Annotating UML Models with Non-functional Properties for Quantitative Analysis

  • Huáscar Espinoza
  • Hubert Dubois
  • Sébastien Gérard
  • Julio Medina
  • Dorina C. Petriu
  • Murray Woodside
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3844)


This work is motivated by the recent Request For Proposals issued by OMG for a new UML Profile named “Modeling and Analysis of Real-Time and Embedded systems”. The paper describes first some domain concepts for annotating Non-Functional Properties (NFPs), whose focus is on supporting temporal verification of UML-based models. Particular emphasis is given to schedulability and performance analysis for real-time systems. We discuss next some general requirements for NFP annotations and evaluate how the UML profiles for “Schedulability, Performance, and Time Specification” and for “Modeling Quality of Service and Fault Tolerance Characteristics and Mechanisms”, address these requirements. Last but not least, the paper proposes a preliminary framework for describing NFPs by considering the major requirements previously stated and by analyzing some UML mechanisms to attach NFPs to model elements.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Balsamo, S., Di Marco, A., Inverardi, P., Simeoni, M.: Model-based performance predic-tion in software development: a survey. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 30(5), 295–310 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bernardi, S., Donatelli, S., Merseguer, J.: From UML sequence diagrams and state-charts to analysable Petri net models. In: Proc. of 3rd Int. Workshop on Software and Per-formance (WOSP 2002), Rome, July 2002, pp. 35–45 (2002)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    CEA, I-Logix, Uppsala, OFFIS, PSA, MECEL, ICOM, UML based methodology for real time embedded systems, version 1.0, April 2003, Project IST 10069 AIT-WOODDES (2003) Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cortellessa, V., Pompei, A.: Towards a UML profile for QoS: a contribution in the reli-ability domain. In: Proc. 4th Int. Workshop on Software and Performance WOSP 2004, pp. 197–206. Redwood Shores, California (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Flake, S., Mueller, W.: A UML Profile for Real-Time Constraints with the OCL. In: Jézéquel, J.-M., Hussmann, H., Cook, S. (eds.) UML 2002. LNCS, vol. 2460, pp. 179–195. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Graf, S., Ober, I., Ober, I.: Timed annotations in UML, accepted to STTT. In: Int. Journal on Software Tools for Technology Transfer. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lanusse, A., Gérard, S., Terrier, F.: Real-time Modelling with UML: The ACCORD Ap-proach. In: Bézivin, J., Muller, P.-A. (eds.) UML 1998. LNCS, vol. 1618, pp. 319–335. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lavagno, L., Martin, G., Selic, B.: UML for Real. Design of Embedded Real-Time Systems. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (2003)MATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lugato, D., Bigot, C., Valot, Y.: Validation and automatic test generation on UML models: the AGATHA approach. In: Proceedings of the Workshop FMICS. ENTCS, vol. 66 n°2 (2002)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Medina, J.L., González Harbour, M., Drake, J.M.: MAST Real-Time View: A Graphic UML Tool for Modeling Object-Oriented Real-Time Systems. In: Proceedings of the 22nd IEEE Real-Time Systems Symposium (RTSS 2001), London, UK, December 2001, pp. 245–256. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos (2001)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Object Management Group, “UML Profile for Schedulability, Performance, and Time”, Version 1.1, OMG document: formal/05-01-02 (2005)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Object Management Group, “UML Profile for Modeling and Analysis of Real-Time and Embedded systems (MARTE)”, RFP, OMG document: realtime/05-02-06 (2005)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Object Management Group: “UML Profile for Modeling Quality of Service and Fault Tol-erance Characteristics and Mechanisms”, OMG document ptc/04-09-01 (2004)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Palencia, J.C., Harbour, M.G.: Exploiting Precedence Relations in the Schedulability Analysis of Distributed Real-Time Systems. In: Proceedings of the 20th Real-Time Systems Symposium, December 1999, pp. 328–339. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos (1999)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Phan, T.H., Gérard, S., Lugato, D.: Schedulability Validation for UML-modeled real-time systems with symbolic execution and jitter compensation. In: ERCT Workshop (2003)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Petriu, D.C.: Performance Analysis with the SPT Profile. In: Gerard, S., Babeau, J.P., Champeau, J. (eds.) Model-Driven Engineering for Distributed and Embedded Systems, pp. 205–224. Hermes Science Publishing Ltd., London (2005)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Selic, B.: A Generic Framework for Modeling Resources with UML. IEEE Computer 33(6), 64–69 (2000)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Sha, L., Abdelzaher, T., Arzen, K.E., Cervin, A., Baker, T., Burns, A., Buttazzo, G., Caccamo, M., Lehoczky, J., Mok, A.K.: Real Time Scheduling Theory: A Historical Per-spective. Real-Time Systems Journal 28(2-3), 101–155 (2004)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Woodside, C.M., Petriu, D.C., Petriu, D.B., Shen, H., Israr, T., Merseguer, J.: Performance by Unified Model Analysis (PUMA). In: Proc. of 5th Int. Workshop on Software and Per-formance WOSP 2005, Palma, Spain, July 2005, pp. 1–12 (2005)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Huáscar Espinoza
    • 1
  • Hubert Dubois
    • 1
  • Sébastien Gérard
    • 1
  • Julio Medina
    • 2
  • Dorina C. Petriu
    • 3
  • Murray Woodside
    • 3
  1. 1.CEA Saclay, DRT/LIST/DTSI/SOL/L-LSPGif sur YvetteFrance
  2. 2.Departamento de Electrónica y ComputadoresUniversidad de CantabriaSantanderSpain
  3. 3.Department of Systems and Computer EngineeringCarleton UniversityOttawaCanada

Personalised recommendations