Advertisement

A UML-Compatible Formal Language for System Architecture Description

  • Matteo Pradella
  • Matteo Rossi
  • Dino Mandrioli
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3530)

Abstract

This paper presents ArchiTRIO (Architectural TRIO), a new temporal logic language which combines a subset of the UML notation with a precise formal semantics inspired from the authors’ experiences. ArchiTRIO allows developers to use standard UML 2.0 notation to describe non-critical aspects of systems, but it also offers a complementary formal notation, fully integrated with the UML one, to represent those system aspects that require precise modeling.

Keywords

Temporal Logic Class Diagram Object Constraint Language Semantic Point Access Control System 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Cigoli, S., Leblanc, P., Malaponti, S., Mandrioli, D., Mazzucchelli, M., Morzenti, A., Spoletini, P.: An Experiment in Applying UML 2.0 to the Development of an Industrial Critical Application. In: Proceedings of the UML 2003 workshop on Critical Systems Development with UML, San Francisco, CA, October 21 (2003)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Coen-Porisini, A., Pradella, M., Rossi, M., Mandrioli, D.: A Formal Approach for Designing CORBA based Applications. ACM TOSEM 12(2), 107–151 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Eclipse Foundation, http://www.eclipse.org
  4. 4.
    Flake, S., Mueller, W.: Formal Semantics of Static and Temporal State-Oriented OCL Constraints. Software and Systems Modeling 2(3), 164–186 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Furia, C.A., Mandrioli, D., Morzenti, A., Pradella, M., Rossi, M., San Pietro, P.: Higher-Order TRIO, Technical Report 2004.28, Dipartimento di Elettronica ed Informazione, Politecnico di Milano (2004)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gargantini, A., Morzenti, A.: Automated Deductive Requirements Analysis of Critical Systems. ACM TOSEM 3(3), 225–307 (2001)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Giese, H., Tichy, M., Burmester, S., Flake, S.: Towards the compositional verification of real-time UML designs. In: Proc. of ESEC/FSE 2003, pp. 38–47. Helsinki, Finland (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lavazza, L., Quaroni, G., Venturelli, M.: Combining UML and formal notations for modelling real-time systems. In: Proc. of ESEC/FSE 2001, Vienna, pp. 196–206 (2001)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Li, X., Liu, Z., Jifeng, H.: A Formal Semantics of UML Sequence Diagram. In: Proceedings of the 2004 Australian Software Engineering Conference, pp. 168–177 (2004)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    McUmber, W.E., Cheng, B.H.C.: A general framework for formalizing UML with formal languages. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ICSE, pp. 433–442 (2001)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Medvidovic, N., Rosenblum, D.S., Redmiles, D.F., Robbins, J.E.: Modeling Software Architectures in the Unified Modeling Language. ACM TOSEM 11(1), 2–57 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Mitschele-Theil, A.: System Engineering with SDL – Developing Performance-Critical Communication Systems. John Wiley, Chichester (2001)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Morzenti, A., Pradella, M., San Pietro, P., Spoletini, P.: Model-checking TRIO specifications in SPIN. In: Araki, K., Gnesi, S., Mandrioli, D. (eds.) FME 2003. LNCS, vol. 2805, pp. 542–561. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Object Management Group, UML 2.0 Superstructure Specification, Technical Report, OMG, ptc/03-08-02 (2003)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Object Management Group, UML 2.0 OCL Specification, Technical Report, OMG, ptc/03-10-14 (2003)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Rossi, M., Mandrioli, D.: A Formal Approach for Modeling and Verification of RTCORBA-based Applications, ISSTA, Boston, 263–273 (2004)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Saiedian, H., Bowen, J.P., Butler, R.W., Dill, D.L., Glass, R.L., Gries, D., Hall, A., Hinchey, M.G., Holloway, C.M., Jackson, D., Jones, C.B., Luts, M.J., Parna, D.L., Rushby, J., Wing, J., Zave, P.: An Invitation to Formal Methods. IEEE Computer 29(4), 16–30 (1996)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Telelogic Tau Generation2 Tools, http://www.telelogic.com/products/tau/tg2.cfm

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Matteo Pradella
    • 2
  • Matteo Rossi
    • 1
  • Dino Mandrioli
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Dipartimento di Elettronica ed InformazionePolitecnico di MilanoMilanoItaly
  2. 2.Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche – Istituto di Elettronica e di Ingegneria dell’Informazione e delle Telecomunicazioni (CNR-IEIIT-MT)MilanoItaly

Personalised recommendations