A Scenario-Based Validation Language for ASMs

  • Alessandro Carioni
  • Angelo Gargantini
  • Elvinia Riccobene
  • Patrizia Scandurra
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5238)


This paper presents the AValLa language, a domain-specific modelling language for scenario-based validation of ASM models, and its supporting tool, the AsmetaV validator. They have been developed according to the model-driven development principles as part of the asmeta (ASM mETAmodelling) toolset, a set of tools around ASMs. As a proof-of-concepts, the paper reports the results of the scenario-based validation for the well-known LIFT control case study.


Abstract Syntax Concrete Syntax Observer Actor Abstract State Machine Rule Coverage 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Amyot, D., Eberlein, A.: An evaluation of scenario notations and construction approaches for telecommunication systems development. Telecommunication Systems 24(1), 61–94 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Anderson, J.S., Durney, B.: Using scenarios in deficiency-driven requirements engineering. In: Proceedings of the International Symposium on Requirements Engineering, pp. 134–141. IEEE, Los Alamitos (1993)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Anton, A.I., McCracken, W.M., Potts, C.: Goal decomposition and scenario analysis in business process reengineering. LNCS, vol. 811, pp. 94–104. Springer, Heidelberg (1994)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    The Abstract State Machine Metamodel website (2006),
  5. 5.
    Barnett, M., Grieskamp, W., Schulte, W., Tillmann, N., Veanes, M.: Validating use-cases with the asmL test tool. In: 3rd International Conference on Quality Software (QSIC 2003), Dallas, TX, USA, November 6-7, 2003, pp. 238–246. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Börger, E., Stärk, R.: Abstract State Machines: A Method for High-Level System Design and Analysis. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Carioni, A., Gargantini, A., Riccobene, E., Scandurra, P.: Scenario-based Validation of Embedded Systems. In: FDL 2008: Proceedings of Forum on Specification and Design Languages (2008)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Carroll, J.M.: Five reasons for scenario-based design. Interacting with Computers 13(1), 43–60 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Carroll, J.M., Rosson, M.B.: Getting around the task-artifact cycle: How to make claims and design by scenario. ACM Transactions on Information Systems 10(2), 181–212 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Chandrasekaran, P.: How use case modeling policies have affected the success of various projects (or how to improve use case modeling). In: Addendum to the 1997 ACM SIGPLAN Conference on Object-Oriented Programming, Systems, Lanuages, and Applications, pp. 6–9 (1997)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Damm, W., Harel, D.: LCSs: Breathing life into message sequence charts. Formal Methods in System Design 19(1), 45–80 (2001)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Eclipse Modeling Framework (2008),
  13. 13.
    Gargantini, A.: Using model checking to generate fault detecting tests. In: Gurevich, Y., Meyer, B. (eds.) TAP 2007. LNCS, vol. 4454, pp. 189–206. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gargantini, A., Riccobene, E.: Asm-based testing: Coverage criteria and automatic test sequence. J. of Universal Computer Science 7(11), 1050–1067 (2001)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gargantini, A., Riccobene, E., Rinzivillo, S.: Using spin to generate tests from ASM specifications. In: Börger, E., Gargantini, A., Riccobene, E. (eds.) ASM 2003. LNCS, vol. 2589, pp. 263–277. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Gargantini, A., Riccobene, E., Scandurra, P.: Deriving a textual notation from a metamodel: an experience on bridging Modelware and Grammarware. In: 3M4MDA 2006 workshop at the European Conference on MDA (2006)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gargantini, A., Riccobene, E., Scandurra, P.: Metamodelling a Formal Method: Applying MDE to Abstract State Machines. Technical Report 97, DTI Dept., University of Milan (2006)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Gargantini, A., Riccobene, E., Scandurra, P.: A metamodel-based simulator for ASMs. In: Prinz, A. (ed.) Proceedings of the 14th International ASM Workshop (2007)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Gargantini, A., Riccobene, E., Scandurra, P.: Ten reasons to metamodel ASMs. In: Rigorous Methods for Software Construction and Analysis - Papers Dedicated to Egon Börger on the Occasion of His 60th Birthday. LNCS, vol. 5115. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Gargantini, A., Riccobene, E., Scandurra, P.: A Model-driven Validation & Verification Environment for Embedded Systems. In: Proc. of the IEEE third Symposium on Industrial Embedded Systems (SIES 2008). IEEE, Los Alamitos (2008)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Gargantini, A., Riccobene, E., Scandurra, P.: A language and a simulation engine for abstract state machines based on metamodelling. In: JUCS (accepted, 2008)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Grieskamp, W., Tillmann, N., Veanes, M.: Instrumenting scenarios in a model-driven development environment. Information & Software Technology 46(15), 1027–1036 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Harel, D., Rumpe, B.: Meaningful modeling: What’s the semantics of ”semantics”? IEEE Computer 37(10), 64–72 (2004)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hassine, J., Rilling, J., Dssouli, R.: An ASM operational semantics for use case maps. In: 13th IEEE International Conference on Requirements Engineering (RE 2005), Paris, France, August 29 - September 2, 2005, pp. 467–468. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Heymans, P., Dubois, E.: Scenario-based techniques for supporting the elaboration and the validation of formal requirements. Requir. Eng. 3(3/4), 202–218 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Hsia, P., Samuel, J., Gao, J., Kung, D., Toyoshima, Y., Chen, C.: Formal approach to scenario analysis. IEEE Software 11(2), 33–41 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Kaindl, H., Kramer, S., Kacsich, R.: A case study of decomposing functional requirements using scenarios. In: 3rd International Conference on Requirements Engineering (ICRE 1998), pp. 156–163. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (1998)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Kemmerer, R.: Testing formal specifications to detect design errors. IEEE Trans. Soft. Eng. 11(1), 32–43 (1985)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Kurtev, I., Bézivin, J., Jouault, F., Valduriez, P.: Model-based DSL frameworks. In: OOPSLA Companion, pp. 602–616 (2006)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Lalioti, V., Theodoulidis, B.: Visual scenarios for validation of requirements specification. In: SEKE 1995, The 7th Int. Conference on Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering, pp. 114–116. Knowledge Systems Institute (1995)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Message sequence chart (MSC). ITU-T Recommendation Z.120, International Telecommunications Union (November 1996)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Nielsen, J.: Scenarios in discount usability engineering. In: Scenario-Based Design, pp. 59–83. John Wiley & Sons, Chichester (1995)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Potts, C., Takahashi, K., Anton, A.I.: Inquiry-based requirements analysis. IEEE Software 11(2), 21–32 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Riccobene, E., Scandurra, P., Rosti, A., Bocchio, S.: A UML 2.0 profile for SystemC: toward high-level SoC design. In: EMSOFT 2005: Proceedings of the 5th ACM international conference on Embedded software, pp. 138–141. ACM Press, New York (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Rich, E., Knight, K.: Artificial Intelligence. McGraw-Hill, New York (1991)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Rubin, K.S., Goldberg, A.: Object behavior analysis. Communications of the ACM 35(9), 48–62 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Sutcliffe, A.: Scenario-based requirements engineering. In: 11th IEEE Joint Int. Conference on Requirements Engineering (RE 2003), pp. 320–329 (2003)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
  39. 39.
    OMG. The Unified Modeling Language (UML), v2.1.2 (2007),

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alessandro Carioni
    • 2
  • Angelo Gargantini
    • 1
  • Elvinia Riccobene
    • 2
  • Patrizia Scandurra
    • 2
  1. 1.Dip. di Ing. Informatica e Metodi MatematiciUniversità di BergamoItaly
  2. 2.Dip. di Tecnologie dell’InformazioneUniversità di MilanoItaly

Personalised recommendations