Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Activity Graphs and Processes

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Integrated Formal Methods (IFM 2000)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 1945))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

The widespread adoption of graphical notations for software design has created a demand for formally-based methods to support and extend their use. A principal focus for this demand is the Unified Mo- deling Language (UML), and, within UML, the diagrammatic notations for describing dynamic properties. This paper shows how one such notation, that of Activity Graphs, can be given a process semantics in the language of Communicating Sequen- tial Processes (CSP). Such a semantics can be used to demonstrate the consistency of an object model and to provide a link to other methods and tools. A small example is included.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. D. Amyot, L. Logrippo, R.J.A. Buhr, and T. Gray. Use case maps for the capture and validation of distributed systems requirements. In Proceedings of RE’ 99, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  2. C. Bolton and J. Davies. Using relational and behavioural semantics in the verification of object models. In C. Talcott and S. Smith, editors, Proceedings of FMOODS’ 00. Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2000. To appear.

    Google Scholar 

  3. C. Bolton, J. Davies, and J. Woodcock. On the refinement and simulation of data types and processes. In K. Araki, A. Galloway, and K. Taguchi, editors, Proceedings of IFM’99. Springer, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  4. E. Börger, A. Cavarra, and E. Riccobene. Modeling the dynamics of UML state machines. In Y. Gurevich, P. Kutter, M. Odersky, and L. Thiele, editors, Proceedings of ASM’00, LNCS. Springer-Verlag, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  5. H. Bowman and J. Derrick. A junction between state-based and behavioural specification. In P. Ciancarini, A. Fantechi, and R. Gorrieri, editors, Proceedings of FMOODS’ 99. Kluwer, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  6. S. J. Creese and A. W. Roscoe. Verifying an independent family of inductions simultaneously using data independence and fdr. In Proceedings of FORTE/PSTV’ 99. Kluwer Academic Press, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  7. R. Duke, G. Rose, and G. Smith. Object-Z: a specification language advocated for the description of standards. Computer Standards and Interfaces, 17:511–533, 1995.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. A.S. Evans, R.B. France, K.C. Lano, and B. Rumpe. Developing the UML as a formal modelling notation. In J. Bezivin and P.-A. Muller, editors, UML’98-Beyond the notation, volume 1618 of LNCS. Springer, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  9. C. Fischer. How to combine Z with a process algebra. In J. Bowen, A. Fett, and M. Hinchey, editors, Proceedings of ZUM’ 98, volume 1493 of LNCS. Springer-Verlag, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  10. C. Fischer. Combination and implementation of processes and data: from csp-oz to java. PhD thesis, University of Oldenburg, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  11. R. B. France, J.-M. Bruel, M. M. Larrondo-Petrie, and M. Shroff. Exploring the semantics of UML type structures with Z. In H. Bowman and J. Derrick, editors, Proceedings of FMOODS’ 97, volume 2. Chapman and Hall, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  12. D. Harel. Statecharts: A visual formalism for complex systems. Science of Computer Programming, 8, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  13. C. A. R. Hoare. Communicating Sequential Processes. Prentice Hall, 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  14. D. Latella, I. Majzik, and M. Massink. Towards a formal operational semantics of UML statechart diagrams. In A. Fantechi P. Ciancarini and R. Gorrieri, editors, Proceedings of FMOODS’ 99. Kluwer, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  15. R. Lazic. A semantic study of data independence with applications to model checking. PhD thesis, University of Oxford, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  16. J. Lilius and I. Porres Paltor. Formalising UML state machines for model checking. In R. France and B. Rumpe, editors, UML’99-The Unified Modeling Language, volume 1723 of LNCS. Springer, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Object Management Group. Unified Modeling Language Specification, version 1.3. Rational Software Corporation, Santa Clara, CA 95051, USA, June 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  18. J. L. Peterson. Petri Net Theory and the Modeling of Systems. Prentice-Hall International, 1981.

    Google Scholar 

  19. A. W. Roscoe. The Theory and Practice of Concurrency. Prentice Hall Series in Computer Science, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  20. J. Rumbaugh, I. Jacobson, and G. Booch. The Unified Modeling Language reference manual. Addison-Wesley, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  21. G. Smith. The Object-Z specification language. Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  22. J. M. Spivey. The Z notation: a reference manual. Prentice-Hall International, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  23. J. C. P. Woodcock and J. Davies. Using Z: Specification, Proof and Refinement. Prentice Hall International Series in Computer Science, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Oxford University Computing Laboratory Wolfson Building, Parks Road, Oxford, OX1 3QD

    Christie Bolton & Jim Davies

Authors
  1. Christie Bolton
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jim Davies
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Sekr.FR 5-13 bzw.5-6, TU Berlin, Franklinstr.28-29, 10587, Berlin, Germany

    Wolfgang Grieskamp  & Thomas Santen  & 

  2. School of Computing and Mathematics, University of Teesside, Middlesbrough, TS1 3BA, UK

    Bill Stoddart

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2000 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Bolton, C., Davies, J. (2000). Activity Graphs and Processes. In: Grieskamp, W., Santen, T., Stoddart, B. (eds) Integrated Formal Methods. IFM 2000. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 1945. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-40911-4_6

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-40911-4_6

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-41196-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-40911-3

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation