Advertisement

Bridging Algorithm and ESL Design: MATLAB/Simulink Model Transformation and Validation

  • Liyuan Zhang
  • Michael Glaß
  • Nils Ballmann
  • Jürgen Teich
Chapter
Part of the Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering book series (LNEE, volume 311)

Abstract

MATLAB/Simulink is today’s de-facto standard for model-based design in domains such as control engineering and signal processing. Particular strengths of Simulink are rapid design and algorithm exploration. Moreover, commercial tools are available to generate embedded C or HDL code directly from a Simulink model. On the other hand, Simulink models are purely functional models and, hence,designers cannot seamlessly consider the architecture that a Simulink model is later implemented on. In particular, it is not possible to explore the different architectural alternatives and investigate the arising interactions and side-effects directly within Simulink. To benefit from MATLAB/Simulink’s algorithm exploration capabilities and overcome the outlined drawbacks, this work introduces a model transformation framework that converts a Simulink model to an executable specification, written in an actor-oriented modeling language. This specification then serves as the input of a well-established Electronic System Level (ESL) design flow, enabling Design Space Exploration (DSE) and automatic code generation for both hardware and software. We also present a validation technique that considers the functional correctness by comparing the original Simulink model with the generated specification in a co-simulation environment. The co-simulation can also be used to evaluate different quality numbers of implementation candidates during DSE. As a case study, we present and investigate a torque vectoring application from an electric automotive vehicle.

Keywords

Electronic System Level (ESL) MATLAB/Simulink Model transformation Model validation Design Space Exploration (DSE) SystemC Model-Based Design (MBD) Code generation SysteMoC Torque vectoring 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The work has been partially supported by EFRE funding from the Bavarian Ministry of Economic Affairs (Bayerisches Staatsministerium für Wirtschaft, Infrastruktur, Verkehr und Technologie) as a part of the “ESI Application Center” project.

References

  1. 1.
    Atat Y, Zergainoh NE (2008) Automatic code generation for MPSOC platform starting from SIMULINK/MATLAB: new approach to bridge the gap between algorithm and architecture design. In: Proceedings on the international conference on information and communication technologies: from theory to applications (ICTTA) 2008, IEEE, pp 1–6Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Baleani M, Ferrari A, Mangeruca L, Sangiovanni-Vincentelli AL, Freund U, Schlenker E, Wolff HJ (2005) Correct-by-construction transformations across design environments for model-based embedded software development. In: Proceedings of the design, automation and test in Europe conference (DATE) 2005, IEEE, pp 1044–1049Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Barnasconi M, Einwich K, Grimm C, Maehne T, Vachoux A (2011) Advancing the SystemC analog/mixed-signal AMS extensions. Open SystemC Initiative (OSCI)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Boland JF, Thibeault C, Zilic Z (2005) Using MATLAB and Simulink in a SystemC verification environment. In: Proceedings of the design and verification conference (DVCon) 2005Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Caspi P, Curic A, Maignan A, Sofronis C, Tripakis S, Niebert P (2003) From Simulink to SCADE/Lustre to TTA: a layered approach for distributed embedded applications. ACM Sigplan Not ACM 38:153–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Czerner F, Zellmann J (2002) Modeling cycle-accurate hardware with Matlab/Simulink using SystemC. In: The European SystemC users group meeting (ESCUG) 2002Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    dSPACE (2013) Automotive simulation models (ASM). dSPACE. http://www.dspace.com/
  8. 8.
    ESTEREL (2013) SCADE suite™: control and logic application development. ESTEREL technologies. http://www.esterel-technologies.com/
  9. 9.
    ETAS (2013) ASCET. ETAS. http://www.etas.com/
  10. 10.
    Falk J, Haubelt C, Teich J (2006) Efficient representation and simulation of model-based designs in SystemC. In: Proceedings of the forum on specification and design languages (FDL) 2006, pp 129–134Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gerstlauer A, Haubelt C, Pimentel AD, Stefanov TP, Gajski DD, Teich J (2009) Electronic system-level synthesis methodologies. IEEE Trans Comput Aided Des Integr Circ Syst 28(10):1517–1530CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Grötker T, Liao S, Martin G, Swan S (2002) System design with SystemC. Kluwer Academic Publisher, BostonGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Jersak M, Cai Y, Ziegenbein D, Ernst R (2000) A transformational approach to constraint relaxation of a time-driven simulation model. In: Proceedings of the international symposium on system synthesis (ISSS) 2000, IEEE Computer Society, Washington DC, pp 137–142. doi: 10.1145/501790.501820
  14. 14.
    Kai H, Sang-il H, Popovici K, Brisolara L, Guerin X, Li L, Yan X, Chae SI, Carro L, Jerraya A (2007) Simulink-based MPSoC design flow: case study of motion-JPEG and H.264. In: Proceedings of the ACM/IEEE design automation conference (DAC) 2007, pp 39–42Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Keinert J, Streubühr M, Schlichter T, Falk J, Gladigau J, Haubelt C, Teich J, Meredith M (2009) SYSTEMCODESIGNER—an automatic ESL synthesis approach by design space exploration and behavioral synthesis for streaming applications. ACM Trans Des Autom Electron Syst 14(1):1–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kienhuis B, Deprettere E, Vissers K, van der Wolf P (1997) An approach for quantitative analysis of application-specific dataflow architectures. In: Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on application-specific systems, architectures and processors (ASAP) 1997, pp 338–349. doi: 10.1109/ASAP.1997.606839
  17. 17.
    Kopetz H (2011) Real-time systems: design principles for distributed embedded applications. Springer, HermannCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lee EA (2000) What’s ahead for embedded software? Computer 33(9):18–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lee EA, Neuendorffer S (2004) Actor-oriented models for codesign. Formal methods and models for system design. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Norwell, pp 33–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lukasiewycz M, Streubühr M, Glaß M, Haubelt C, Teich J (2009) Combined system synthesis and communication architecture exploration for MPSoCs. In: Proceedings of the design, automation and test in Europe Conference (DATE) 2009. IEEE Computer Society, Nice, pp 472–477Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Martin G, Bailey B, Piziali A (2010) ESL design and verification, a prescription for electronic system level methodology. Morgan Kaufmann, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    MathWorks T (2013) S-Function. http://www.mathworks.com/
  23. 23.
    The MathWorks (2013) HDL Verifier™: Verify HDL and Verilog using HDL simulators and FPGA-in-the-loop test. The MathWorks. http://www.mathworks.com/
  24. 24.
    The Mathworks (2013) Simulink Coder: Generate C and C\({+}{+}\) code from Simulink and Stateflow models. The MathWorksGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    The Mathworks (2013) Simulink: Simulation and model-based design. The MathWorksGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Liyuan Zhang
    • 1
  • Michael Glaß
    • 1
  • Nils Ballmann
    • 1
  • Jürgen Teich
    • 1
  1. 1.Hardware/Software Co-Design, Department of Computer ScienceFriedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU)ErlangenGermany

Personalised recommendations