Advertisement

Synthesis of Connectors from Scenario-Based Interaction Specifications

  • Farhad Arbab
  • Sun Meng
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5282)

Abstract

The idea of synthesizing state-based models from scenario-based interaction specifications has received much attention in recent years. The synthesis approach not only helps to significantly reduce the effort of system construction, but it also provides a bridge over the gap between requirements and implementation of systems. However, the existing synthesis techniques only focus on generating (global or local) state machines from scenario-based specifications, while the coordination among the behavior alternatives of services/components in the systems is not considered. In this paper we propose a novel synthesis technique, which can be used to generate constraint automata specification for connectors from scenario specifications. Inspired by the way UML2.0 sequence diagrams can be algebraically composed, we define an algebraic framework for building constraint automata by exploiting the algebraic structure of UML sequence diagrams.

Keywords

Connector Reo Constraint Automata Scenario-based Specification UML Synthesis 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Eclipse Coordination Tools, http://homepages.cwi.nl/~koehler/ect/
  2. 2.
    Arbab, F.: Reo: A Channel-based Coordination Model for Component Composition. Mathematical Structures in Computer Science 14(3), 329–366 (2004)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Arbab, F., Baier, C., de Boer, F., Rutten, J., Sirjani, M.: Synthesis of Reo Circuits for Implementation of Component-Connector Automata Specifications. In: Jacquet, J.-M., Picco, G.P. (eds.) COORDINATION 2005. LNCS, vol. 3454, pp. 236–251. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Arbab, F., Chothia, T., Meng, S., Moon, Y.-J.: Component Connectors with QoS Guarantees. In: Murphy, A.L., Vitek, J. (eds.) COORDINATION 2007. LNCS, vol. 4467, pp. 286–304. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Arbab, F., Meng, S., Baier, C.: Synthesis of Reo Circuits from Scenario-based Specifications. In: Proceedings of FOCLASA 2008 (2008)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Arbab, F., Rutten, J.: A coinductive calculus of component connectors. In: Wirsing, M., Pattinson, D., Hennicker, R. (eds.) WADT 2003. LNCS, vol. 2755, pp. 34–55. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Baier, C., Sirjani, M., Arbab, F., Rutten, J.: Modeling component connectors in Reo by constraint automata. Science of Computer Programming 61, 75–113 (2006)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Blechmann, T., Baier, C.: Checking Equivalence for Reo Networks. In: Proceedings of 4th International Workshop on Formal Aspects of Component Software, FACS 2007 (2007)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Carriero, N., Gelernter, D.: Coordination Languages and Their Significance. Communications of the ACM 35, 97–107 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Damm, W., Harel, D.: LSCs: Breathing Life into Message Sequence Charts. Formal Methods in System Design 19(0) (2001)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Harel, D., Kugler, H.: Synthesizing State-Based Object Systems from LSC Specifications. Foundations of Computer Science 13, 5–51 (2002)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Harel, D., Kugler, H., Pnueli, A.: Synthesis Revisited: Generating Statechart Models from Scenario-Based Requirements. In: Proc. Formal Methods in Software and Systems Modeling, pp. 309–324 (2005)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    ITU-TS. Recommendation Z.120(11/99) : MSC 2000, Geneva (1999)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Khriss, I., Elkoutbi, M., Keller, R.K.: Automating the synthesis of uml statechart diagrams from multiple collaboration diagrams. In: Bézivin, J., Muller, P.-A. (eds.) UML 1998. LNCS, vol. 1618, pp. 132–147. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Klüppelholz, S., Baier, C.: Symbolic Model Checking for Channel-based Component Connectors. In: Canal, C., Viroli, M. (eds.) Proceedings of FOCLASA 2006, pp. 19–36 (2006)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Krüger, I., Grosu, R., Scholz, P., Broy, M.: From mscs to statecharts. In: Distributed and Parallel Embedded Systems, pp. 61–72. Kluwer, Dordrecht (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Krüger, I.H., Mathew, R.: Component Synthesis from Service Specifications. In: Leue, S., Systä, T.J. (eds.) Scenarios: Models, Transformations and Tools. LNCS, vol. 3466, pp. 255–277. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lazovik, A., Arbab, F.: Using Reo for Service Coordination. In: Krämer, B.J., Lin, K.-J., Narasimhan, P. (eds.) ICSOC 2007. LNCS, vol. 4749, pp. 398–403. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Papazoglou, M.P., Georgakopoulos, D.: Service Oriented Computing. Comm. ACM 46(10), 25–28 (2003)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Mäkinen, E., Systä, T.: Mas - an interactive synthesizer to support behavioral modeling in uml. In: Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Software Engineering, ICSE 2001, pp. 15–24. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Meng, S., Arbab, F.: Web Services Choreography and Orchestration in Reo and Constraint Automata. In: Adams, C., Miri, A., Wiener, M. (eds.) SAC 2007. LNCS, vol. 4876, pp. 346–353. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Object Management Group. Unified Modeling Language: Superstructure - version 2.1.1 (2007), http://www.uml.org/
  23. 23.
    Sun, J., Dong, J.S.: Design Synthesis from Interaction and State-Based Specifications. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 32, 349–364 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Tivoli, M., Autili, M.: SYNTHESIS, a Tool for Synthesizing Correct and Protocol-Enhanced Adaptors. RSTI L’object 12, 77–103 (2006)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Uchitel, S., Brunet, G., Chechik, M.: Behaviour model synthesis from properties and scenarios. In: 29th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE 2007), pp. 34–43. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Uchitel, S., Kramer, J.: A Workbench for Synthesising Behaviour Models from Scenarios. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE 2001), pp. 188–197. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Uchitel, S., Kramer, J., Magee, J.: Detecting implied scenarios in message sequence chart specifications. In: Proceedings of the 9th European Software Engineering Conference and 9th ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering (ESEC/FSE 2001), pp. 74–82. ACM, New York (2001)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Yellin, D.M., Strom, R.E.: Protocol specifications and component adaptors. ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems 19(2), 292–333 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Ziadi, T., Hélouët, L., Jézéquel, J.-M.: Revisiting Statechart Synthesis with an Algebraic Approach. In: Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE 2004). IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2004)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Farhad Arbab
    • 1
  • Sun Meng
    • 1
  1. 1.CWIAmsterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations