On the Use of Domain and System Knowledge Modeling in Goal-Based Event-B Specifications

Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9952)

Abstract

When using formal methods, one of the main difficulties is to elaborate the initial formal specification from informal descriptions obtained during the requirements analysis phase. For that purpose, we propose a goal-based approach in which the building of an initial formal model (in Event-B) is driven by a goal-oriented requirements engineering model (SysML/KAOS). In a previous work, we have defined a set of rules to derive a partial Event-B specification from a goal model. In this paper, we propose to enhance the goal model in order to obtain a more complete formal specification. First, we advocate the specification of a domain ontology in order to share common understanding of the structure of the different applications of the underlying domain. This is particularly useful for complex systems to explicit and make clearer the domain knowledge. For a specific system, a class and an object diagrams are then specified to detail its components and their relationships. Finally, we describe how the ontology and the structural model are translated into Event-B. The proposed approach is illustrated through a landing gear system.

Notes

Acknowledgment

The work in this paper is supported by the FORMOSE project ANR-14-CE28-0009 funded by the French ANR (National Research Agency).

References

  1. 1.
    Abrial, J.-R.: The B-Book, Assigning Programs to Meanings. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2005)MATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Abrial, J.R.: Modeling in Event-B: System and Software Engineering. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2010)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Aït Ameur, Y., Méry, D.: Making explicit domain knowledge in formal system development. Sci. Comput. Program. 121, 100–127 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Anton, A.I.: Goal-based requirements analysis. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Requirements Engineering (1996)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Boniol, F., Wiels, V.: The landing gear system case study. In: Boniol, F., Wiels, V., Ait Ameur, Y., Schewe, K.-D. (eds.) ABZ 2014. CCIS, vol. 433, pp. 1–18. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bjørner, D.: Software Engineering 3 - Domains, Requirements, and Software Design. Texts in Theoretical Computer Science. An EATCS Series. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)MATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Broy, M.: Domain modeling and domain engineering : key tasks in requirements engineering. In: Munch, J., Schmid, K. (eds.) Perspectives on the Future of Software Engineering, pp. 15–30. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chung, L., Nixon, B., Yu, E., Mylopoulos, J.: Non-functional Requirements in Software Engineering. Kluwer Academic, Boston (2000)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    FORMOSE Project: ANR-14-CE28-0009. http://formose.lacl.fr/
  10. 10.
    Fricker, S., Grau, R., Zwingli, A.: Requirements engineering: best practice. In: Fricker, S., Thummler, C., Gavras, A. (eds.) Requirements Engineering for Digital Health. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gnaho, C., Semmak, F., Laleau, R.: Modeling the impact of non-functional requirements on functional requirements. In: Parsons, J., Chiu, D. (eds.) ER Workshops 2013. LNCS, vol. 8697, pp. 59–67. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hitzler, P., Krotzsch, M., Parsia, B., Patel-Schneider, P.F., Rudolph, S. (eds.): OWL 2 Web Ontology Language: Primer, W3C Recommendation (2009). http://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-primer
  13. 13.
    Kaiya, H., Saeki, M.: Using domain ontology as domain knowledge for requirements elicitation. In: 14th IEEE International Conference on Requirements Engineering (2006)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    van Lamsweerde, A.: Requirements Engineering: From System Goals to UML Models to Software Specifications. Wiley, Hoboken (2009)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lecomte, T.: Applying a formal method in industry: a 15-year trajectory. In: Alpuente, M., Cook, B., Joubert, C. (eds.) FMICS 2009. LNCS, vol. 5825, pp. 26–34. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Matoussi, A., Gervais, F., Laleau, R.: An Event-B formalization of KAOS goal refinement patterns. LACL, University of Paris-Est, Technical report TRLACL-2010-1 (2010). http://lacl.univ-paris12.fr/Rapports/TR/TR-LACL-2010-1.pdf
  17. 17.
    Matoussi, A., Gervais, F., Laleau, R.: A goal-based approach to guide the design of an abstract Event-B specification. In: 16th IEEE International Conference on Engineering of Complex Computer Systems (2011)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Nuseibeh, B., Easterbrook, S.: Requirements engineering: a roadmapp. In: 22nd ACM International Conference on Software Engineering. The Future of Software Engineering (2000)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    OMG. SysML Specification. v1.3, 12 June 2012. http://www.sysml.org/docs/specs/OMGSysML-v1.3-12-06-02.pdf
  20. 20.
    Openflexo project. http://www.openflexo.org
  21. 21.
    Sikora, E., Tenbergen, B., Pohl, K.: Industry needs and research directions in requirements engineering for embedded systems. Requir. Eng. 17(1), 57–78 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.SAMOVAR, Télécom SudParis CNRSUniversité Paris-SaclaySaint-AubinFrance
  2. 2.Université Paris-Est, LACL UPEC, IUT Sénart FontainebleauCréteilFrance

Personalised recommendations