An Overview of RoZ : A Tool for Integrating UML and Z Specifications

  • Sophie Dupuy
  • Yves Ledru
  • Monique Chabre-Peccoud
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1789)


This paper presents an approach and a tool to increase specification quality by using a combination of UML and formal languages. Our approach is based on the expression of the UML class diagram and its annotations into a Z formal specification. Our tool called RoZ supports this approach by making the transition between the UML world and the Z world : from an annotated class diagram, it automatically generates a complete Z specification, the specifications of some elementary operations and some proof obligations to validate the model constraints.


Formal Specification Unify Modeling Language Telephone Number Class Diagram Integrity Constraint 
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. 1.
    J. Brunet. An enhanced definition of composition and its use for abstraction. The 5th international conference on Object Oriented Information Systems, Paris, September 1998.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Rational Software Corporation. UNIFIED MODELING LANGUAGE — notation guide version 1.1. September 1997.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Y. Ou. On Using UML Class Diagram for Object-Oriented Database Design — Specification of Integrity Constraints. Proc “UML”’ 98 Beyong the Notation, Mulhouse, France, June 1998.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    J. Warmer and A. Kleppe. The Object Constraints Language. Addison-Wesley, 1998.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    J.M. Spivey. The Z notation — a reference manual (second edition). Prentice-Hall International, 1992.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    M. Saaltink. The Z/EVES system. In j. Bowen, M. Hinchey and D. Till editors, Proc. 10th Int. Conf. On the Z formal method (ZUM), volume 1212 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 72–88, Reading, UK, April 1997.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Rational Software Corporation. Rational Rose — Using Rational Rose 4.0. 1996.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Rational Software Corporation. Rational Rose — Using Rational Rose 98. 1998.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    R. France and JM. Bruel and M. Larrondo-Petrie and M. Shroff. Exploring the Semantics of UML type structures with Z. Proc. 2nd IFIP Workshop on Formal Methods for Open Object-Based Distributed Systems (FMOODS), 1997.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    M. Shroff and R.B. France. Towards a Formalization of UML class structures in Z. COMPSAC’97, 1997.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    K. Lano, H. Houghton, P. Wheeler. Integrating Formal and Structured Methods in Object-Oriented System Development. In Formal Methods and Object technology, Chapter 7, Springer, 1996.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    P. Facon, R. Laleau Laleau and H.P. Nguyen. Mapping Object Diagrams into B Specifications. Proc of the Method Integration Workshop, Springer-Verlag, Leeds, March 1996.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    S. Dupuy, Y. Ledru and M. Chabre-Peccoud. Vers une intégration utile de notations semiformelles et formelles: un expérience en UML et Z. revue l’Objet, numéro spécial sur les méthodes formelles pour les systèmes à objets, 2000, to appear.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    S. Dupuy. RoZ version 0.3 an environment for the integration of UML and Z. technical report Laboratoire LSR-IMAG, 1999.
  15. 15.
    Y. Ledru. Identifying pre-conditions with the Z/EVES theorem prover. Proc Int. IEEE Conference on Automated Software Engineering’98, IEEE Computer Society Press, October 1998.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Y. Ledru. Complementing semi-formal specifications with Z. KBSE’96, IEEE Computer Society Press, 1996.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    N. Hadj-Rabia and H. Habrias. Formal specification from NIAM model: a Bottom-Up Approach. ISCIS XI (11th int. Symposium on Computer and Information Sciences), Antalya, Turkey, November 1996.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    H.P. Nguyen. Dérivation de Spécifications Formelles B à Partir de Spécifications Semi-Formelles. PhD thesis, CNAM, December 1998.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    B. Nuseibeh and A. Finkelstein. ViewPoints: a vehicle for method and tool integration. IEEE Proc. Of the 5th Int. Workshop on CASE (CASE’92), p50–60, Montreal, Canada, July 1992.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    R. Laleau, N. Nadj-Rabia. Génération automatique de spécifications VDM à partir d’un schéma conceptuel de données. Dans Actes du 13ème congrès INFORSID, Grenoble, France, June 1995.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    J.C. Freire Junior, M. Chabre-Peccoud, A. Front and J.-P. Giraudin. A CASE Tool for modeling of methods and information systems. OOIS’98, Int. Conference on Object-Oriented Information Systems, Springer, Paris, France, September 1998.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    IFAD. the Rose-VDM++ Link.
  23. 23.
  24. 24.
    R.B. France, J.-M. Bruel, M.M. Larrondo-Petrie. An Integrated Object-Oriented and Formal Modeling Environment. Journal of Object Oriented Programming, November/December 1997.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    P. Caspi, N. Halbwachs, D. Pilaud and J. Plaice. LUSTRE, a declarative language for programming synchronous systems. In 14th Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages (POPL’87), ACM, p 178–188, Munich, 1987.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    G. Booch, I. Jacobson and J. Rumbaugh. The Unified Modeling Language-User Guide. Addison-Wesley, 1998.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sophie Dupuy
    • 1
  • Yves Ledru
    • 1
  • Monique Chabre-Peccoud
    • 1
  1. 1.Saint-Martin d’Hères CedexFrance

Personalised recommendations