Advertisement

Integrating Graph Transformations and Modal Sequence Diagrams for Specifying Structurally Dynamic Reactive Systems

  • Sabine Winetzhammer
  • Joel Greenyer
  • Matthias Tichy
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8769)

Abstract

Software-intensive systems, for example service robot systems in industry, often consist of multiple reactive components that interact with each other and the environment. Often, the behavior depends on structural properties and relationships among the system and environment components, and reactions of the components in turn may change this structure. Modal Sequence Diagrams (MSDs) are an intuitive and precise formalism for specifying the interaction behavior among reactive components. However, they are not sufficient for specifying structural dynamics. Graph transformation rules (GTRs) provide a powerful approach for specifying structural dynamics. We describe an approach for integrating GTRs with MSDs such that requirements and assumptions on structural changes of system resp. environment objects can be specified. We prototypically implemented this approach by integrating ModGraph with ScenarioTools. This allows us not only to specify MSDs and GTRs in Eclipse, but also to simulate the specified behavior via play-out.

Keywords

scenario-based specification reactive systems embedded systems automotive simulation validation testing 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Becker, S., Dziwok, S., Gerking, C., Schfer, W., Heinzemann, C., Thiele, S., Meyer, M., Priesterjahn, C., Pohlmann, U., Tichy, M.: The MechatronicUML design method – process and language for platform-independent modeling. Tech. Rep. tr-ri-14-337, Heinz Nixdorf Institute, University of Paderborn, version 0.4 (March 2014)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bontemps, Y., Heymans, P.: From live sequence charts to state machines and back: A guided tour. Transactions on Software Engineering 31(12), 999–1014 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Brenner, C., Greenyer, J., Panzica La Manna, V.: The ScenarioTools play-out of modal sequence diagram specifications with environment assumptions. In: Proc. 12th Int. Workshop on Graph Transformation and Visual Modeling Techniques (GT-VMT 2013), vol. 58, EASST (2013)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Damm, W., Harel, D.: LSCs: Breathing life into message sequence charts. In: Formal Methods in System Design, vol. 19, pp. 45–80. Kluwer Academic (2001)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Diethelm, I., Geiger, L., Maier, T., Zündorf, A.: Turning collaboration diagram strips into storycharts. In: Workshop on Scenarios and State Machines: Models, Algorithms, and Tools (SCESM 2002) ICSE Workshop, Florida, Orlando, USA (2002)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ehrig, H., Ehrig, K., Prange, U., Taentzer, G.: Fundamentals of Algebraic Graph Transformation. Springer, Berlin (2006)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Greenyer, J., Brenner, C., Cordy, M., Heymans, P., Gressi, E.: Incrementally synthesizing controllers from scenario-based product line specifications. In: Proceedings of the 2013 9th Joint Meeting on Foundations of Software Engineering, ESEC/FSE 2013, pp. 433–443. ACM, New York (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Greenyer, J., Kindler, E.: Compositional synthesis of controllers from scenario-based assume-guarantee specifications. In: Moreira, A., Schätz, B., Gray, J., Vallecillo, A., Clarke, P. (eds.) MODELS 2013. LNCS, vol. 8107, pp. 774–789. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Harel, D., Kugler, H.: Synthesizing state-based object systems from LSC specifications. International Journal of Foundations of Computer Science 13(01), 5–51 (2002)CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Harel, D., Maoz, S.: Assert and negate revisited: Modal semantics for UML sequence diagrams. Software and Systems Modeling (SoSyM) 7(2), 237–252 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Harel, D., Marelly, R.: Specifying and executing behavioral requirements: The play-in/play-out approach. Software and System Modeling (SoSyM) 2(2), 82–107 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Harel, D., Marelly, R.: Come, Let’s Play: Scenario-Based Programming Using LSCs and the Play-Engine. Springer (August 2003)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Harel, D., Marron, A., Weiss, G.: Behavioral programming. Commun. ACM 55(7), 90–100 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Haugen, Ø., Husa, K., Runde, R., Stølen, K.: STAIRS towards formal design with sequence diagrams. Software & Systems Modeling 4(4), 355–357 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Maoz, S., Harel, D.: From multi-modal scenarios to code: Compiling LSCs into AspectJ. In: Proc. 14th Int. Symp. on Foundations of Software Engineering, SIGSOFT 2006/FSE-14, pp. 219–230. ACM, New York (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Maoz, S., Harel, D., Kleinbort, A.: A compiler for multimodal scenarios: Transforming LSCs into AspectJ. ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. 20(4), 18:1–18:41 (2011)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Priesterjahn, C., Steenken, D., Tichy, M.: Timed hazard analysis of self-healing systems. In: Cámara, J., de Lemos, R., Ghezzi, C., Lopes, A. (eds.) Assurances for Self-Adaptive Systems. LNCS, vol. 7740, pp. 112–151. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Steinberg, D., Budinsky, F., Paternostro, M., Merks, E.: EMF: Eclipse Modeling Framework, 2nd edn. Addison-Wesley, Boston (2009)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Winetzhammer, S.: ModGraph – generating executable EMF models. In: Margaria, T., Padberg, J., Taentzer, G., Krause, C., Westfechtel, B. (eds.) Proc. 7th Int. Workshop on Graph Based Tools (GraBaTs 2012). Electronic Communications of the EASST, vol. 54, pp. 32–44. EASST, Bremen (2012)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Winetzhammer, S., Westfechtel, B.: Compiling graph transformation rules into a procedural language for behavioral modeling. In: Pires, L.F., Hammoudi, S., Filipe, J., das Neves, R.C. (eds.) Proc. 2nd Int Conf. on Model-Driven Engineering and Software Development (MODELSWARD 2014), pp. 415–424. SCITEPRESS Science and Technology Publications, Portugal (2014)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sabine Winetzhammer
    • 1
  • Joel Greenyer
    • 2
  • Matthias Tichy
    • 3
  1. 1.Applied Computer Science 1, Software EngineeringUniversität BayreuthBayreuthGermany
  2. 2.Software Engineering GroupLeibniz Universität HannoverHannoverGermany
  3. 3.Software Engineering DivisionChalmers, University of GothenburgGothenburgSweden

Personalised recommendations