Robust Design of a Collaborative Platform for Model-Based System Engineering: Experience from an Industrial Deployment

  • Christophe PonsardEmail author
  • Robert Darimont
  • Mounir Touzani
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11815)


Model-Based System Engineering is gaining momentum in the industry. In order to be successful, it requires adequate tooling support. In addition to functional requirements related to model edition, verification and transformation, key non-functional requirements need to be carefully addressed such as versioning, usability/team work, reliability, security, ease of integration. In this paper, we first give an overview of how we dealt with such requirements in the context of the development of a real world platform for a global telecom operator, with a focus on early steps of system modelling. We then present a more detailed design of the tooling architecture and a high availability protocol for accessing a mainstream model repository. The proposed protocol is modelled and verified using the Alloy language and model-checker.


Model-Based System Engineering Tool support Modelling Industrial transfer High availability Alloy Model-checking 



This research was partly supported by the SAMOBIGrow project (nr. 1910032). We thank Respect-IT and Huawei for their feedback in the elaboration of this tooling. We also thank the reviewers for their comments.


  1. 1.
    Abrial, J.R.: Modeling in Event-B: System and Software Engineering, 1st edn. Cambridge University Press, New York (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Abrial, J.R., et al.: Rodin: an open toolset for modelling and reasoning in event-B. STTT 12(6), 447–466 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Adzic, G.: Specification by Example: How Successful Teams Deliver the Right Software, 1st edn. Manning Publications Co., Greenwich (2011)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Alder, G., Benson, D.: (2011).
  5. 5.
    Amyot, D., Mussbacher, G.: User requirements notation: the first ten years, the next ten years. JSW 6(5), 747–768 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chang, E., Roberts, R.: An improved algorithm for decentralized extrema-finding in circular configurations of processes. Commun. ACM 22(5), 281–283 (1979)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dardenne, A., van Lamsweerde, A., Fickas, S.: Goal-directed requirements acquisition. Sci. Comput. Program. 20(1–2), 3–50 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Darimont, R., Zhao, W., Ponsard, C., Michot, A.: A modular requirements engineering framework for web-based toolchain integration. In: 24th IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference, RE 2016, Beijing, China, 12–16 September, pp. 405–406 (2016)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dennis, G., Seater, R.: Alloy Analyzer 4 Tutorial Session 4: Dynamic Modeling Software. Design Group. MIT (2017)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Jackson, D.: Alloy: a lightweight object modelling notation. ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. 11(2), 256–290 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Jackson, D.: Alloy Analyser, Version 4 (2006).
  12. 12.
    Jackson, D.: Software Abstractions: Logic, Language, and Analysis. The MIT Press, Cambridge (2012)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kahani, N., Bagherzadeh, M., Cordy, J.R., Dingel, J., Varró, D.: Survey and classification of model transformation tools. Softw. Syst. Model. 18(4), 2361–2397 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    van Lamsweerde, A.: Requirements Engineering: From System Goals to UML Models to Software Specifications. Wiley, Hoboken (2009)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Legrand, T.: Genmymodel (2012).
  16. 16.
    Legrand, T.: GenMyModel API Documentation (2014).
  17. 17.
    Lucid Software: Lucidchart (2008).
  18. 18.
    Nulab Inc.: Cacoo (2009).
  19. 19.
    Nulab Inc.: Cacoo API Overview (2012).
  20. 20.
    OASIS: Open Services for Lifecycle Collaboration (2008).
  21. 21.
    OMG: Unified modeling language (1997).
  22. 22.
    OMG: System modeling language (2005).
  23. 23.
    OMG: MOF Model to Text Transformation Language (2008).
  24. 24.
    OMG: XML Metadata Interchange v2.5.1 (2015).
  25. 25.
    Ponsard, C., Darimont, R.: Improving requirements engineering through goal-oriented models and tools: feedback from a large industrial deployment. In: Proceedings of 12th International Conference on Software Technologies, ICSOFT, Madrid, Spain, 24–26 July 2017Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Ponsard, C., Darimont, R., Michot, A.: Combining models, diagrams and tables for efficient requirements engineering: lessons learned from the industry. In: INFORSID 2015, Biarritz, France, June 2015Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Ponsard, C., Deprez, J.C., Delandtsheer, R.: Is my formal method tool ready for the industry? In: 11th International Workshop on Automated Verification of Critical Systems, Newcastle, UK, 12–14 September 2011Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Ponsard, C., Michot, A., Darimont, R., Zhao, W.: A generic rest API on top of eclipse CDO for web-based modelling. EclipseCon France, Toulouse, June 2016Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Ryan, M., Cook, S., Scott, W.: Application of MBSE to requirements engineering research challenges. In: Systems Engineering, Test and Evaluation Conference SETE2013, Canberra, Australia, April 2013Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Schmidt, D.C.: Guest editor’s introduction: model-driven engineering. Computer 39(2), 25–31 (2006). Scholar
  31. 31.
    Soukaina, M., Abdessamad, B., Abdelaziz, M.: Model driven engineering tools: a survey. Am. J. Sci. Eng. Technol. 3(2), 29 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Steinberg, D., Budinsky, F., Paternostro, M., Merks, E.: EMF: Eclipse Modeling Framework 2.0, 2nd edn. Addison-Wesley Professional, Upper Saddle River (2009)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Stepper, E.: Connected data object (2006).
  34. 34.
    Sysoev, I.: Nginx (2004).
  35. 35.
    Sztipanovits, J., et al.: Model and tool integration platforms for cyberphysical system design. Proc. IEEE 106(9), 1501–1526 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Wynne, M., Hellesoy, A.: The Cucumber Book. The Pragmatic Programmers. Pragmatic Bookshelf, Dallas (2012)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Yu, E.S.K., Mylopoulos, J.: Enterprise modelling for business redesign: the i* framework. SIGGROUP Bull. 18(1), 59–63 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Zolotas, A., et al.: Bridging proprietary modelling and open-source model management tools: the case of PTC integrity modeller and epsilon. In: Software & Systems Modeling (2019)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.CETIC Research CenterCharleroiBelgium
  2. 2.Respect-IT SALouvain-la-NeuveBelgium
  3. 3.ToulouseFrance

Personalised recommendations