Advertisement

Prototyping a Requirements Specification through an Automatically Generated Concurrent Logic Program

  • Patricio Letelier
  • Pedro Sánchez
  • Isidro Ramos
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1551)

Abstract

OASIS is a formal approach for the specification of object oriented conceptual models. In OASIS conceptual schemas of information systems are represented as societies of interacting concurrent objects. Animating such models in order to validate the specification of information systems is a topic of interest in requirements engineering. Thus a basic execution model for OASIS specifications has been developed. Concurrent Logic Programming is a suitable paradigm for distributed computation allowing a natural representation of concurrence. Using Concurrent Logic Programming, OASIS specifications are animated according to OASIS execution model. In this work, we show how OASIS concepts are directly mapped into concurrent logic programming concepts. To illustrate our ideas, an example of a bank account codified in KL1 is given and parts of the program that animates its corresponding OASIS specification are shown. This work has been developed in the context of a CASE tool supporting the OASIS approach. Our aim is to build a module for animation and validation of specifications. A preliminary version of this module is presented.

Keywords

Logic Programming Output Channel Execution Model Deontic Logic Dynamic Logic 
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.
    L. Åqvist. Deontic logic. In D.M. Gabbay and F. Guenthner, editors, Handbook of Philosophical Logic II, pages 605–714. Reidel, 1984.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    T. Chikayama. KLIC User’s Manual. Institute for New Generation Computer Technology, Tokyo JAPAN, 1995.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    T. Conlon. Programming in PARLOG. Addisson-Wesley, 1989.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    A. Davison. Polka: A Parlog object-oriented language, Ph.D. thesis, Department of Computer Science, Imperial College London, 1989.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    D. Harel. Dynamic Logic. In Handbook of Philosophical Logic II, editors D.M. Gabbay, F. Guenthner; pages 497–694. Reidel 1984.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    P. Heymans. The Albert II Specification Animator. Technical Report CREWS 97-13, Cooperative Requirements Engineering with Scenarios, http://sunsite.informatik.rwth-aachen.de/CREWS/reports97.htm.
  7. 7.
    R. Herzig and M. Gogolla. An animator for the object specification language TROLL light. In Proc. Colloq. on Object-Orientation in Databases and Software Engineering, Montreal 1994.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    P. Letelier, P. Sánchez and I. Ramos. Animation of system specifications using concurrent logic programming. Symposium on Logical Approaches to Agent Modeling and Design, ESSLLI’97, Aix-en-Provence, France, 1997.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    P. Letelier, I. Ramos, P. Sánchez and O. Pastor. OASIS 3.0: Un enfoque formal para el modelado conceptual orientado a objeto. SPUPV-98.4011, Servicio de Publicaciones Universidad Politécnica de Valencia, 1998.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    P. Letelier, I. Ramos and P. Sánchez. Un modelo de ejecución para especificaciones OASIS 3.0 Infórme Técnico DSIC-II/36/98, Universidad Politécnica de Valencia, 1998.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    J.-J.Ch. Meyer. A different approach to deontic logic: Deontic logic viewed as a variant of dynamic logic. In Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic, vol.29, pages 109–136, 1988.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    J. Ousterhout. Tcl and the Tk Toolkit. Addison-Wesley, 1994.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    O. Pastor and I. Ramos. OASIS version 2 (2.2): A Class-Definition language to model information systems using an object-oriented approach, SPUPV-95.788, Servicio de Publicaciones Universidad Politécnica de Valencia, 1995.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    E. Pimentel. L2 O2: Un lenguaje lógico concurrente orientado a objetos, Tesis Doctoral, Facultad de Informática, Universidad de Málaga, 1993.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    C. Rolland, C. Ben Achour, C. Cauvet, J. Ralyté, A. Sutcliffe, N.A.M. Maiden, M. Jarke, P. Haumer, K. Pohl, E. Dubois and P. Heymans. A Proposal for a Scenario Classification Framework, Technical Report CREWS 96-01, http://sunsite.informatik.rwth-aachen.de/CREWS/reports96.htm.
  16. 16.
    P. Sánchez, P. Letelier and I. Ramos. Constructs for Prototyping Information Systems using Object Petri Nets, Proc. of IEEE International Conference on System Man and Cybernetics, pages 4260–4265, Orlando, USA, 1997.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    E. Shapiro and A. Takeuchi. Object oriented programming in concurrent prolog, en New Generation Computing, vol.1, pages 25–48, 1983.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    J. Siddiqi, I.C. Morrey, C.R. Roast and M.B. Ozcan. Towards quality requirements via animated formal specifications. Annals of Software Engineering, n.3, 1997.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    K. Yoshida and T. Chikayama. A’UM: A string based concurrent object-oriented language, In Proc. of the Int.Conf. on FGCS, ICOT, pages 638–649, 1988.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    R.J. Wieringa and J.-J. Ch. Meyer. Actors, Actions and Initiative in Normative System Specification. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence, 7:289–346, 1993.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • Patricio Letelier
    • 1
  • Pedro Sánchez
    • 1
  • Isidro Ramos
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Information Systems and ComputationValencia University of TechnologyValenciaSpain

Personalised recommendations