Uniting Academic Achievements on Performance Analysis with Industrial Needs

  • Bart Theelen
  • Jozef Hooman
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9259)


In our mission to advance innovation by industrial adoption of academic results, we perform many projects with high-tech industries. Favoring formal methods, we observe a gap between industrial needs in performance modeling and the analysis capabilities of formal methods for this goal. After clarifying this gap, we highlight some relevant deficiencies for state-of-the-art quantitative analysis techniques (focusing on model checking and simulation). As an ingredient to bridging the gap, we propose to unite domain-specific industrial contexts with academic performance approaches through Domain Specific Languages (DSLs). We illustrate our vision with examples from different high-tech industries and discuss lessons learned from the migration process of adopting it.


Performance modeling Performance analysis Quantitative analysis Domain specific languages Model checking Simulation 


  1. 1.
  2. 2.
  3. 3.
    Adyanthaya, S., Geilen, M., Basten, T., Schiffelers, R., Theelen, B., Voeten, J.: Fast multiprocessor scheduling with fixed task binding of large scale industrial cyber physical systems. In: 2013 Euromicro Conference on Digital System Design, DSD 2013, Los Alamitos, CA, USA, September 4–6, 2013, pp. 979–988 (2013)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Balsamo, S., di Marco, A., Inverardi, P., Simeoni, M.: Model-based performance prediction in software development: a survey. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 30(5), 295–310 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Behrmann, G., David, A., Larsen, K.G.: A tutorial on Uppaal. In: Bernardo, M., Corradini, F. (eds.) SFM-RT 2004. LNCS, vol. 3185, pp. 200–236. Springer, Heidelberg (2004) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Edwards, G., Brun, Y., Medvidovic, N.: Automated analysis and code generation for domain-specific models. In: 2012 Joint Working IEEE/IFIP Conference on Software Architecture (WICSA) and European Conference on Software Architecture (ECSA), pp. 161–170 (2012)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Esteve, M.-A., Katoen, J.-P., Nguyen, V.Y., Postma, B., Yushtein, Y.: Formal correctness, safety, dependability, and performance analysis of a satellite. In: Proceedings of the 34th International Conference on Software Engineering, ICSE 2012, pp. 1022–1031. IEEE Press (2012)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Forsberg, K., Mooz, H.: The relationship of system engineering to the project cycle. INCOSE Int. Symp. 1(1), 57–65 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hamann, A., Henia, R., Racu, R., Jersak, M., Richter, K., Ernst, R.: SymTA/S - symbolic timing analysis for systems. In: Work In Progress session - Euromicro Workshop on Real-time Systems (2004)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hartmanns, A.: Modest - a unified language for quantitative models. In: The 2012 Forum on Specification and Design Languages (FDL), pp. 44–51. IEEE (2012)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hartmanns, A., Hermanns, H.: The modest toolset: an integrated environment for quantitative modelling and verification. In: Ábrahám, E., Havelund, K. (eds.) TACAS 2014 (ETAPS). LNCS, vol. 8413, pp. 593–598. Springer, Heidelberg (2014) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hendriks, M., Basten, T., Verriet, J., Brassé, M., Somers, L.: A blueprint for system-level performance modeling of software-intensive embedded systems. Int. J. Softw. Tools Technol. Transf. 1–20 (2014)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hendriks, M., Verriet, J., Basten, T., Theelen, B., Brassé, M., Somers, L.: Analyzing execution traces - critical path analysis and distance analysis. Submitted to: Software Tools for Technology Transfer (2015)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kienhuis, B., Deprettere, E., Vissers, K., van der Wolf, P.: An approach for quantitative analysis of application-specific dataflow architectures. In: ASAP 1997: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Application-Specific Systems, Architectures and Processors, p. 338. IEEE Computer Society (1997)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lapalme, J., Theelen, B., Stoimenov, N., Voeten, J., Thiele, L., Aboulhamid, E.M.: Y-chart based system design: a discussion on approaches. In: Nouvelles approches pour la conception d’outils CAO pour le domaine des systems embarqu’es, pp. 23–56. Universite de Montreal (2009)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Mernik, M., Heering, J., Sloane, A.M.: When and how to develop domain-specific languages. ACM Comput. Surv. 37(4), 316–344 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Mooij, A.J., Hooman, J., Albers, R.: Early fault detection using design models for collision prevention in medical equipment. In: Gibbons, J., MacCaull, W. (eds.) FHIES 2013. LNCS, vol. 8315, pp. 170–187. Springer, Heidelberg (2014) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Perathoner, S., Wandeler, E., Thiele, L.: Evaluation and comparison of performance analysis methods for distributed embedded systems. Technical report, ETH Zurich, Switzerland (2006)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Potts, C.: Software-engineering research revisited. IEEE Softw. 10(5), 19–28 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Sangiovanni-Vincentelli, A., Martin, G.: Platform-based design and software design methodology for embedded systems. IEEE Des. Test 18(6), 23–33 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Schiffelers, R., Alberts, W., Voeten, J.: Model-based specification, analysis and synthesis of servo controllers for lithoscanners. In: Proceedings of the 6th International Workshop on Multi-Paradigm Modeling, MPM 2012, pp. 55–60. ACM, New York (2012)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Software Technology Group, TU Dresden. EMFText (2015).
  23. 23.
    Steinberg, D., Budinsky, F., Paternostro, M., Merks, E.: Eclipse Modeling Framework. Pearson Education, London (2008)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Teeselink, E., Somers, L., Basten, T., Trcka, N., Hendriks, M.: A visual language for modeling and analyzing printer data path architectures. In: Proceedings of the ITSLE, p. 20 (2011)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Theelen, B., Florescu, O., Geilen, M., Huang, J., van der Putten, P., Voeten, J.: Software/hardware engineering with the parallel object-oriented specification language. In: Proceedings of the 5th IEEE/ACM International Conference on Formal Methods and Models for Codesign, MEMOCODE 2007, pp. 139–148. IEEE Computer Society. Washington, DC (2007)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Thiele, L., Chakraborty, S., Naedele, M.: Real-time calculus for scheduling hard real-time systems. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Symposium on Circuits and Systems, vol. 4, pp. 101–104 (2000)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    van den Berg, F., Remke, A., Haverkort, B.: A domain specific language for performance evaluation of medical imaging systems. In: Proceedings of the 5th Workshop on Medical Cyber-Physical Systems, MCPS 2014, Berlin, Germany. OpenAccess Series in Informatics (OASIcs), vol. 36, pp. 80–93, Schloss Dagstuhl-Leibniz-Zentrum fuer Informatik, Dagstuhl (2014)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    van den Berg, F., Remke, A., Mooij, A., Haverkort, B.: Performance evaluation for collision prevention based on a domain specific language. In: Balsamo, M.S., Knottenbelt, W.J., Marin, A. (eds.) EPEW 2013. LNCS, vol. 8168, pp. 276–287. Springer, Heidelberg (2013) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    van Deursen, A., Klint, P., Visser, J.: Domain-specific languages: an annotated bibliography. SIGPLAN Not. 35(6), 26–36 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Voeten, J., Hendriks, T., Theelen, B., Schuddemat, J., Suermondt, W.T., Gemei, J., Kotterink, K., van Huët, C.: Predicting timing performance of advanced mechatronics control systems. In: 2011 IEEE 35th Annual Computer Software and Applications Conference Workshops (COMPSACW), pp. 206–210 (2011)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Wandeler, E., Thiele, L., Verhoef, M., Lieverse, P.: System architecture evaluation using modular performance analysis: a case study. Int. J. Softw. Tools Technol. Transf. (STTT) 8(6), 649–667 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Embedded Systems Innovation by TNOEindhovenThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Radboud UniversityNijmegenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations