Advertisement

MegaM@Rt2 Project: Mega-Modelling at Runtime - Intermediate Results and Research Challenges

  • Andrey SadovykhEmail author
  • Dragos Truscan
  • Wasif Afzal
  • Hugo Bruneliere
  • Adnan Ashraf
  • Abel Gómez
  • Alexandra Espinosa
  • Gunnar Widforss
  • Pierluigi Pierini
  • Elizabeta Fourneret
  • Alessandra Bagnato
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11771)

Abstract

MegaM@Rt2 Project is a major European effort towards the model-driven engineering of complex Cyber-Physical systems combined with runtime analysis. Both areas are dealt within the same methodology to enjoy the mutual benefits through sharing and tracking various engineering artifacts. The project involves 27 partners that contribute with diverse research and industrial practices addressing real-life case study challenges stemming from 9 application domains. These partners jointly progress towards a common framework to support those application domains with model-driven engineering, verification, and runtime analysis methods. In this paper, we present the motivation for the project, the current approach and the intermediate results in terms of tools, research work and practical evaluation on use cases from the project. We also discuss outstanding challenges and proposed approaches to address them.

Keywords

Cyber-Physical systems Model-Driven Engineering Runtime Analysis Tools Mega-Modelling Traceability ECSEL 

Notes

Acknowledgement

This project has received funding from the Electronic Component Systems for European Leadership Joint Undertaking under grant agreement No. 737494. This Joint Undertaking receives support from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation program and from Sweden, France, Spain, Italy, Finland and Czech Republic.

References

  1. 1.
    Afzal, W., et al.: The MegaM@Rt2 ECSEL project: MegaModelling at runtime – scalable model-based framework for continuous development and runtime validation of complex systems. Microprocess. Microsyst. 61, 86–95 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Sadovykh, A., et al.: Model-based system engineering in practice: document generation-MegaM@Rt2 project experience. In: Proceedings of the 14th Central and Eastern European Software Engineering Conference, pp. 9:1–9:6 (2018)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    MegaMart2 - MegaModelling at runtime: MegaMart2 - MegaModelling at runtime. https://megamart2-ecsel.eu/. Accessed 25 June 2019
  4. 4.
  5. 5.
    Sadovykh, A., et al.: A tool-supported approach for building the architecture and roadmap in MegaM@Rt2 project. In: Ciancarini, P., Mazzara, M., Messina, A., Sillitti, A., Succi, G. (eds.) SEDA 2018. AISC, vol. 925, pp. 265–274. Springer, Cham (2020).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-14687-0_24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Pérez, B., Porres, I.: Reasoning about UML/OCL class diagrams using constraint logic programming and formula. Inf. Syst. 81, 152–177 (2019)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Villar, E.: Model-driven analysis and design of IoT systems. In: 1st International Workshop on Embedded Software for Industrial IoT, Dresden, Germany (2018)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cariou, E., Le Goaer, O., Brunschwig, L., Barbier, F.: A generic solution for weaving business code into executable models. In MODELS 2018 ACM/IEEE 21th International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems, Copenhagen, Denmark (2018)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Muttillo, V., Valente, G., Pomante, L.: Design space exploration for mixed-criticality embedded systems considering hypervisor-based SW partitions. In: 2018 21st Euromicro Conference on Digital System Design (DSD) (2018)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ciambrone, D., Muttillo, V., Pomante, L., Valente, G.: HEPSIM: an ESL HW/SW co-simulator/analysis tool for heterogeneous parallel embedded systems. In: 2018 7th Mediterranean Conference on Embedded Computing (MECO) (2018)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Wiik, J., Ersfolk, J., Walden, M.: A contract-based approach to scheduling and verification of dynamic dataflow networks. In: 2018 16th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Formal Methods and Models for System Design (MEMOCODE) (2018)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Vain, J., Truscan, D., Iqbal, J., Tsiopoulos, L.: On the benefits of using aspect-orientation in UPPAAL timed automata. In: 2017 International Conference on Infocom Technologies and Unmanned Systems (Trends and Future Directions) (ICTUS) (2017)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Medina, J.L., Villar, E.: Towards MARTE ++: an enhanced UML-based language to Model and Analyse Real-Time and Embedded Systems for the IoT age. Presented at the Forum on specification & Design Languages (FDL 2017), Verona, Italy (2017)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Arcelli, D., Cortellessa, V., Di Pompeo, D.: Automating performance antipattern detection and software refactoring in UML models. In: 2019 IEEE 26th International Conference on Software Analysis, Evolution and Reengineering (SANER) (2019)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Arcelli, D., Cortellessa, V., Di Pompeo, D., Eramo, R., Tucci, M.: Exploiting architecture/runtime model-driven traceability for performance improvement. In: 2019 IEEE International Conference on Software Architecture (ICSA) (2019)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Nybom, K., Ashraf, A., Porres, I.: A systematic mapping study on API documentation generation approaches. In: 2018 44th Euromicro Conference on Software Engineering and Advanced Applications (SEAA) (2018)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Marinescu, R., Filipovikj, P., Enoiu, E.P., Larsson, J., Seceleanu, C.: An energy-aware mutation testing framework for EAST-ADL architectural models. In: 29th Nordic Workshop on Programming Theory, Turku, Finland (2018)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Marinescu, R., Enoiu, E., Seceleanu, C., Sundmark, D.: Automatic test generation for energy consumption of embedded systems modeled in EAST-ADL. In: 2017 IEEE International Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation Workshops (ICSTW) (2017)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Siavashi, F., Truscan, D., Vain, J.: Vulnerability assessment of web services with model-based mutation testing. In: 2018 IEEE International Conference on Software Quality, Reliability and Security (QRS) (2018)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Iqbal, J., Truscan, D., Vain, J., Porres, I.: Reconstructing timed symbolic traces from rtioco-based timed test sequences using backward-induction. In: Proceedings of the Fifth European Conference on the Engineering of Computer-Based Systems – ECBS 2017 (2017)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Stratis, A., Causevic, A.: A practical approach towards validating HIL simulation of a safety-critical system. In: 2017 IEEE International Symposium on Software Reliability Engineering Workshops (ISSREW) (2017)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Bergstrom, H., Enoiu, E.P.: Using timed base-choice coverage criterion for testing industrial control software. In: 2017 IEEE International Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation Workshops (ICSTW) (2017)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Enoiu, E., Sundmark, D., Causevic, A., Pettersson, P.: A comparative study of manual and automated testing for industrial control software. In: 2017 IEEE International Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation (ICST) (2017)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Ahmad, T., Truscan, D., Porres, I.: Identifying worst-case user scenarios for performance testing of web applications using Markov-chain workload models. Future Gener. Comput. Syst. 87, 910–920 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Diaz, A., Pena, D., Villar, E.: Short and long distance marker detection technique in outdoor and indoor environments for embedded systems. In: 2017 32nd Conference on Design of Circuits and Integrated Systems (DCIS) (2017)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Gronback, R.: Eclipse modeling project | the eclipse foundation. https://www.eclipse.org/modeling/emf/. Accessed 25 June 2019
  27. 27.
    Modelio open source - UML and BPMN modeling tool. https://www.modelio.org/. Accessed 25 June 2019
  28. 28.
    Daniel, G., et al.: NeoEMF: a multi-database model persistence framework for very large models. Sci. Comput. Programm. 149, 9–14 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Bruneliere, H., Perez, J.G., Wimmer, M., Cabot, J.: EMF views: a view mechanism for integrating heterogeneous models. In: Johannesson, P., Lee, M.L., Liddle, S.W., Opdahl, A.L., López, Ó.P. (eds.) ER 2015. LNCS, vol. 9381, pp. 317–325. Springer, Cham (2015).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-25264-3_23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Cicchetti, A., Di Ruscio, D., Eramo, R., Pierantonio, A.: JTL: a bidirectional and change propagating transformation language. In: Malloy, B., Staab, S., van den Brand, M. (eds.) SLE 2010. LNCS, vol. 6563, pp. 183–202. Springer, Heidelberg (2011).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-19440-5_11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Desfray, P.: Model repositories at the enterprises and systems scale: the Modelio Constellation solution. In: 2015 International Conference on Information Systems Security and Privacy (ICISSP) (2015)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Eramo, R., Pierantonio, A., Tucci, M.: Enhancing the JTL tool for bidirectional transformations. In: Conference Companion of the 2nd International Conference on Art, Science, and Engineering of Programming – Programming 2018 Companion (2018)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Cortellessa, V., Eramo, R., Tucci, M.: Availability-driven architectural change propagation through bidirectional model transformations between UML and petri net models. In: 2018 IEEE International Conference on Software Architecture (ICSA) (2018)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Bruneliere, H., Burger, E., Cabot, J., Wimmer, M.: A feature-based survey of model view approaches. Softw. Syst. Model. 18(3), 1931–1952 (2019)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Bruneliere, H., Marchand, F., Daniel, G., Cabot, J.: Towards scalable model views on heterogeneous model resources. In: ACM/IEEE 21th International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems (MODELS 2018), Copenhagen, Denmark, pp. 334–344 (2018)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Eramo, R., et al.: Model-driven design-runtime interaction in safety critical system development: an experience report. In: 15th European Conference on Modelling Foundations and Applications (ECMFA), Co-located with STAF 2019, Eindhoven, The Netherlands (2019)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Bruneliere, H., et al.: Model-driven engineering for design-runtime interaction in complex systems: scientific challenges and roadmap. In: Mazzara, M., Ober, I., Salaün, G. (eds.) STAF 2018. LNCS, vol. 11176, pp. 536–543. Springer, Cham (2018).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-04771-9_40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Deliverables - MegaMart2 - MegaModelling at Runtime. https://megamart2-ecsel.eu/deliverables/. Accessed 25 June 2019
  39. 39.
    MegaM@Rt2 tool box. http://toolbox.megamart2-ecsel.eu/. Accessed 25 June 2019

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Andrey Sadovykh
    • 1
    • 3
    Email author
  • Dragos Truscan
    • 2
  • Wasif Afzal
    • 4
  • Hugo Bruneliere
    • 5
  • Adnan Ashraf
    • 2
  • Abel Gómez
    • 6
  • Alexandra Espinosa
    • 4
  • Gunnar Widforss
    • 4
  • Pierluigi Pierini
    • 7
  • Elizabeta Fourneret
    • 8
  • Alessandra Bagnato
    • 1
  1. 1.Research and Development DepartmentSofteamParisFrance
  2. 2.Åbo Akademi UniversityTurkuFinland
  3. 3.Innopolis UniversityInnopolisRussia
  4. 4.Mälardalen UniversityVästeråsSweden
  5. 5.IMT Atlantique, LS2N (CNRS) & ARMINESNantesFrance
  6. 6.Internet Interdisciplinary InstituteUniversitat Oberta de CatalunyaBarcelonaSpain
  7. 7.Intecs Solutions S.p.A.RomeItaly
  8. 8.SmartestingParisFrance

Personalised recommendations