University of Calcutta, Acharya Prafulla Chandra Roy Shiksha
Prangan, Saltlake, Kolkata, India
Vikash Kumar National Institute of Technology Patna, Patna, Bihar, India
xii Editors and Contributors

Rajat Kumar Pal University of Calcutta, Acharya Prafulla Chandra Roy Shiksha
Prangan, Saltlake, Kolkata, India
Srijoni Majumdar Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur, West Bengal, India
Ranjan Mehera Business & Solution Consulting, Subex, Inc., Broomfield, CO,
USA
Rajat Kumar Pal Department of Computer Science and Engineering, University
of Calcutta, Kolkata, West Bengal, India
Sudhir Kumar Pandey Lok Nayak Jai Prakash Institute of Technology, Chapra,
Saran, Bihar, India
Partha Pratim Das Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur, West Bengal, India
Rajarshi Ray Indian Association for the Cultivation of Science, Kolkata, West
Bengal, India
Mandira Roy University of Calcutta, Kolkata, India
Pushpita Roy Indian Statistical Institute, Kolkata, India;
Calcutta University, Kolkata, India
Sandip Roy Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Asansol Engi-
neering College, Asansol, WB, India
Santanu Roy Future Institute of Engineering and Management, Kolkata, India
Sunita Roy Department of Computer Science and Engineering, University of
Calcutta, Kolkata, West Bengal, India
Goutam Saha Department of Information Technology, North-Eastern Hill Univer-
sity, Umshing Mawkynroh, Shillong, Meghalaya, India
Anirban Sarkar Department of Computer Science and Engineering, National
Institute of Technology, Durgapur, West Bengal, India
Sanchari Sen Department of Computer Science and Engineering, University of
Calcutta, Kolkata, West Bengal, India
Soumya Sen University of Calcutta, Kolkata, India
Bibekananda Shit Future Institute of Engineering and Management, Kolkata, India
Ditipriya Sinha National Institute of Technology Patna, Patna, Bihar, India
Security
Parallel Simulation of
Cyber-Physical-Systems

Kamal Das, Amit Gurung, and Rajarshi Ray

Abstract Model-based design (MBD) in systems engineering is a well-accepted

technique to abstract, analyze, verify, and validate complex systems. In MBD, we
design a mathematical model of the system to virtually execute and test systems via
model simulations to understand the system dynamics better. Computing model sim-
ulations have their challenges: one is to ensure that the simulation trajectory preserves
the model semantics. Besides, computing many simulation trajectories over a long
time-horizon must be time-efficient for rapid response to system engineers. In this
work, we address these challenges in simulating models of Cyber-Physical-Systems
(CPS), particularly systems possessing mixed discrete-continuous dynamics. We
focus on the subclass of CPS’s hybrid-automata models, where jump predicates are
restricted to polygonal constraints and present a numerical simulation engine that can
efficiently compute many random simulations in parallel by exploiting the parallel
computing capability in modern multicore processors. Our simulation engine imple-
ments a lock-free parallel breadth-first-search (BFS) like algorithm and is imple-
mented in the model-checking tool XSpeed. We demonstrate the performance gains
of our simulation engine over SpaceEx and CORA, the modern model checkers and
simulators for affine hybrid systems.

Keywords Hybrid systems · Hybrid automaton · Simulation trajectory · Parallel

simulations

K. Das (B)
National Institute of Technology Meghalaya, Shillong, Meghalaya, India
e-mail: [email protected]
A. Gurung
Martin Luther Christian University, Shillong, Meghalaya, India
R. Ray
Indian Association for the Cultivation of Science, Kolkata, West Bengal, India
e-mail: [email protected]

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2021 3
R. Chaki et al. (eds.), Advanced Computing and Systems for Security: Volume 14,
Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems 242,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-4294-4_1
4 K. Das et al.

1 Introduction

MBD in systems engineering is a well-accepted technique to abstract, analyze, ver-

ify, and validate complex systems [20, 25, 26]. In MBD, a mathematical model of
the system is designed and used to virtually execute and test systems via model sim-
ulations with the intent of gaining a better insight of the system dynamics. Model
simulation not only serves as a useful tool to assess the dynamics of a complex
system but also enables detection of bugs early in the design and development pro-
cess, without needing a physical prototype of the system in place, therefore sub-
stantially reducing the time, cost, and effort in system-engineering. There are vari-
ous modeling frameworks such as finite-state-machines (FSMs) [8], Petri-Nets [28],
ordinary-differential-equations (ODEs) [9], message-sequence-charts (MSCs) [10],
timed-automata [5], and hybrid-automata [18] to name some and each one is well-
suited to model a particular category of systems. For instance, time-automata are
well-suited to real-time systems whereas Petri-Nets are ideal for concurrent systems
modeling.
CPS is an integration of physical processes with computation [22]. The physical
processes follow continuous dynamics and are monitored and controlled by a discrete
controller implementing a control logic. There is a growing interest in CPS research
since many real-world applications and a large number of Artificial Intelligence
powered systems are cyber-physical in nature. Unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV),
self-driving cars, autonomous robots, planetary landers, and rovers are all examples
of CPS. The mathematical modeling framework that is particularly suited for CPS is
Hybrid Automaton (HA) since it can represent the discrete computation by a state-
transition system and continuous process dynamics by ODEs [4]. Depending on the
type of ODEs, hybrid-automata are broadly classified into linear, affine, or non-linear.
We present the details in the following sections.
Computing simulation trajectories of HA models of CPS poses difficulty due to
(1) the interplay of continuous and discrete dynamics and (2) computations involving
variables taking values in R. Numerical computation of a HA trajectory is compu-
tationally inexpensive in general. However, when precise trajectories at very small
time-steps are necessary over a large time-horizon, its computation may require con-
siderable time. Additionally, a system engineer may wish to simulate a model with
numerous initial conditions over a large time-horizon for the purpose of testing and
robustness evaluation, thus requiring the computation of a large number of long
simulation trajectories. In-efficient sequential computations may therefore have a
very slow response. These observations motivate us to design parallel algorithms for
computing simulations of CPS models. In this work, we propose a multi-threaded
lock-free BFS like algorithm to compute many simulation trajectories of a restrictive
class of hybrid automaton models of CPS, where the transition jump predicates are
polygonal constraints. A multi-threaded implementation exploits the inherent paral-
lel processing power in modern multicore processors. The algorithm is implemented
in the model-checker XSpeed [27], open-source software available in https://gitlab.
com/raj.ray84/XSpeed-plan. We demonstrate our simulation engine’s performance
Parallel Simulation of Cyber-Physical-Systems 5

benefits over SpaceEx [14] and CORA [2], the modern model checkers and simu-
lators for linear and affine hybrid systems.
Related Works:
Tools like HyLAA [7] and Breach [11] implement numerical simulators for linear
hybrid systems whereas C2E2 [12] is a numerical simulator for linear and non-linear
CPS. These tools, however, focus on methods of approximating reachable states of
HA models using finitely many simulations. Breach can additionally monitor the
robustness satisfaction of metric interval temporal logic (MITL) formulas. SpaceEx
[14] and CORA [2] are verification tools that implement HA simulation engines
that can compute random simulations using numerical ODE solvers. None of these
tools exploits the inherent parallelism in the modern multicore processors to accel-
erate computing simulation trajectories in parallel. This is where we contribute by
implementing a parallel simulation engine as part of the model-checker XSpeed.
We organize the paper as follows. The requisite background is discussed in Sect. 2.
The parallel algorithm to compute simulation trajectories is presented in Sect. 3. We
show the algorithm’s performance and validity evaluation in Sect. 4, and we conclude
in Sect. 5.

2 Preliminaries

An HA is a mathematical formalism to model CPS. In an HA, the discrete behavior

is abstracted by a finite state machine, whereas the continuous behavior is abstracted
by ODE assigned to the automaton’s locations. The definition of an HA is

Definition 2.1 [18] A hybrid automaton is a 7-tuple (X , G (V, E), Init, Inv, Flow,
Jump, Assign) where
– X = {x1 , x2 , . . . , xn } is a finite set of continuous variables. The number of
variables in the set is called the dimension of the hybrid automaton. The set
Ẋ = {x˙1 , x˙2 , . . . , x˙n } is the set of variables representing the first derivative of
the respective variables in X . Similarly, the set X  = {x1 , x2 , . . . , xn } is the set
of primed variables representing the reset values of the respective variables in X
after effectuating a discrete transition.
– G (V, E) is a directed multigraph of a finite automaton with the set of locations V
and the set of transition edges E.
– Init and Inv are labeling functions that assign to each location in V, a predicate
with free variables from X . The predicate assigned to a location by Inv and Init
is called the invariant and initial condition of the location respectively. Jump is a
labeling function that assigns to each transition edge e ∈ E, a predicate with free
variables from X .
– Flow is a labeling function that assigns to each location in V, a predicate with free
variables from X ∪ Ẋ .
– Assign is a labeling function that assigns to each transition edge e ∈ E, a predicate
with free variables from the set X ∪ X  .
6 K. Das et al.

Fig. 1 A pictorial representation of a general HA trajectory

The state of an hybrid automaton is a 2-tuple , v, where  ∈ V and v ∈ Rn such that
v satisfies the predicate Inv(), i.e., Inv()[X := v] = tr ue, n being the dimension
of the automaton. The state represents the location  of the HA and an assignment
of values to the variables of the HA, denoted with vector v. The state of an HA may
change either by a timed transition or by a discrete transition. A timed transition
δ
due to δ passage of time can be represented as , v − → , w such that v, v̇ and
w, ẇ satisfies the flow predicate Flow(), i.e., Flow()[X := v, Ẋ := v̇] = tr ue
and Flow()[X := w, Ẋ := ẇ] = tr ue. Note that in a timed transition, the location
of the state  ∈ V remains the same but represents the change in system variables
due to the continuous flow dynamics. A discrete transition can be represented as
e
→ 2 , v  , given that ∃e ∈ E from 1 to 2 for some 1 , 2 ∈ V, such that
1 , v −
Jump(e)[X := v] = tr ue, and Assign(e)[X := v, X  := v  ] = tr ue. We now define
a trajectory of an hybrid automaton.

Definition 2.2 A finite trajectory of an HA is a sequence of states obtained by timed

δ0 e1 δ1
and discrete transitions of a HA, represented as 0 , v0  − → 1 , v1  −
→ 0 , v1  − →
en δn
→ n , vn  −
1 , v2  . . . − → n , vn+1  such that
1. Init(0 )[X := v0 ] = tr ue.
δi ei
2. ∀i ∈ [0, n], i , vi  −
→ i , vi+1  is a timed transition and ∀i ∈ [1, n], i−1 , vi  −
→
i , vi  is a discrete transition of the HA.
δi τ
3. For a timed transition i , vi  −
→ i , vi+1  in the trajectory sequence, i , vi  −
→
τ
i , vi  is also a timed transition in the HA, for any intermediate time τ ∈ [0, δi ].

Definition 2.3 A trajectory state of an HA trajectory beginning from an initial state

0 , v0  is a state , v obtained from a finite sequence of timed and discrete transi-
tions from the initial state.

An exemplary trajectory of a two-dimensional HA with two timed transitions and

one discrete transition is shown pictorially in Fig. 1. The labeled shaded regions depict
the vectors satisfying the corresponding predicate. The curve vi − vi+1 and vi+1 
−
Parallel Simulation of Cyber-Physical-Systems 7

Fig. 2 An HA modeling a Thermostat

vi+2 depicts the trajectory in location 1 and 2 due to timed transition, satisfying
Flow(1 ) and Flow(2 ) respectively. The figure shows a discrete transition due to an
edge e from 1 to 2 . Since the end-point vi+1 of the trajectory in 1 satisfies the
Jump(e) predicate, the transition is enabled. The result of taking the transition is an

update of vi+1 to the new vector vi+1 due to the assignments defined in the Assign(e)
predicate. An important point here is that it is not obligatory to effectuate a discrete
jump when the Jump predicate is satisfied since HA has may transition semantics.
In other words, the may transition semantics in HA says that if a state , v is such
that v satisfies Inv() as well as the Jump(e) predicate for some e ∈ E, then there is
a choice to either take a timed transition or take a discrete transition due to e from
the state , v in the HA.
Definition 2.4 A polygonal constraint over the variables in X = {x1 , x2 , . . . , xn } is
of the form A.x ≤ b, where An×n is a real-valued matrix, xn×1 is a column vector
comprising of the variables x1 , x2 , . . . xn and b ∈ Rn is a real-valued column vec-
tor. The vectors v ∈ Rn satisfying a polygonal constraint defines an n-dimensional
polytope.
An HA, modeling a thermostat is shown in Fig. 2. It has two locations, ON and OFF,
to represent the thermostat’s switched-on and switched-off state, respectively. It is a
two-dimensional HA with variables T and time, representing the temperature and
the elapsed time. The invariant T ≥ 60 in OFF location signifies that during the
switched-off state of the thermostat, the temperature can be 60 or above. Similarly
the invariant T ≤ 70 in the ON location signifies that during the switched-on state
of the thermostat, the temperature can be 70 or below. The Flow in the OFF location
is Ṫ = −k2, time˙ = 1 and signifies that the temperature decreases in a constant rate
k2 while the time progresses during the switched-off state of the thermostat. Simi-
larly, during the switched-on state, the temperature increases following the dynamics
Ṫ = k1(70 − T ) while the time progresses (time˙ = 1) as represented with the Flow
predicate. The Jump predicate on the OFF to ON transition is T ≤ 62 indicating that
the transition may take effect only when the temperature of the thermostat is 62 or
8 K. Das et al.

below. On effectuating the transition, the Assign predicate T  := T , time := time

depicts that the updated value of the temperature and time is the same as its value
before taking the transition. Similarly, the transition from ON to OFF may take effect
only when the temperature is 68 or above and taking the transition does not modify
the value of the variables. Overall, we see that the thermostat’s temperature will vary
in the interval [60, 70] due to the invariant constraints imposed on the two locations.
We now present our contribution in the following section. This HA is an example
where the Jump predicates are polygonal constraints since they form A.x ≤ b.

3 Parallel HA Simulation

This section presents our proposed parallel trajectory simulation algorithm. We first
briefly describe the computation of timed and discrete transitions.
Evaluating Timed Transition: Trajectory-states due to time-transitions are com-
puted numerically using an ODE solver [29]. The present-day ODE solvers can simu-
late first-order linear as well as non-linear ODEs very efficiently. We can improve the
trajectory’s precision by choosing smaller time-steps but at the cost of performance
and memory.
Evaluating Discrete Transition: In the may transition semantics of HA, there
may be infinitely many next trajectory-states possible after taking a discrete transi-
tion. This is due to the non-determinism involved in either choosing or not choosing
to take a transition when an HA state satisfies both the Jump and I nv predicates.
In our algorithm, we follow as soon as possible semantics where a discrete tran-
sition is effectuated as soon as the trajectory satisfies a Jump predicate. There are
two numerical problems involved in the implementation: (1) detecting whether a
trajectory-state , x satisfies the Jump() predicate, and (2) computing the next
trajectory-state  , x   such that Assign(e)[X = x, X  = x  ] is satisfied. If a Jump
predicate is a hyperplane, then successive trajectory points computed at time-step
δ may cross the guard failing to detect an intersection. To deal with this crossover
detection problem, we convert the predicate from a hyperplane to a half-space [17] in
the region opposite to the region containing the trajectory’s initial point. This ensures
crossover detection. In the case of polygonal predicates other than hyperplanes, the
satisfaction is easily checked from the satisfiability of AX − b ≤ 0. As soon as a
trajectory-state is detected to satisfy Jump(e), for some e, we compute the successor
state following Assign(e). The computation of a simulation trajectory due to timed
transition is shown in Algorithm 1. The algorithm terminates as soon as a successor
state due to a discrete transition is found, or all states in the time-horizon have been
computed.
For a chosen point pt and a given time-horizon T , the algorithm computes a simu-
lation trajectory, T race, consisting of a sequence of trajectory-states. The trajectory-
states are computed using an ODE solver according to the location dynamics, dis-
cretized at a fixed time-step, δ. The data structure pt consists of a field τ that holds
the elapsed time in the simulation. For any T race, the successive pt.τ holds the time
Parallel Simulation of Cyber-Physical-Systems 9

at which pt is attained in the model. Therefore, the number of discrete trajectory-

states for a given time-horizon T is computed as N = (T − τ )/δ (see line 2). The
algorithm computes trajectory-states until a point (v) intersects with a transition’s
Jump predicate (Jump(e)) or all the trajectory-states in the given time-horizon have
been computed (see lines 8–17). Line 8 computes the successor trajectory-state using
an ODE solver. This is added to the trace (in line 9) and is tested for intersection
with each transition’s (Loc.trans) jump predicate g (at line 12). If the intersection
is not {∅}, then, a successor state due to discrete transition is evaluated for fur-
ther exploration. The time elapsed, τ is computed as k × δ, k being the number of
trajectory-states computed at a finite time-step δ. This value is appended in the point
p (in line 14) and returned by the routine. When a trajectory does not satisfy any of
the transition’s jump predicate, it returns an empty point p. This indicates that no
new successor states due to discrete transition are present and the trajectory evalua-
tion is complete for the full time-horizon. We now present the algorithm to compute
multiple trajectories in parallel.

Algorithm 1 Simulation of HA from a state pt

1: procedure ODE- sim( pt, ha, T )
2: N = (T − pt.τ )/δ number of trajectory states
3: Loc ← pt.get Location() from ha
4: I nv ← invariant from Loc
5: T race. push( pt); v = pt; v: initial trajectory state
6: k = 1; p = ∅;
7: repeat
8: Compute next trajectory state v use ODE solver
9: T race. push(v)
10: for each t in Loc.trans do
11: g ← J ump(t)
12: if (v ∩ g) != ∅ then
13: p←v
14: p.τ = k × δ time elapsed in this loc
15: done = tr ue;
16: k =k+1
17: until done OR v ∈ / I nv(Loc) OR k ≥ N
18: return p

Parallel Algorithm: The inputs to our algorithm are N —the number of random
simulation trajectories to compute, the HA model to simulate, and the time-horizon T
for simulation. Random vectors N pts ⊂ Rn are obtained such that for any v ∈ N pts,
Init()[X := v] = tr ue, for some  ∈ V. Our algorithm is motivated by the parallel
BFS implemented in the model checkers XSpeed [15] and Spin [19]. The algorithm
maintains a shared data-structure W ait, a list of states of the HA, from which further
trajectory needs to be generated via timed and/or discrete transitions. We use W ait of
size (N × N ) to randomly distribute the trajectory-states among N available threads
for efficient load balancing. However, simultaneous read and write access must be
controlled with semaphores or locks to avoid a race condition with a shared W ait.
10 K. Das et al.

Locking incurs extra overhead in terms of performance. Our algorithm proposes to

have a shared W ait, yet, with no locking overhead by adapting the parallel lock-free
BFS algorithm proposed in [16, 19] for HA simulation. The routine ODE- sim (line
10) computes the numerical simulations of a trajectory-state with a fixed time-step
δ and generates new successor trajectory-state pts, which must satisfy the jump
condition. We read a trajectory-states from the W ait[t] copy at each iteration and
write a successor trajectory-states to the W ait[1 − t] copy. Initially, t is assigned
0, and at each successive iteration, it is reset to 1 − t (see line 17). In this manner,
the write W ait copy transforms to the read W ait copy and vice-versa after each
iteration. The algorithm terminates when no successor trajectory-states remains in
W ait[1 − t] or when the BFS reaches a user-defined depth bound. The algorithm
also terminates when the trajectory-states have elapsed the time-horizon (T).

Algorithm 2 Parallel BFS Algorithm for Parallel Simulations of HA

1: procedure PAR- SIMU(ha, N pts, T )
2: t = level = 0, N = Cor es
3: W ait[2][N ][N ] 2 × N × N vector
4: Distribute N pts equally in W ait[t][i][0], for i = 0 to N − 1
5: repeat
6: Fork threads with id w = 0 to N − 1 and execute
7: for q = 0 to N − 1 do
8: for each s in W ait[t][w][q] do
9: delete s from W ait[t][w][q]
10: pts ← ODE- sim (s, ha, T )
11: w  = select random 0 . . . N − 1
12: add pts to W ait[1 − t][w  ][w]
13: Thread synchronization Threads sync here to ensure BFS
14: if W ait[1 − t] is ∅ then
15: done = true;
16: else
17: t =1−t Read/Write transformation
18: level ← level + 1
19: until done OR level = depth

4 Evaluation

Benchmark Description:
We consider Bouncing-Ball [23], Navigation benchmark [13], Thermostat [3], Heli-
copter Controller [30], Five Dimensional dynamical system [1], Vehicle platoon
[24], Drivetrain [21], and Building [6] benchmarks for evaluation. The Bouncing-
Ball models the motion of a ball under gravity together with bouncing upon hitting
the ground. The navigation-benchmark depicts a moving object in a grid of n × n
partition in a plane. A Thermostat is a model of a temperature controller. The Heli-
Parallel Simulation of Cyber-Physical-Systems 11

Table 1 Performance comparison of computing 1000 random simulations over SpaceEx

Time (in secs) Speedup Vs
Benchmark Dim #Loc SpaceEx XSpeed XSpeed XSpeed SpaceEx
Seq Par Seq
B. Ball 3 1 13.50 1.84 1.29 1.43 10.46
Nav (1) 4 9 11.54 0.95 0.33 2.88 34.97
Nav (2) 4 25 63.64 2.52 0.83 3.04 76.67
Nav (3) 4 81 85.73 3.61 1.15 3.14 74.55
Helicopter 29 1 58.16 18.30 4.13 4.43 14.08
Building 48 1 32.48 73.21 13.39 5.47 2.43

copter controller represents the controller of a Westland Lynx military helicopter.

The Five-dimensional system is a continuous linear dynamical system. The Vehi-
cle platoon models a platoon of three vehicles with a leader vehicle, the vehicles
communicate with each other and aim to maintain a safe distance with each other,
under an occasional loss of communication. The Building is a Los Angeles hospital
building model with eight floors, each having three degrees of freedom. This is a
48-dimensional HA model. The Drivetrain models the engine of a vehicle together
with the other rotating components such as the gears, clutches, and differentials. The
backlash between the components is modeled via discrete transitions in the HA. For
each benchmark, the HA model parameters such as the number of locations and the
dimension are mentioned in the experiment tables below.
Experiment Setup:
The experiments of Table 1 are on Intel i7-4770, 3.40 GHz, 8 cores (hyper-threading
enabled), 8 GB RAM. The experiments of Table 2 are on a VM with 4 cores, 4 GB
RAM. The trajectories are computed with a time-step of 0.01. The simulation time
is computed for a fixed time-horizon or until reaching a fixed bound on the discrete
transitions.
Performance Evaluation:
Table 1 shows the performance comparison of computing 1000 random simulations
in the parallel simulation engine with the sequential counterpart and SpaceEx. In
the table, Nav(1), Nav(2), and Nav(3) denotes different instances of the Navigation
benchmark. We observe a maximum speedup of 5× and 76× in Building and Nav
(2) in the parallel-engine (XSpeed Par) over sequential (XSpeed Seq) simulation
and SpaceEx respectively. Table 2 shows a similar comparison over CORA. The TH
column shows the considered time-horizon of the computed simulations. A maximum
of 52× speedup is observed over CORA in Bouncing-Ball model.
12 K. Das et al.

Table 2 Performance comparison of 1000 random simulations over CORA

Time (in secs) Speedup
Benchmarks Dim. #Locs TH XSpeed CORA
Thermostat 2 2 30 1.84 50.25 27.31
B. Ball 3 1 30 1.82 94.91 52.15
FiveDimSys 5 1 10 0.88 5.68 6.45
Platoon 10 2 30 1.04 16.83 16.18
Drivetrain 10 4 10 3.51 135.29 38.54
Helicopter 29 1 20 6.79 23.17 3.41
Building 48 1 5 21.58 23.90 1.11

(a): Nav (3) (b): Thermostat (c): Helicopter (d): Drivetrain

Fig. 3 Computed simulation trajectories in XSpeed for various benchmarks

4.1 Correctness Evaluation

To evaluate the semantic correctness of our simulator, we compare the generated

trajectories with that of SpaceEx and CORA and found them to be matching. Some
of the computed trajectories on selected variables from four benchmarks are reported
in Fig. 3. During the evaluation, we detected few bugs in the SpaceEx simulator. For
example, Fig. 4a shows the trajectory in SpaceEx for Nav (2) that did not complete
till the time-horizon since it failed to detect the satisfaction of the jump condition
(x1 = 1 & x2 ∈ [3, 4]) for a simulation time-step of 0.05. For the same time-step,
our simulator in XSpeed correctly computes the entire trajectory shown in Fig. 4b.
In addition, the trajectory in SpaceEx for Nav (3) splits as shown in Fig. 4a. The
expected trajectory is computed by our simulator in XSpeed as shown in Fig. 5b.
The Green region in the figures denotes the vectors satisfying the Init predicate.

5 Conclusion

We present a parallel simulation engine for hybrid automaton models of CPS which
can compute random simulations in parallel on multicore processors. Our simula-
tion engine implements a multi-threaded lock-free algorithm in order to efficiently
Parallel Simulation of Cyber-Physical-Systems 13

Fig. 4 Premature termination of trajectory computation in SpaceEx

Fig. 5 SpaceEx trajectory splits for a single start state in Nav (3)

compute the simulations. We demonstrate performance speedup over SpaceEx and

CORA on standard CPS benchmarks.

Acknowledgements Rajarshi Ray gratefully acknowledges financial support from the Science and
Engineering Research Board (SERB) project with file number IMP/2018/000523. Amit Gurung is
grateful to Martin Luther Christian University, Shillong, Meghalaya, for partially supporting the
work under project grant No. Seed-Grant/559/2017-5567.
14 K. Das et al.

References

1. Althoff M (2010) Reachability analysis and its application to the safety assessment of
autonomous cars. PhD thesis, Technische Universität München
2. Althoff M, Grebenyuk D (2016) Implementation of interval arithmetic in cora 2016. In:
ARCH@ CPSWeek, pp 91–105
3. Alur, R.: Principles of cyber-physical systems. MIT Press (2015)
4. Alur R, Courcoubetis C, Henzinger TA, Ho PH (1992) Hybrid automata: an algorithmic
approach to the specification and verification of hybrid systems. In: Hybrid systems. Springer,
pp 209–229
5. Alur R, Dill DL (1994) A theory of timed automata. Theoretical computer science 126(2):183–
235
6. Antoulas AC, Sorensen DC, Gugercin S (2001) A survey of model reduction methods for
large-scale systems. Contemporary Mathematics 280:193–219
7. Bak S, Duggirala PS (2017) Hylaa: a tool for computing simulation-equivalent reachability
for linear systems. In: Proceedings of the 20th international conference on hybrid systems:
computation and control. ACM, pp. 173–178
8. Brand D, Zafiropulo P (1983) On communicating finite-state machines. Journal of the ACM
(JACM) 30(2):323–342
9. Coddington EA, Levinson N (1955) Theory of ordinary differential equations. Tata McGraw-
Hill Education
10. Damm W, Harel D (2001) Lscs: Breathing life into message sequence charts. Formal methods
in system design 19(1):45–80
11. Donze A (2010) Breach: a toolbox for verification and parameter synthesis of hybrid systems.
In: In Computer-aided verification, pp 167–170
12. Duggirala PS, Mitra S, Viswanathan M, Potok M (2015) C2e2: a verification tool for stateflow
models. In: International conference on tools and algorithms for the construction and analysis
of systems. Springer, pp 68–82
13. Fehnker A, Ivancic F (2004) Benchmarks for hybrid systems verification. In: HSCC, vol 4.
Springer, pp 326–341
14. Frehse G, Le Guernic C, Donzé A, Cotton S, Ray R. Lebeltel O, Ripado R, Girard A, Dang
T, Maler O (2011) SpaceEx: scalable verification of hybrid systems. In: Proceedings of CAV.
LNCS, vol 6806. Springer, pp 379–395
15. Gurung A, Deka A, Bartocci E, Bogomolov S, Grosu R, Ray R (2016) Parallel reachability
analysis for hybrid systems. In: 2016 ACM/IEEE international conference on formal methods
and models for system design (MEMOCODE). IEEE, pp 12–22
16. Gurung A, Ray R, Bartocci E, Bogomolov S, Grosu R (2018) Parallel reachability analysis of
hybrid systems in XSpeed. Int J Softw Tools Technol Transf 1–23
17. Hainry E (2008) Reachability in linear dynamical systems. In: Conference on computability
in Europe. Springer, pp 241–250
18. Henzinger TA (2000) The theory of hybrid automata. In: Verification of digital and hybrid
systems. Springer, pp 265–292
19. Holzmann GJ (2012) Parallelizing the SPIN model checker. In: Proceedings of SPIN 2012.
LNCS, vol 7385. Springer, pp 155–171
20. Jensen JC, Chang DH, Lee EA (2011) A model-based design methodology for cyber-physical
systems. In: 2011 7th international wireless communications and mobile computing conference.
IEEE, pp 1666–1671
21. Jin X, Deshmukh JV, Kapinski J, Ueda K, Butts K (2014) Powertrain control verification bench-
mark. In: Proceedings of the 17th international conference on Hybrid systems: computation
and control. ACM, pp. 253–262
22. Lee EA, Seshia SA (2016) Introduction to embedded systems: a cyber-physical systems
approach. MIT Press
23. Lygeros J, Tomlin C, Sastry S (1999) Hybrid systems: modeling, analysis and control. preprint
Parallel Simulation of Cyber-Physical-Systems 15

24. Makhlouf IB, Kowalewski S (2014) Networked cooperative platoon of vehicles for testing
methods and verification tools. In: ARCH@ CPSWeek, pp 37–42
25. Mathworks: Model-Based Design (2020). https://www.mathworks.com/solutions/model-
based-design.html
26. Paterno F (1999) Model-based design and evaluation of interactive applications. Springer Sci-
ence & Business Media
27. Ray R, Gurung A, Das B, Bartocci E, Bogomolov S, Grosu R (2015) Xspeed: accelerating
reachability analysis on multi-core processors. In: Piterman N (ed) Hardware and software:
verification and testing—11th international haifa verification conference, HVC 2015, Haifa,
Israel, November 17-19, 2015, Proceedings. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 9434.
Springer, pp 3–18. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-26287-1_1
28. Reisig W (2012) Petri nets: an introduction, vol 4. Springer Science & Business Media
29. Serban R, Hindmarsh AC (2005) Cvodes: the sensitivity-enabled ode solver in sundials. In:
ASME 2005 international design engineering technical conferences and computers and infor-
mation in engineering conference. American Society of Mechanical Engineers, pp 257–269
30. Skogestad S, Postlethwaite I (2005) Multivariable Feedback Control: Analysis and Design.
John Wiley & Sons
Attack Detection Scheme Using Deep
Learning Approach for IoT

Vikash Kumar, Sidra Kalam, Ayan Kumar Das, and Ditipriya Sinha

Abstract In recent years, the major concern of Internet of Things is cybersecurity

as attacks are increasing at an alarming rate with the rapid increase in connectivity
and integrity of various devices. It is necessary to detect the attack on the IoT devices
in real time as undetected attack on IoT devices for a longer period of time can result
in system unavailability to the end-users. In this paper, fog layer is introduced to
manage the resource constraint devices. The proposed Intrusion Detection System
is implemented in the fog layer. Deep learning is used to train the proposed system
so that it can classify the network traffic as attack and benign. The proposed scheme
is evaluated using the UNSW-NB15 and Bot-IoT dataset, which confirms that the
proposed model is able to classify the network traffic as attack and benign effectively.

Keywords Deep learning · Intrusion detection system · IoT · Security · Dataset

1 Introduction

Internet of Things (IoT) is an emerging technology that enabled the communica-

tion and processing of data in smart applications such as smart city, e-health, smart
agriculture, etc. The increasing application of IoT results in a huge increment in the
number of unknown cyber-attacks. Various sensitive and confidential data of users
are prone to numerous types of attacks from both internal and external attackers.
These types of attacks can be generated by either human or machine. For example,
the data breach of bitcoin leads to the loss of almost $70M and data breach of yahoo

V. Kumar · D. Sinha
National Institute of Technology Patna, Patna 800005, India
e-mail: [email protected]
D. Sinha
e-mail: [email protected]
S. Kalam · A. K. Das (B)
Birla Institute of Technology, Mesra, Patna campus, Patna 800015, India
e-mail: [email protected]

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2021 17
R. Chaki et al. (eds.), Advanced Computing and Systems for Security: Volume 14,
Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems 242,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-4294-4_2
18 V. Kumar et al.

caused the loss of $350M [1]. Traditional security measures cannot be applied to
IoT as they are low power and resource constrained. These issues can be resolved by
implementing fog layer, which is the extension of the cloud computing that enables
computing service to reside at the edge of the network. In fog layer, the deployed IoT
devices are of high capacity in terms of computational power and energy resource.
Thus, the task of Intrusion Detection System can be easily done in this layer, whereas
the low capacity devices of data sensing layer are deployed to sense different events.
This reduces the burden of the IoT as the storage, pre-processing and computation are
shifted to the nearby fog nodes. The security issue of the IoT generates the need for a
reliable Intrusion Detection System (IDS). An IDS is an application that detects the
malicious activity and classifies the data as malicious and benign at host level and at
network level. Network Intrusion Detection System (NIDS) uses network behavior to
detect attack and Host-based Intrusion Detection System (HIDS) uses system activ-
ities for the detection of attack. The proposed scheme will focus on the former one.
Network traffic is analyzed using anomaly detection and misuse detection. Misuse
detection matches the incoming traffic with already stored signatures for detecting
the attack. Database needs to be updated regularly for new types of attack. It cannot
detect an unknown attack on its own. Anomaly detection detects unknown attack
using behavioral analysis. In the proposed scheme, NIDS uses deep learning for the
training and classification of the attack and benign. The working of deep learning
is inspired by the way human brain thinks and takes the decision. It is an advanced
version of machine learning that is comprised of multiple layers. These layers are
used for feature extraction from the raw data. Each layer is trained to transform the
raw data into more intellectual and composite representation. The main motives of
this research are:
• Develop an anomaly-based intrusion detection model using deep learning
approach.
• Evaluation of the model for checking its efficiency.
The remainder of the paper is divided as—Sect. 2 deals with the study of related
field, Sect. 3 explains the overview of deep learning, Sect. 4 describes the proposed
work, Sect. 5 evaluates the performance of the proposed scheme, and the paper is
concluded in Sect. 6 followed by references.

2 Literature Survey

As IoT is nowadays a buzzword for the entire world, there come many barriers
along with it. Security is a major concern as it makes the system vulnerable to
many cyber-attacks. In order to resolve this issue, deep learning is used. Deep
learning has emerged as an advanced technique of machine learning. The tradi-
tional machine learning algorithms are less capable of attack detection as compar-
ative to the deep learning algorithm [2]. Multiple layer deep learning comprises of
multiple hidden layers, which encourages the model to detect the attacks in the IoT
Attack Detection Scheme … 19

network. There are many research works that discuss about the intrusion detection
using deep neural network. Nathan Shone and Tran Nguyen Ngoc use the non-
symmetric deep auto encoder (NDAE) for the intrusion detection [3]. They stacked
NDAEs in order to form deep learning hierarchy to deal with the complicated rela-
tionships between the features. NDAEs are comprised of multiple hidden layers,
which are non-symmetrical to learn the features from unlabeled data. Classification
of network traffic as normal or benign can be easily done by the neural network
concept. One more approach regarding this is Recurrent Neural Network (RNN)
that can also be used for malware detection [4]. Now a day, many new attacks are
attempting to exploit the system. In an attempt to protect the system against the
attack, first, we need to detect the attacks then only it can be prevented. Many deep
learning-based intrusion detection systems are developed [5] for this implementa-
tion. The attacker keeps on changing their methods every time, IoT network needs
an IDS, which should be flexible to deal with these issues. An intelligent intrusion
detection system is developed to detect and classify these unpredictable attacks [6]
in which network-based intrusion detection system (NIDS) and Host-based intrusion
detection system (HIDS) are combined to detect the cyber-attacks more efficiently.
When attacks are not detected for a longer period of time, it will affect the availability
of the system for the end user. It is very important to deal with these attacks in real
time to minimize the loss. An anomaly based intrusion detection system is devel-
oped, which implemented deep learning [7] to deal with these issues. This approach
worked successfully against wormhole attack, black hole attack, sinkhole attack,
DDoS and opportunistic service attack. DDoS attack is mostly common as it can be
easily spread on a larger scale. Restricted Boltzmann machines (RBM) specifically
handle the DDoS attack [8]. RBMs have the ability to learn the complex features in
an unsupervised learning system. In case of supervised learning, deep convolutional
neural network (DCNN) is also used. Hyun Min Song and Jiyoung Woo have also
developed a model, which uses DCNN in the IDS to provide security in Controller
Area Network (CAN) [9]. CAN is basically used to broadcast the information of the
current status of the vehicle. There are many more ways in which malicious activities
can govern the IoT system. It becomes very important to secure it from the various
types of cyber-attacks as it may lead to risk of life. Multiple IDS frameworks based
on deep learning are already in trend as it is successfully detecting the attacks and
simultaneously preventing the system with higher accuracy rate. Table 1 describes
the attacks detected in the existing schemes.

3 Deep Learning Overview

Deep learning is the breakthrough of the machine learning with increased accuracy
as compared with traditional learning algorithms. It is used for feature extraction and
training of the system. It is comprised of multiple consecutive layers that are used to
perform various operations. Each layer is interconnected to one another and output of
the previous layer is fed as an input to the next consecutive layer. Various application
Discovering Diverse Content Through
Random Scribd Documents
difficult to tell, for, obscure as the financial system of the Norman
period may be, it is clear that just as the rotulus exactorius recorded
the amounts to which the king was entitled from the firmarii of the
various counties, so these firmarii, in their turn, were entitled to
sums of ostensibly fixed amount from the various constituents of
their counties' "corpora." Domesday, however, while recording these
sums, shows us, in many remarkable cases, a larger "redditus" being
paid than that which was strictly due. The fact is that we are, and
must be, to a great extent, in the dark as to the fixity of these
ostensibly stereotyped payments. That the remarkable rise in the
annual firmæ exacted from the towns which, Domesday shows us,
had taken place since, and consequent on, the Conquest would
seem to imply that these firmæ, under the loose régime of the old
system, had been allowed to remain so long unaltered that they had
become antiquated and unduly low. In any case the Conqueror
raised them sharply, probably according to his estimate of the
financial capacity of the town. And this step would, of course,
involve a rise in the total of the firma exacted from the corpus
comitatus. The precedent which his father had thus set was probably
followed by Henry I., who appears to have exacted, systematically,
the uttermost farthing. It was probably, however, to the oppressive
use of the "placita" included in the "firma comitatus" that the sheriffs
mainly trusted to increase their receipts.
But whatever may have been the means of extortion possessed by
the sheriffs in the towns within their rule,[1044] and exercised by them
to recoup themselves for the increased demands of the Crown, we
know that such means there must have been, or it would not have
been worth the while of the towns to offer considerable sums for the
privilege of paying their firmæ to the Crown directly, instead of
through the sheriffs.[1045]
I would now institute a comparison between the cases of Lincoln
and of London. In both cases the city formed part of the corpus
comitatus; in both, therefore, its firma was included in the total ferm
of the shire. Lincoln was at this time one of the largest and
wealthiest towns in the country. Its citizens evidently had reason to
complain of the exactions of the sheriff of the shire. London, we
infer, was in the same plight. Both cities were, accordingly, anxious
to exclude the financial intervention of the sheriff between
themselves and the Crown. How was this end to be attained? It was
attained in two different ways varying with the circumstances of the
two cases. London was considerably larger than Lincoln, and
Middlesex infinitely smaller than Lincolnshire. Thus while the firma of
Lincoln represented less than a fifth of the ferm of the shire,[1046]
that of London would, of course, constitute the bulk of the ferm of
Middlesex. Lincoln, therefore, would only seek to sever itself
financially from the shire; London, on the contrary, would endeavour
to exclude, still more effectually, the sheriff, by itself boldly stepping
into the sheriff's shoes. The action of the citizens of Lincoln is
revealed to us by the Roll of 1130:—
"Burgenses Lincolie reddunt compotum de cc marcis argenti et iiij marcis auri ut
teneant ciuitatem de Rege in capite" (p. 114).
The same Roll is witness to that of the citizens of London:—
"Homines Londonie reddunt compotum de c marcis argenti ut habeant
Vic[ecomitem?] ad electionem suam" (p. 148).
I contend that these two passages ought to be read together. No
one appears to have observed the fact that the sequel to the above
Lincoln entry is to be found in the Pipe-Roll of 1157 (3 Hen. II.). We
there find £140 deducted from the ferm of the shire in consideration
of the severance of the city from the corpus comitatus ("Et in
Civitate Lincol[nie] CXL libræ blancæ"). But we further find the
citizens of Lincoln, in accounting for their firma to the Crown direct,
accounting not for £140, but for £180. It must, consequently, have
been worth their while to offer the Crown a sum equivalent to about
a year's rental for the privilege of paying it £180 direct rather than
£140 through the sheriff.[1047] Such figures are eloquent as to the
extortions from which they had suffered. The citizens of London, as I
have said, set to work a different way. They simply sought to lease
the shrievalty of the shire themselves. I can, on careful
consideration, offer no other suggestion than that the hundred
marcs for which they account in the Roll of 1130, represent the
payment by which they secured a lease of the shrievalty for the year
1129-1130, the shrievalty being held in that year by the "quatuor
vicecomites" of the Roll. I gather from the Roll that Fulcred fitz
Walter had been sheriff for 1128-29, and his payment "de gersoma"
is, I take it, represented in the case of the following year (1129-30)
by these hundred marks, the "quatuor vicecomites" themselves
having paid nothing "de gersoma." On this view, the citizens must
have leased the shrievalty themselves and then put in four of their
fellows, as representing them, to hold it. But, obviously, such a post
was not one to be coveted. To exact sufficient from their fellow-
citizens wherewith to meet the claims of the Crown would be a task
neither popular nor pleasant. Indeed, the fact of the citizens
installing four "vicecomites" may imply that they could not find any
one man who would consent to fill a post as thankless as that of the
hapless decurio in the provinces of the Roman Empire, or of the
chamberlain, in a later age, in the country towns of England. Hence
it may be that we find it thus placed in commission. Hence, also, the
eagerness of these vicecomites to be quit of office, as shown by
their payment, for that privilege, of two marcs of gold apiece.[1048] It
may, however, be frankly confessed that the nature of this payment
is not so clear as could be wished. Judging from the very ancient
practice with regard to municipal offices, one would have thought
that such payments would probably have been made to their fellow-
citizens who had thrust on them the office rather than to the Crown.
Moreover, if their year of office was over, and the city's lease at an
end, one would have thought they would be freed from office in the
ordinary course of things. The only explanation, perhaps, that
suggests itself is that they purchased from the Crown an exemption
from serving again even though their fellow-citizens should again
elect them to office.[1049] But I leave the point in doubt.
The hypothesis, it will be seen, that I have here advanced is that
the citizens leased the shrievalty (so far as we know, for the first
time) for the year 1129-30. We have the names of those who held
the shrievalty at various periods in the course of the reign, before
this year, but there is no evidence that, throughout this period, it
was ever leased to the citizens. The important question which now
arises is this: How does this view affect the charter granted to the
citizens by Henry I.?
We have first to consider the date to which the charter should be
assigned. Mr. Loftie characteristically observes that Rymer, "from the
names appended to it or some other evidence, dates it in 1101."[1050]
As a matter of fact, Rymer assigns no year to it; nor, indeed, did
Rymer himself even include it in his work. In the modern enlarged
edition of that work the charter is printed, but without a date, nor
was it till 1885 that in the Record Office Syllabus, begun by Sir T. D.
Hardy, the date 1101 was assigned to it.[1051] That date is possibly to
be traced to Northouck's History of London (1773), in which the
commencement of Henry's reign is suggested as a probable period
(p. 27). This view is set forth also in a modern work upon the
subject.[1052] It is not often that we meet with a charter so difficult to
date. The formula of address, as it includes justices, points,
according to my own theory, to a late period in the reign, as also
does the differentiation between the justice and the sheriff. And the
witnesses do the same. But there is, unfortunately, no witness of
sufficient prominence to enable us to fix the date with precision. All
that we can say is that such a name as that of Hugh Bigod points to
the period 1123-1135, and that, of the nine witnesses named, seven
or eight figure in the Pipe-Roll of 1130 (31 Hen. I.). This would
suggest that these two documents must be of about the same date.
Now, though we cannot trace the tenure of the shrievalty before
Michaelmas, 1128, from the Roll, there is, as I have said, no sign
that this charter had come into play. Nor is it easy to understand
how or why it could be withdrawn within a very few years of its
grant. In short, for this view there is not a scrap of evidence; against
it, is all probability. If, on the contrary, we adopt the hypothesis
which I am now going to advance, namely, that the charter was later
than the Pipe-Roll, the difficulties all vanish. By this view, the lease
for a year, to which the Pipe-Roll bears witness, would be succeeded
by a permanent arrangement, that lease of the ferm in perpetuity,
which we find recorded in the charter.
It is, indeed, evident that the contrary view rests solely on the
guess at "1101," or on the assumption of Dr. Stubbs that the charter
was earlier than the Pipe-Roll. Mr. Freeman and others have merely
followed him. Dr. Stubbs writes thus:—
"Between the date of Henry's charter and that of the great Pipe-Roll, some
changes in the organization of the City must have taken place. In 1130 there were
four sheriffs or vicecomites, who jointly account for the ferm of London, instead of
the one mentioned in the charter; and part of the account is rendered by a
chamberlain of the City. The right to appoint the sheriffs has been somehow
withdrawn, for the citizens pay a hundred marks of silver that they may have a
sheriff of their own choice," etc., etc.[1053]
But our great historian nowhere tells us what he considers "the date
of Henry's charter" to have been. If that date was subsequent to the
Pipe-Roll, the whole of his argument falls to the ground.
The substitution of four sheriffs for one, to which Dr. Stubbs
alludes, is a matter of slight consequence, for the number of the
"vicecomites" varies throughout. As a matter of fact, the abbreviated
forms leave us, as in the Pipe-Roll of 1130, doubtful whether we
ought to read "vicecomitem" or "vicecomites," and even if the
former is the one intended, we know, both in this and other cases,
that there was nothing unusual in putting the office in commission
between two or more. As to the chamberlain, he does not figure in
connection with the firma, with which alone we are here concerned.
But, oddly enough, Dr. Stubbs has overlooked the really important
point, namely, that the firma is not £300, as fixed by the charter, but
over £500.[1054] This increases the discrepancy on which Dr. Stubbs
lays stress. The most natural inference from this fact is that, as on
several later occasions, the Crown had greatly raised the firma
(which had been under the Conqueror £300), and that the citizens
now, by a heavy payment, secured its reduction to the original
figure. Thus, on my hypothesis that the charter was granted
between 1130 and 1135, the Crown must have been tempted, by
the offer of an enormous sum down, to grant (1) a lease in
perpetuity, (2) a reduction of the fee-farm rent ("firma") to £300 a
year. As the sum to which the firma had been raised by the king,
together with the annual gersoma, amounted to some £600 a year,
such a reduction can only have been purchased by a large payment
in ready money.
It was, of course, by such means as these that Henry accumulated
the vast "hoard" that the treasury held at his death. He may not
improbably in collecting this wealth have kept in view what appears
to have been the supreme aim of his closing years, namely, the
securing of the succession to his heirs. This was to prove the means
by which their claims should be supported. It would, perhaps, be
refining too much to suggest that he hoped by this charter to attach
the citizens to the interests of his line, on whom alone it could be
binding. In any case his efforts were notoriously vain, for London
headed throughout the opposition to the claims of his heirs. I cannot
but think that his financial system had much to do with this result,
and that, as with the Hebrews at the death of Solomon, the citizens
of London bethought them only of his "grievous service" and his
"heavy yoke," as when they met the demand of his daughter for an
enormous sum of money[1055] by bluntly requesting a return to the
system of Edward the Confessor.[1056]
In any case the concessions in Henry's charter were wholly
ignored both by Stephen and by the Empress, when they granted in
turn to the Earl of Essex the shrievalty of London and Middlesex
(1141-42).
A fresh and important point must, however, now be raised. What
was the attitude of Henry II. towards his grandfather's charter? Of
our two latest writers on the subject, Mr. Loftie tells us that
"Henry II. was too astute a ruler not to put himself at once on a good footing with
the citizens. One of his first acts was to confirm the Great Charter of his
grandfather."[1057]
Miss Norgate similarly asserts that "the charter granted by
Henry II. to the citizens, some time before the end of 1158, is simply
a confirmation of his grandfather's."[1058] Such, indeed, would seem
to be the accepted belief. Yet, when we compare the two
documents, we find that the special concessions with which I am
here dealing, and which form the opening clauses of the charter of
Henry I., are actually omitted altogether in that of Henry II.![1059]
This leads us to examine the rest of the latter document. To facilitate
this process I have here arranged the two charters side by side, and
divided their contents into numbered clauses, italicizing the points of
difference.

Henry I. Henry II.

(1) Cives non placitabunt extra (1) Nullus eorum placitet extra
muros civitatis pro ullo placito. muros civitatis Londoniarum[1060] de
ullo placito præter placita de tenuris
exterioribus, exceptis monetariis et
ministris meis.

(2) Sint quieti de schot et de loth de (2) Concessi etiam eis quietanciam
Danegildo et de murdro, et nullus murdri, [et[1061]] infra urbem et
eorum faciat bellum. Portsokna,[1062] et quod nullus[1063]
faciat bellum.[1064]

(3) Et si quis civium de placitis (3) De placitis ad coronam

coronæ implacitatus fuerit, per [spectantibus[1065]] se possunt
sacramentum quod judicatum fuerit disrationare secundum antiquam
in civitate, se disrationet homo consuetudinem civitatis.
Londoniarum.

(4) Et infra muros civitatis nullus (4) Infra muros nemo capiat
hospitetur, neque de mea familia, hospitium per vim vel per
neque de alia, nisi alicui hospitium liberationem Marescalli.
liberetur.

(5) Et omnes homines Londoniarum (5) Omnes cives Londoniarum[1066]

sint quieti et liberi, et omnes res sint quieti de theloneo et lestagio
eorum, et per totam Angliam et per per totam Angliam et per
portus maris, de thelonio et passagio portum[1067] maris.
et lestagio et omnibus aliis
consuetudinibus.

(6) Et ecclesiæ et barones et cives [This clause is wholly omitted.]

teneant et habeant bene et in pace
socnas suas cum omnibus
consuetudinibus, ita quod hospites
qui in soccis suis hospitantur nulli
dent consuetudines suas, nisi illi
cujus socca fuerit, vel ministro suo
quem ibi posuerit.

(7) Et homo Londoniarum non (7) Nullus de misericordia pecuniæ

judicetur in misericordia pecuniæ judicetur nisi secundum legem
nisi ad suam were, scilicet ad c civitatis quam habuerunt tempore
solidos, dico de placito quod ad Henrici regis[1068] avi mei.
pecuniam pertineat.

(8) Et amplius non sit miskenninga (8) In civitate in nullo placito sit
in hustenge, neque in folkesmote, miskenninga; et quod Hustengus
neque in aliis placitis infra civitatem; semel tantum in hebdomada
Et husteng sedeat semel in teneatur.
hebdomada, videlicet die Lunæ.

(9) Et terras suas et wardemotum et (9) Terras suas et tenuras et

debita civibus meis habere faciam vadimonia et debita omnia juste
infra civitatem et extra. habeant, quicunque eis debeat.

(10) Et de terris de quibus ad me (10) De terris suis et tenuris quæ

clamaverint rectum eis tenebo lege infra urbem sunt, rectum eis
civitatis. teneatur secundum legem[1069]
civitatis; et de omnibus debitis suis
quæ accomodata fuerint apud
Londonias,[1070] et de vadimoniis
ibidem factis, placita [? sint] apud
Londoniam.[1071]

(12) Et omnes debitores qui civibus (11) Et si quis in tota Anglia

debita debent eis reddant vel in theloneum et consuetudinem ab
Londoniis se disrationent quod non hominibus Londoniarum[1070] ceperit,
debent. Quod si reddere noluerint, postquam ipse a recto defecerit,
neque ad disrationandum venire, Vicecomes Londoniarum[1070]
tunc cives quibus debita sua debent namium inde apud Londonias[1070]
capiant intra civitatem namia sua, capiat.
vel de comitatu in quo manet qui
debitum debet.
 (11) Et si quis thelonium vel (12) Habeant fugationes suas,
consuetudinem a civibus ubicumque[1073]habuerunt tempore
Londoniarum ceperit, cives Regis Henrici avi mei.
Londoniarum capiant de burgo vel
de villa ubi theloneum vel
consuetudo capta fuit, quantum
homo Londoniarum pro theloneo
dedit, et proinde de damno ceperit.
[1072]

(13) Et cives habeant fugationes (13) Insuper etiam, ad

suas ad fugandum sicut melius et emendationem civitatis, eis concessi
plenius habuerunt antecessores quod[1074] sint quieti de Brudtolle, et
eorum, scilicet Chiltre et Middlesex de Childewite, et de Yaresive,[1075] et
et Sureie. de Scotale; ita quod Vicecomes
meus (sic) London[iarum][1076] vel
aliquis alius ballivus Scotalla non
faciat.

Before passing to a comparison of these charters, we must glance

at the question of texts. The charter of Henry I. is taken from the
Select Charters of Dr. Stubbs, who has gone to the Fœdera for his
text (which is taken from an Inspeximus of 5 Edw. IV.). That of
Henry II. is taken from the transcript in the Liber Custumarum
(collated with the Liber Rubeus). Neither of these sources is by any
means as pure as could be wished. The names of the witnesses in
both had always aroused my suspicions,[1077] but the collation of the
two charters has led to a singular discovery. It will be noticed that in
the charter of Henry I. the citizens are guaranteed "terras et
wardemotum et debita sua." Now, this is on the face of it an
unmeaning combination. Why should the wardmoot be thus
sandwiched between the lands of the citizens and the debts due to
them? And what can be the meaning of confirming to them their
wardmoot (? wardmoots), when the hustings is only mentioned as
an infliction and the folkmoot as a medium of extortion? Yet, corrupt
though this passage, on the face of it, appears, our authorities have
risen at this unlucky word, if I may venture on the expression, like
pike. Dr. Stubbs, Professor Freeman, Miss Norgate, Mr. Green, Mr.
Loftie, Mr. Price, etc., etc., have all swallowed it without suspicion.
Historians, like doctors, may often differ, but truly "when they do
agree their unanimity is wonderful." Collation, however, fortunately
proves that "wardemotum" is nothing more than a gross misreading
of "vadimonia," a word which restores to the passage its sense by
showing that what Henry confirmed to the citizens was "the property
mortgaged to them, and the debts due to them."[1078]
Having thus enforced the necessity for caution in arguing from the
text as it stands, I would urge that, with the exception of the
avowed addition at the close, the later charter has, in sundry details,
the aspect of a grudging confirmation, restricting rather than
enlarging the benefits conferred. This, however, is but a small matter
in comparison with its total omission of the main concession itself.
This fact, so strangely overlooked, coincides with the king's allusion
to the sheriff as "vicecomes meus" (no longer the citizens' sheriff),
[1079] but explains above all the circumstance, which would be quite

inexplicable without it, that the firma is again, under Henry II., found
to be not £300, but over £500 a year.
In 1164 (10 Hen. II.) the firma of London, if I reckon it right, was,
as in 1130 (31 Hen. I.), about £520.[1080] In 1160 (6 Hen. II.) it was
a few pounds less,[1081] and in 1161 (7 Hen. II.) it was little, it would
seem, over £500.[1082] But in these calculations it is virtually
impossible to attain perfect accuracy, not only from the system of
keeping accounts partly in libræ partly in marcæ, and partly in
money "blanched" partly in money "numero," but also from the fact
that the figures on the Pipe-Rolls are by no means so infallible as
might be supposed.[1083]
Nor does the charter of Richard I. (April 23, 1194) make any
change. It merely confirms that of his father. But John, in addition to
confirming this (June 17, 1199), granted a supplementary charter
(July 5, 1199)—
"Sciatis nos concessisse et præsenti Charta nostra confirmasse civibus
Londoniarum Vicecomitatum Londoniarum et de Middelsexia, cum omnibus rebus
et consuetudinibus quæ pertinent ad prædictum Vicecomitatum ... reddendo inde
annuatim nobis et heredibus nostris ccc libras sterlingorum blancorum.... Et
præterea concessimus civibus Londoniarum, quod ipsi de se ipsis faciant
Vicecomites quoscunque voluerint, et amoveant quando voluerint; ... Hanc vero
concessionem et confirmationem fecimus civibus Londoniarum propter
emendationem ejusdem civitatis et quia antiquitus consuevit esse ad firmam pro
ccc libris."[1084]
Here at length we return to the concessions of Henry I., with
which this charter of John ought to be carefully compared. With the
exception of the former's provision about the "justiciar" (an
exception which must not be overlooked), the concessions are the
same. The subsequent raising of the firma to £400 (in 1270), and its
eventual reduction to £300 (in 1327), have been already dealt with
(pp. 358, 359).
We see then that, in absolute contradiction of the received belief
on the subject, the shrievalty was not in the hands of the citizens
during the twelfth century (i.e. from "1101"), but was held by them
for a few years only, about the close of the reign of Henry I. The fact
that the sheriffs of London and Middlesex were, under Henry II. and
Richard I., appointed throughout by the Crown, must compel our
historians to reconsider the independent position they have assigned
to the City at that early period. The Crown, moreover, must have
had an object in retaining this appointment in its hands. We may
find it, I think, in that jealousy of exceptional privilege or exemption
which characterized the régime of Henry II. For, as I have shown,
the charters to Geoffrey remind us that the ambition of the urban
communities was analogous to that of the great feudatories in so far
as they both strove for exemption from official rule. It was precisely
to this ambition that Henry II. was opposed; and thus, when he
granted his charter to London, he wholly omitted, as we have seen,
two of his grandfather's concessions, and narrowed down those that
remained, that they might not be operative outside the actual walls
of the city. When the shrievalty was restored by John to the citizens
(1199), the concession had lost its chief importance through the
triumph of the "communal" principle. When that civic revolution had
taken place which introduced the "communa" with its mayor—a
revolution to which Henry II. would never, writes the chronicler, have
submitted—when a Londoner was able to boast that he would have
no king but his mayor, then had the sheriff's position become but of
secondary importance, subordinate, as it has remained ever since, to
that of the mayor himself.
The transient existence of the local justitiarius is a phenomenon of
great importance, which has been wholly misunderstood. The
Mandeville charters afford the clue to the nature of this office. It
represents a middle term, a transitional stage, between the
essentially local shire-reeve and the central "justice" of the king's
court. I have already (p. 106) shown that the office sprang from "the
differentiation of the sheriff and the justice," and represented, as it
were, the localization of the central judicial element. That is to say,
the justitiarius for Essex, or Herts., or London and Middlesex, was a
purely local officer, and yet exercised, within the limits of his
bailiwick, all the authority of the king's justice. So transient was this
state of things that scarcely a trace of it remains. Yet Richard de Luci
may have held the post, as we saw (p. 109), for the county of Essex,
and there is evidence that Norfolk had a justice of its own in the
person of Ralf Passelewe.[1085] Now, in the case of London, the office
was created by the charter of Henry I., granted (as I contend)
towards the end of his reign, and it expired with the accession of
Henry II. It is, therefore, in Stephen's reign that we should expect to
find it in existence; and it is precisely in that reign that we find the
office eo nomine twice granted to the Earl of Essex and twice
mentioned as held by Gervase, otherwise Gervase of Cornhill.[1086]
The office of the "Justiciar of London" should now be no longer
obscure; its possible identity with those of portreeve, sheriff, or
mayor cannot, surely, henceforth be maintained.

[1009] On the somewhat thorny question of the right

extension of "Lond'" (Londonia or Londoniæ) I would explain at
the outset that both forms, the singular and the plural, are
found, so that either extension is legitimate. I have seen no
reason to change my belief (as set forth in the Athenæum,
1887) that "Londonia" is the Latinization of the English
"Londone," and "Londoniæ" of the Norman "Londres."
[1010] "Vicecomitatus de Londonia et de Middelsexa ... pro
ccc libris."
[1011] "Vicecomitatum Lundoniæ et Middelsex pro ccc libris."
[1012] Madox's Firma Burgi, p. 242, note.
[1013] These words were written before the late changes.
[1014] A remarkable illustration of this loose usage is afforded
by the case of the archdeaconry. Take the styles of Ralph "de
Diceto." Dr. Stubbs writes of his archdeaconry: "That it was the
archdeaconry of Middlesex is certain ... it is beyond doubt, and
wherever Ralph is called Archdeacon of London, it is only
loosely in reference to the fact that he was one of the four
archdeacons of the diocese" (Radulfi de Diceto Opera, I. xxxv.,
xxxvi.). But, as to this explanation, the writer adduces no
evidence in support of this view, that all "four archdeacons"
might be described, loosely, as "of London." Indeed, he admits,
further on (p. xl., note), "that the title of Essex or Colchester is
generally given to the holders of these two archdeaconries, so
that really the only two between which confusion was likely to
arise were London and Middlesex." Now, in a very formal
document, quoted by Dr. Stubbs himself (p. 1., note), Ralph is
emphatically styled "Archdeacon of London." It is clear,
therefore, that, in the case of this archdeaconry, that style was
fully recognized, and the explanation of this is to be found, I
would suggest, in the use, exemplified in the text ut supra, of
"London" and "Middlesex" as convertible terms.
[1015] Mr. Freeman himself makes the same mistake, and
insists on regarding Middlesex as a subject district round the
City.
[1016] Even Dr. Sharpe, the learned editor of the valuable
Calendar of Hustings Wills, is similarly puzzled by a grant of
twenty-five marks out of the king's ferm "de civitate London,"
to be paid annually by the sheriffs of London and Middlesex (i.
610), because he imagines that the firma was paid in respect of
the sheriffwick of Middlesex alone.
[1017]

"It has been supposed that the "The next substantial benefit
justiciar here mentioned they derived from the charter
means a mayor or chief was the leave to elect their
magistrate, and that the grant own justiciar. They may place
includes that of the election of whom they will to hold pleas of
the supreme executive officer the Crown. The portreeve is
of the City. It may be so, but here evidently intended, for it
all probability is against this is manifestly absurd to
view. For by this time the suppose, as some have done,
citizens already appear to have that Henry allowed the citizens
selected their own portreeve, to elect a reeve for Middlesex,
by whatever name he was if they could not elect one for
called; and it is absurd to themselves; and if proof were
suppose that the king gave wanting, we have it in the
them power to appoint a references to the trials before
sheriff of Middlesex, if they the portreeve which are found
were not already allowed to in very early documents. In
appoint their own. The one of these, which cannot be
omission of any reference to dated later than 1115, Gilbert
the portreeve in the charter Proudfoot, or Prutfot,
cannot, in fact, be otherwise described as vicecomes, is
accounted for" (History of mentioned as having some
London, i. 90). time before given judgment
against the dean and chapter
as to a piece of land on the
present site of the Bank of
England" (London, p. 29).
[1018] Ninth Report Hist. MSS., i. 66 b.
[1019] Reference to p. 110, supra, will show at once how vain
is the effort to wrench "justitiarius" from its natural and well-
known meaning.
[1020] See Appendix O.
[1021] Here and elsewhere I use "shire" on the strength of
Middlesex having a "sheriff" (i.e. a shire-reeve).
[1022] London, p. 126.
[1023] This springs, of course, from what I have termed "the
fundamental error."
[1024] See p. 37, ante, and Norm. Conq., iii. (1869) 424, 544,
729.
[1025] I would suggest that, as in the case of Ulf, the Reeve
of "London and Middlesex" might be addressed as portreeve in
writs affecting the City and as shire-reeve in those more
particularly affecting the rest of Middlesex.
[1026] Dr. Stubbs, in a footnote, hazards "the conjecture" that
"the disappearance of the portreeve" may be connected with "a
civic revolution, the history of which is now lost, but which
might account for the earnest support given by the citizens to
Stephen," etc. In another place (Select Charters, p. 300) he
writes: "How long the Portreeve of London continued to exist is
not known; perhaps until he was merged in the mayor." I have
already dealt with Mr. Loftie's explanation of "the omission of
any reference to the portreeve" in the charter.
[1027] See p. 37, ante, and Addenda.
[1028] See Athenæum, February 5, 1887, p. 191; also my
papers on "The First Mayor of London" in Academy, November
12, 1887, and Antiquary, March, 1887.
[1029] Const. Hist., i. 404.
[1030] "The ... shire organization which seems to have
displaced early in the century" [i.e. by Henry's charter] "the
complicated system of guild and franchise" (ibid., i. 630).
[1031] Ibid., i. 405.
[1032] This was written before the days of the London County
Council.
[1033] Ibid., i. 630.
[1034] Liber de Antiquis Legibus, p. 124: "Circa idem tempus,
scilicet Pentecosten (1270), ad instantiam domini Edwardi
concessit Dominus Rex civibus ad habendum de se ipsis duos
Vicecomites, qui tenerent Vicecomitatum Civitatis et Midelsexiæ
ad firmam sicut ante solebant: Ita, tamen, cum temporibus
transactis solvissent inde tantummodo per annum ccc libras
sterlingorum blancorum, quod de cetero solvent annuatim cccc
libras sterlingorum computatorum.... Et tunc tradite sunt
civibus omnes antique carte eorum de libertatibus suis que
fuerunt in manu Domini Regis, et concessum est eis per
Dominum Regem et per Dominum Edwardum ut eis plenarie
utantur, excepto quod pro firma Civitatis et Comitatus solvent
per annum cccc libras, sicut præscriptum est.
"Tunc temporis dederunt Cives Domino Regi centum marcas
sterlingorum.... Dederunt etiam Domino Edwardo Vᶜ. marcas ad
expensas suas in itinere versus Terram Sanctam." This passage
is quoted in full because, important though the transaction is,
not a trace of it is to be found in The Historical Charters and
Constitutional Documents of the City of London (1884), the
latest work on the subject. So, in 1284, when Edward I., who
had "taken into his hands" the town of Nottingham for some
years, restored the burgesses their liberties, it was at the price
of their firma being raised from £52 to £60 a year.
[1035] History of London, ii. 208, 209.
[1036] A curious illustration of the fact that this firma arose
out of the city and county alike is afforded by Henry III.'s
charter (1253): "quod vii libre sterlingorum per annum
allocarentur Vicecomitibus in firma eorum pro libertate ecclesiæ
sancti Pauli."
[1037] This is illustrated by the subsequent prohibition of the
sheriffs themselves underletting the county at "farm" (Liber
Custumarum, p. 91; Liber Albus, p. 46).
[1038] Rot. Pip., 31 Hen. I., p. 2.
[1039] Ibid., p. 122.
[1040] Ibid., p. 100.
[1041] Ibid., p. 52.
[1042] "William de Einesford, vicecomes de Londoniâ," heads
the list of witnesses to a London agreement assigned to 1114-
1130 (Ramsey Cartulary, i. 139).
[1043] Rot. Pip., 31 Hen. I., p. 144.
[1044] Probably the mysterious "scotale" was among them
(cf. Stubbs, Const. Hist., i. 628).
[1045] Cf. Stubbs, Const. Hist., i. 410.
[1046] The ferm of Lincolnshire in 1130 was rather over £750
(£40 "numero" plus £716 16s. 3d. "blanch").
[1047] We have a precisely similar illustration, ninety years
later, in the case of Carlisle. In 5 Hen. III. (1220-21) the
citizens of Carlisle obtained permission to hold their city ad
firmam for £60 a year payable to the Crown direct, in the place
of £52 a year payable through the sheriff ("per vicecomitem")
and his ferm of the shire (Ninth Report Hist. MSS., App. i. pp.
197, 202).
[1048] Rot. Pip., 31 Hen. I., p. 149.
[1049] Compare Henry III.'s charter to John Gifard of
Chillington, conceding that during his lifetime he should not be
made a sheriff, coroner, or any other bailiff against his will
(Staffordshire Collections, v. [1] 158).
[1050] History of London, ii. 88. Compare Mr. Loftie's London
("Historic Towns"), p. 28: "The exact date of the charter is
given by Rymer as 1101."
[1051] Vol. iii. p. 4.
[1052] The Charters of the City of London (1884), p. xiiii.: "To
engage the citizens to support his Government he conferred
upon them the advantageous privileges that are conferred in
this charter."
[1053] Const. Hist., i. 406.
[1054] £327 3s. 11d. "blanch," plus £209 6s. 5½d. "numero."
[1055] "Infinitæ copiæ pecuniam ... cum ore imperioso ab eis
exegit" (Gesta Stephani).
[1056] "Interpellata est et a civibus ut leges eis regis Edwardi
observare liceret, quia optimæ erant, non patris sui Henrici quia
graves erant" (Cont. Flor. Wig.).
[1057] London ("Historic Towns"), p. 38. The Master of
University similarly writes: "He [Henry II.] renewed the charter
of the city of London" (i. 90).
[1058] England under the Angevin Kings, ii. 471. The writer,
being only acquainted with the printed copy of the charter
(Liber Custumarum, ed. Riley, pp. 31, 32), had only the names
of the two witnesses there given (the Archbishop of Canterbury
and the Bishop of London) to guide her, but, fortunately, the
Liber Rubeus version records all the witnesses (thirteen in
number) together with the place of testing, thus limiting the
date to 1154-56, and virtually to 1155.
[1059] The omitted clauses are these: "Sciatis me concessisse
civibus meis Londoniarum, tenendum Middlesex ad firmam pro
ccc libris ad compotum, ipsis et heredibus suis, de me et
heredibus meis, ita quod ipsi cives ponent vicecomitem qualem
voluerint de se ipsis, et justitiarium qualem voluerint de se
ipsis, ad custodiendum placita coronæ meæ et eadem
placitanda; et nullus alius erit justitiarius super ipsos homines
Londoniarum."
[1060] "Lond'" (Liber Rubeus).
[1061] "Et" omitted in L. R.
[1062] "Portsoca" (L. R.).
[1063] "Nullus eorum" (L. R.).
[1064] "Duellum" (L. R.).
[1065] "Pertinentibus" (L. R.).
[1066] "London'" (L. R.).
[1067] "Port'" (L. R.).
[1068] "Regis H." (L. R.).
[1069] "Consuetudinem" (L. R.).
[1070] "Lond'" (L. R.).
[1071] "Apud Lond' teneantur" (L. R.).
[1072] Clauses 11 and 12 in the charter of Henry I. are
transposed in that of Henry II. But it is more convenient to
show the transposition as I have done in the text.
[1073] "Eas habuerunt" (L. R.).
[1074] "Omnes sint" (L. R.).
[1075] "Yeresgieve" (L. R.).
[1076] "London'" (L. R.).
[1077] The first two witnesses to that of Henry I. are given as
"episcopo Winton., Roberto filio Richer. (sic)." The bishop's
initial ought to be given, and the second witness is probably
identical with Robert fitz Richard. "Huberto (sic) regis
camerario" has also a suspicious sound. In the second charter
the witnesses are given in the Liber Custumarum as
"Archiepiscopo Cantuariæ, Ricardo Episcopo Londoniarum."
Here, again, the primate's initial should be given; as, indeed, it
is in the (more accurate) Liber Rubeus version, where (vide
supra, p. 367) all the witnesses are entered.
[1078] This explanation is confirmed by examining other
municipal charters based on that of London. In them this
clause always confirms (1) "terras et tenuras," (2) "vadia," (3)
"debita."
[1079] In confirmation of this view, it may be pointed out that
where this same clause occurs in charters to other towns, the
words are "vicecomes noster" in cases, as at Winchester, where
the king retains in his hand the appointment of reeve, but
simply (as at Lincoln) "præpositus" or (as at Northampton)
"præpositus Northamtonie," where the right to elect the reeve
was also conceded.
[1080] £66 17s. 1d. "blanch" plus £474 17s. 10½d. "numero."
[1081] £445 19s. "blanch" plus £78 3s. 6d. "numero."
[1082] £181 14s. 5d. "blanch" plus £335 0s. 7d. "numero."
[1083] As an example of the possibility of error, in the printed
Roll of 1159 (5 Hen. II.) a town is entered on the Roll as paying
"quater xx. lv. libras et ii marcas et dim'." The explanation of
this unintelligible entry is, I may observe, as follows. The
original entry evidently ran, "quater xx et ii marcas et dim'"
(82½ marcs). Over this a scribe will have written the equivalent
amount in pounds ("lv libræ") by interlineation. Then came the
modern transcriber, who with the stupidity of a mechanical
copyist brought down this interlineation into the middle of the
entry, thus converting it into sheer nonsense. We have also to
reckon with such clerical errors as the addition or omission of
an "x" or an "i," of a "bl." or a "no." Where the total to be
accounted for is stated separately, we have a means of
checking the accounts. But where, as at London, this is not so,
we cannot be too careful in accepting the details as given. See
also Addenda.
[1084] Liber Custumarum (Rolls Series), pp. 249-251.
[1085] "Contra Radulfum de Belphago qui tunc vicecomes
erat in provincia illa et contra Radulfum Passelewe ejusdem
provinciæ justiciarium" (Ramsey Cart., i. 149).
[1086] See Appendix K, on "Gervase of Cornhill."
 APPENDIX Q
OSBERTUS OCTODENARII.
(See p. 170.)
The reference to this personage in the charter to the Earl of Essex is
of quite exceptional interest. He was the Osbert (or Osbern) "Huit-
deniers" (alias "Octodenarii" alias "Octonummi") who was a wealthy
kinsman of Becket and employed him, in his house, as a clerk about
this very time (circ. 1139-1142). We meet him as "Osbertus VIII.
denarii" at London in 1130 (Rot. Pip., 31 Hen. I.), and I have also
found him attesting a charter of Henry I., late in the reign, as
"Osberto Octodenar[ii]." Garnier[1087] tells us that the future saint—
"A soen parent vint, un riche hume Lundreis,
Ke mult ert koneiiz et de Frauns et d'Engleis,
O Osbern witdeniers, ki l'retint demaneis.
Puis fu ses escriveins, ne sais dous ans, u treis."

Another biographer writes:—

"Rursus vero Osbernus, Octonummi cognomine, vir insignis in civitate et
multarum possessionum cui carne propinquus erat detentum circa se Thomam fere
per triennium in breviandis sumptibus redditibusque suis jugiter occupabat."[1088]
The influential position of this wealthy Londoner is dwelt on by yet
another biographer:—
"Ad quendam Lundrensem, cognatum suum, qui non solum inter concives,
verum etiam apud curiales, grandis erat nominis et honoris se contulit."[1089]
In one of the appendices we shall detect him under the strange
form "Ottdevers"[1090] (= "Ottdeuers," a misreading for "Ottdeners")
witnessing a treaty arrangement between the Earls of Hereford and
Gloucester. This he did in his capacity of feudal tenant to the latter,
for in the Earl of Gloucester's Carta (1166) of his tenants in Kent we
read: "Feodum Osberti oitdeniers i mil[item]," from which we learn
that he had held one knight's fee.[1091]
This singular cognomen, though savouring of the nickname
period, may have become hereditary, for we meet with a Philip
Utdeners in 1223, and with Alice and Agnes his daughters in 1233.
[1092]

As I have here alluded to Becket it may be permissible to mention

that as the statements of his biographers in the matter of Osbert are
confirmed by this extraneous evidence, so have we also evidence in
charters of his residence, as "Thomas of London," in the primate's
household. To two charters of Theobald to Earls Colne Priory the first
witness is "Thoma Lond' Capellano nostro,"[1093] while an even more
interesting charter of the primate brings before us those three
names, which, says William of Canterbury, were those of his three
intimates, the first witness being Roger of Bishopsbridge, while the
fourth and fifth are John of Canterbury and Thomas of London,
"clerks."[1094] Here is abundant evidence that Becket was then known
as "Thomas of London," as indeed Gervase of Canterbury himself
implies.[1095]

[1087] Vie de St. Thomas (ed. Hippeau, 1859).

[1088] Grim.
[1089] Auctor anonymus.
[1090] Its apparent dissimilarity to the "Octod'" of Geoffrey's
charter is instructive to note.
[1091] Hearne, who prints this entry, "Feodum Osberti oct.
deniers i. mil." (Liber Niger, ed. 1774, i. 53), makes it the
occasion of an exquisitely funny display of erudite Latinity, in
which he gravely rebukes Dugdale for his ignorance on the
subject ("quid sibi velit denariata militis ignorasse videtur
Dugdalius quam tamen is facile intelliget," etc., etc.), having
himself mistaken the tenant's name for a term of land
measurement.
[1092] Bracton's Note-book (ed. Maitland), ii. 616; iii. 495. A
Nicholas "Treys-deners" or "Treydeners" occurs in Cornwall in
the same reign (De Banco, 45-46 Hen. III., Mich., No. 16, m.
62). "Penny" and "Twopenny" are still familiar surnames among
us, as is also "Pennyfather" (? Pennyfarthing).
[1093] Addl. MS., 5860, fols. 221, 223 (ink).
[1094] Cott. MSS., Nero, C. iii. fol. 188.
[1095] "Clerico suo Thomæ Londoniensi" (i. 160).
 APPENDIX R.
THE FOREST OF ESSEX.
(See pp. 92, 168, 182.)
The references to assarts and to (forest) pleas in the first and second
charters of the Empress ought to be carefully compared, as they are
of importance in many ways. They run thus respectively:—

First Charter. Second Charter.

Ut ipse et omnes homines sui per Quod ipse et omnes homines sui
totam Angliam sint quieti de Wastis habeant et lucrentur omnia essarta
forestariis et assartis que facta sunt sua libera et quieta de omnibus
in feodo ipsius Gaufredi usque ad placitis facta usque ad diem qua
diem quo homo meus devenit, et ut servicio domini mei Comitis
a die illo in antea omnia illa essarta Andegavie ac meo adhæsit.
sint amodo excultibilia, et arrabilia
sine forisfacto.

A similar provision will be found in the charter to Aubrey de Vere.

It is evident from these special provisions that the grantees attached
a peculiar importance to this indemnity for their assarts; and it is
equally noteworthy that the Empress is careful to restrict that
indemnity to those assarts which had been made before a certain
date ("facta usque ad diem quâ," etc.). This restriction should be
compared with that which similarly limited the indemnity claimed by
the barons of the Exchequer,[1096] and which has been somewhat
overlooked.[1097]
Assarts are duly dealt with in the Leges Henrici Primi, and would
form an important part of the "placita forestæ" in his reign. It is
reasonable to presume that one of the first results of the removal of
his iron hand would be a violent reaction against the tyranny of "the
forest." Indeed, we know that Stephen was compelled to give way
upon the point. A general outburst of "assarting" would at once
follow. Thus the prospect of the return, with the Empress, of her
father's forest-law would greatly alarm the offenders who were guilty
of "assarts."[1098]
But, further, the earl's fief lay away from the forest proper. Why,
then, was this concession of such importance in his eyes? We are
helped towards an answer to this question by Mr. Fisher's learned
and instructive work on The Forest of Essex. The facts there given,
though needing some slight correction, show us that the Crown
asserted in the reign of Henry III., that the portion of the county
which had been afforested since the accession of Henry II. had (with
the exception of the hundred of Tendring) been merely reafforested,
having been already "forest" at the death of Henry I., though under
Stephen it had ceased to be so. This claim, which was successfully
asserted, affected more than half the county. Now, it is singular that
throughout the struggle, on this subject, with the Crown, the true
forest, that of Waltham (now Epping), was always conceded to be
"within forest." Mr. Fisher's valuable maps show its limits clearly. It
was, accordingly, tacitly admitted by the perambulation consequent
on the Charter of the Forest to have been "forest" before 1154.
The theory suggested to me by these data is this. Stephen, we
know, by his Charter of Liberties consented that all the forests
created by Henry I. should be disafforested, and retained for himself
only those which had been "forest" in the days of the first and the
second William. Under this arrangement he retained, I hold, the
small true forest (Waltham forest), but had to resign the grasp of the
Crown on the additions made to it by Henry I., which amounted to
considerably more than half the county. My view that this sweeping
extension of "forest" was the work of Henry I. is confirmed by the
fact that his "forest" policy is admittedly the most objectionable
feature of his rule. Nor, I take it, was it inspired so much by the love
of sport as by the great facilities it afforded for pecuniary exaction.
In the Pipe-Roll of his thirty-first year we find (to adapt an old
saying) "forest pleas as thick as fleas" in Essex, affording proof,
moreover, that his "forest" had extended to the extreme north-east
of the Lexden hundred. Here then again, I believe, as in so many
other matters, Henry II. ignored his predecessor, and reverted to the
status quo ante. Nor was the claim he revived finally set at rest, till
Parliament disposed of it for ever in the days of Charles I.
An interesting charter bearing on this subject is preserved to us by
Inspeximus.[1099] It records the restoration by Stephen to the Abbess
of Barking of all her estates afforested by Henry I.[1100] Now, this
charter, which is tested at Clarendon (perhaps the only record of
Stephen being there), is witnessed by W[illiam] Martel, A[ubrey] de
Ver, and E[ustace] fitz John. The name of this last witness[1101] dates
the charter as previous to 1138 (when he threw over Stephen), and,
virtually, to the king's departure for Normandy early in 1137.
Consequently (and this is an important point) we here have Stephen
granting, as a favour, to Barking Abbey what he had promised in his
great charter to grant universally.[1102] This confirms the charge
made by Henry of Huntingdon that he repudiated the concession he
had made. His subsequent troubles, however, must have made it
difficult for him to adhere to this policy, or check the process of
assarting. His grant to the abbess was unknown to Mr. Fisher, who
records an inquest of 1292, by which it was found that the woods of
the abbess were "without the Regard;" and the Regarders were
forbidden to exercise their authority within them.

[1096] "Ut de hiis essartis dicantur quieti, quæ fuerant ante

diem quâ rex illustris Henricus primus rebus humanis exemptus
est" (Dialogus, i. 11). The reason for the restriction is added.
[1097] See, for instance, The Forest of Essex (Fisher), p. 313.
[1098] As a matter of fact, her son's succession was marked
by the exaction of heavy sums, under this head, as shown by
the extracts from his first Pipe-Roll in the Red book of the
Exchequer.
[1099] Pat. 2 Hen. VI., p. 3, m. 18.
[1100] "Reddo et concedo ecclesiæ Berchingie et Abbatissæ
Adel[iciæ] omnes boscos et terras suas ... quas Henricus Rex
afforestavit, ut illas excolat et hospitetur."
[1101] Probably present as a brother of the abbess ("Soror
Pagani filii Johannis").
[1102] "Omnes forestas quas rex Henricus superaddidit
ecclesiis et regno quietas reddo et concedo."
 APPENDIX S.
THE TREATY OF ALLIANCE BETWEEN THE EARLS OF HEREFORD
AND GLOUCESTER.
(See p. 176.)
The document which is printed below is unknown, it would seem, to
historians. It is of a very singular and, in many ways, of a most
instructive character. The fact that Earl Miles is one of the
contracting parties dates the document as belonging to the period
between his creation (July 25, 1141) and his death (December 24,
1143). Further, the fact that the treaty provides for the surrender by
him to the Earl of Gloucester of one of his sons as a hostage, taken
with the fact that the Earl of Gloucester is recorded (supra, p. 196)
to have demanded from his leading supporters their sons as
hostages when he left England for Normandy, creates an extremely
strong presumption that this document should be assigned to that
occasion (June, 1142). It is here printed from a transcript by
Dugdale, which I found among his MSS. The absence of any
provision defining the services to be rendered by Earl Miles suggests
that this portion of the treaty is omitted in the transcript. There is, I
think, just a chance that the original may yet be discovered among
the public records, for they fortunately contain a similar treaty
between the sons and successors of the two contracting parties.[1103]
It may be, however, that the original is the document referred to by
Dugdale (Baronage, i. 537) as "penes Joh. Philipot Somerset
Heraldum anno 1640." The close resemblance between the later
document[1103] and that which I here print confirms the authenticity
of the latter, and is, it will be seen, illustrated by the wording of the
opening clauses:—

Noscant omnes hanc esse Hæc est confederatio amoris inter

confederationem amoris inter Willelmum Comitem Gloec[estrie] et
Robertum Comitem Gloecestrie et Rogerum comitem Herefordie.
Milonem Comitem Herefordie.
We have also the noteworthy coincidence that Richard de St. Quintin
and Hugh de Hese, who are here hostages respectively for the Earls
of Gloucester and Hereford, figure again in the later document as
hostages for the earls' successors.[1104]
Another document with which this treaty should be carefully
compared is the remarkable agreement, in the same reign, between
the Earls of Chester and of Leicester,[1105] though this latter suggests
by its title—"Hæc est conventio ... et finalis pax et concordia," etc.—
the settlement of a strife between them rather than a friendly
alliance. I see in it, indeed, the intervention, if not the arbitration, of
the Church.
Both these alliances, again, should be compared, for their form,
with the treaty between Henry I. and Count Robert of Flanders.[1106]
Although a generation earlier than the document here printed, the
parallels are very striking:—

Robertus, Comes Flandriæ, fide et Robertus, Comes Gloecestrie

sacramento assecuravit Regi Henrico assecuravit Milonem Comitem
vitam suam et membra quæ corpori Herefordie fide et sacramento, ut
suo pertinent ... et quod juvabit custodiet illi pro toto posse suo et
eum, etc. sine ingenio suam vitam et suum
membrum ... et auxiliabitur illi, etc.
Porro Comitissa affidavit, quod,
quantum poterit, Comitem in hac Et in hac ipsa confederatione amoris,
conventione tenebit, et in amicitia affidavit Comitissa Gloecestrie quod
regis, et in prædicto servitio fideliter suum dominum in hoc amore erga
per amorem. Milonem Comitem Hereford pro
posse suo tenebit.
Hujus conventionis tenendæ ex
parte Comitis obsides sunt Et de hac conventione tenendâ ex
subscripti.... Quod si Comes ab hac parte Comitis Gloecestrie sunt hii
conventione exierit et ... infra XL dies obsides, etc.... Quod si Comes
emendare noluerit, etc. Gloecestrie de hac conventione
exiret.... Et si infra XL dies se nollet
erga Comitem Herefordie erigere,
etc.
 The Treaty.
Noscant omnes hanc esse confederationem amoris inter Robertum
Comitem Gloecestrie et Milonem Comitem Herefordie, Robertus
Comes Gloecestrie assecuravit Milonem Comitem Herefordie fide et
sacramento ut custodiet illi pro toto posse suo et sine ingenio suam
vitam et suum membrum et terrenum suum honorem, et auxiliabitur
illi ad custodiendum sua castella et sua recta et sua hereditaria et
sua tenementa et sua conquisita quæ modo habet et quæ faciet, et
suas consuetudines et rectitudines et suas libertates in bosco et in
plano et aquis, et quod sua hereditaria quæ modo non habet
auxiliabitur ad conquirendum. Et si aliquis vellet inde Comiti Hereford
malum facere, vel de aliquo decrescere, si comes Hereford vellet
inde guerrare, quod Robertus comes Gloecestrie cum illo se teneret,
et quod ad suum posse illi auxiliaretur per fidem et sine ingenio, nec
pacem neque treuias cum illis haberet qui malum comiti Herefordiæ
inferret, nisi per bonum velle et grantam (sic) Comitis Herefordiæ, et
nominatim de hac guerra quæ modo est inter Imperatricem et
Regem Stephanum se cum comite Hereford tenebit et ad unum opus
erit, et de omnibus aliis guerris.
Et in hac ipsa confederatione amoris affidavit Comitissa Gloecestrie
quod suum dominum in hoc amore erga Milonem Comitem Hereford
pro posse suo tenebit. Et si inde exiret, ad suum posse illum ad hoc
reponeret. Et si non posset, legalem recordationem, si opus esset,
inde faceret ad suum scire.
Et de hac conventione firmiter tenendâ ex parte Comitis
Gloecestrie sunt hii obsides per fidem et sacramentum erga Comitem
Hereford: hoc modo, quod si comes Gloecestrie de hac conventione
exiret, dominum suum Comitem Gloecestrie requirerent ut se erga
Comitem Herefordiæ erigeret. Et si infra xl dies se nollet erga
Comitem Herefordie erigere, se Comiti Herefordie liberarent, ad
faciendum de illis suum velle, vel ad illos retinendum in suo servitio
donec illos quietos clamaret vel ad illos ponendos ad legalem
redemptionem ita ne terrâ [? terram] perderent. Et quod legalem
recordationem de hac conventione facerent si opus esset, Guefridus
de Waltervill, Ricardus de Greinvill,[1107] Osbernus Ottdevers,[1108]
Reinald de Cahagnis,[1109] Hubertus Dapifer, Odo Sorus,[1110]
Gislebertus de Umfravil,[1111] Ricardus de Sancto Quintino.[1112]
Et ex parte Milonis Comitis Hereford ad istud confirmandum
concessit Milo Comes Hereford Roberto Comiti Gloecestrie Mathielum
filium suum tenendum in obsidem donec guerra inter Imperatricem
et Regem Stephanum et Henricum filium Imperatricis finiatur.
Et interim si Milo Comes Hereford voluerit aliquem alium de suis
filiis, qui sanus sit, in loco Mathieli filii sui ponere, recipietur.
Et postquam guerra finita fuerit et Robertus Comes Gloecestrie et
Milo Comes Hereford terras suas et sua recta rehabuerint reddet
Robertus Comes Gloecestrie Miloni Comiti Herefordie filium suum. Et
hinc de probis hominibus utriusque comitis considerabuntur et
capientur obsides et securitates de amore ipsorum comitum tenendo
imperpetuum.
Et de hac conventione amoris Rogerus filius Comitis Hereford
affidavit et juravit Comiti Gloecestrie quod patrem suum pro posse
suo tenebit; Et si Comes Hereford inde vellet exire, Rogerus filius
suus, inde illum requireret et inde illum corrigeret. Et si Comes
Hereford se inde erigere nollet, servicium ipsius Rogeri filii sui
prorsus perdet, donec se erga Comitem Gloecestrie erexisset.
Et de hac conventione ex parte Comitis Hereford sunt hii sui
homines obsides erga Comitem Gloecestrie et per sacramenta; hoc
modo, quod si Comes Hereford de hac conventione exiret, dominum
suum Comitem Hereford requirerent ut se erga Comitem Gloecestrie
erigeret. Et si infra xl dies se nollet erga Comitem Gloecestrie erigere
se Comiti Gloecestrie liberarent ad faciendum de illis suum velle, vel
ad illos retinendum in suo servicio donec illos quietos clamaret, vel
ad illos ponendos ad legalem redemptionem, ita ne terram perdent.
Et quod legalem recordationem de hac conventione in Curia facerent
si opus esset, Robertus Corbet, Willelmus Mansel, Hugo de la Hese.

[1103] Duchy of Lancaster: Ancient Charters, Box A. No. 4

(Thirty-Fifth Report of Deputy Keeper (1874), p. 2).