Integrating UML Static and Dynamic Views and Formalizing the Interaction Mechanism of UML State Machines

  • Alessandra Cavarra
  • Elvinia Riccobene
  • Patrizia Scandurra
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2589)


In this paper we address the problem of integrating UML static and dynamic views, and different behavioral views. We tackle these problems by providing (a) a mapping of UML metamodel static and behavioral elements into ASMs and (b) a precise compositional semantics for UML state machines.

Structural model elements are translated into an ASM vocabulary as collections of domains and functions. The dynamic view is captured by multi-agent ASMs reflecting the behavior modeled by UML state machines.

The interaction among UML state machines is achieved by providing the semantics for actions and events and refining the ASM model in [4] to formalize objects communication, i.e. signals exchange and operation calls mechanism.


State Machine Class Diagram State Diagram Dynamic View Event Queue 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [4]
    E. Börger, A. Cavarra, and E. Riccobene. A precise semantics of UML State Machines: making semantic variation points and ambiguities explicit. In Proc. Semantic Foundations of Engineering Design Languages (SFEDL02)-ETAPS 2002. 229, 230, 233, 236, 237, 238, 239, 243Google Scholar
  2. [5]
    E. Börger, A. Cavarra, and E. Riccobene. Modeling the Dynamics of UML State Machines. In Y. Gurevich et al., editor, Abstract State Machines. Theory and Applications, volume 1912 of LNCS 1912, pages 223–241. Springer, 2000. 233, 236, 237, 238, 239CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. [6]
    E. Börger and J. Schmid. Composition and Submachine Concepts for Sequential ASMs. In P. Clote and H. Schwichtenberg, editors, Computer Science Logic (Gurevich Festschrift), number 1862 in LNCS, pages 41–60, 2000. 240CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. [7]
    A. Cavarra and E. Riccobene. Simulating UML Statecharts. In R. Moreno-Diaz and A. Quesada-Arencibia, editors, EUROCAST 2001, pages 224–227. February 2001. 229Google Scholar
  5. [8]
    A. Cavarra, E. Riccobene, and P. Scandurra. A Framework to Simulate UML Models. Submitted for publication. 243Google Scholar
  6. [9]
    I. Ober. More meaningful UML Models. In TOOLS-37 Pacific 2000. IEEE Computer Society Press, 2000. 243Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alessandra Cavarra
    • 1
  • Elvinia Riccobene
    • 2
  • Patrizia Scandurra
    • 2
  1. 1.Oxford University Computing LaboratoryOxfordUK
  2. 2.Dipartimento di Matematica e InformaticaUniversità di CataniaCataniaItaly

Personalised recommendations