Ten Reasons to Metamodel ASMs

  • Angelo Gargantini
  • Elvinia Riccobene
  • Patrizia Scandurra
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5115)


Model-Driven Engineering (or MDE) is an emerging approach for system development which refers to the systematic use of models as primary engineering artifacts throughout the engineering lifecycle. MDE puts emphasis on bridges between different working contexts and on the integration of bodies of knowledge differently developed. We discuss the mutual advantages that the integration of MDE and Abstract State Machines (ASMs) would provide: MDE can gain rigour and preciseness, while ASMs get a standard abstract notation and a general framework for a wide tool interoperability.


Abstract Syntax Object Managment Group Concrete Syntax Model Drive Architecture Abstract State Machine 
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.
    Eclipse Modeling Framework,
  2. 2.
    Java Compiler Compiler,
  3. 3.
  4. 4.
    The Eclipse Graphical Modeling Framework,
  5. 5.
    The, M.D.R. (Model Driven Repository) for NetBeans,
  6. 6.
  7. 7.
    Anlauff, M., Del Castillo, G., Huggins, J., Janneck, J., Schmid, J., Schulte, W.: The ASM-Interchange Format XML Document Type Definition (ASM-DTD),
  8. 8.
  9. 9.
    The AsmL metamodel in the Atlantic Zoo (2006),
  10. 10.
    The Abstract State Machine Metamodel and its tool set,
  11. 11.
    ATGT: ASM tests generation tool,
  12. 12.
    Bézivin, J.: On the Unification Power of Models. Software and System Modeling (SoSym) 4(2), 171–188 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bézivin, J., Bruneliére, H., Jouault, F.J., Kurtev, I.: Model Engineering Support for Tool Interoperability. In: The 4th Workshop in Software Model Engineering (WiSME 2005), Montego Bay, Jamaica (2005)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Börger, E., Stärk, R.: Abstract State Machines: A Method for High-Level System Design and Analysis. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Del Castillo, G.: The ASM Workbench - A Tool Environment for Computer-Aided Analysis and Validation of Abstract State Machine Models Tool Demonstration. In: Margaria, T., Yi, W. (eds.) TACAS 2001. LNCS, vol. 2031, pp. 578–581. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Chen, K., Sztipanovits, J., Abdelwalhed, S., Jackson, E.: Semantic anchoring with model transformations. In: Hartman, A., Kreische, D. (eds.) ECMDA-FA 2005. LNCS, vol. 3748, pp. 115–129. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
  18. 18.
    The CoreASM Project,
  19. 19.
    Hearnden, D., Raymond, K., Steel, J.: Anti-Yacc: MOF-to-text. In: Proc. of EDOC, pp. 200–211 (2002)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Dold, A.: A Formal Representation of Abstract State Machines Using PVS. Verifix Technical Report Ulm/6.2, Universitat Ulm (July 1998)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Riccobene, E., Scandurra, P., Rosti, A., Bocchio, S.: A SoC Design Methodology Based on a UML 2.0 Profile for SystemC. In: Proc. of Design Automation and Test in Europe (DATE 2005). IEEE, Los Alamitos (2005)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Efftinge, S.: oAW xText - A framework for textual DSLs. In: Workshop on Modeling Symposium at Eclipse Summit (2006)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Mens, T., et al.: Challenges in software evolution. In: International Workshop on Principles of Software Evolution, IWPSE 2005 (2005)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Fischer, J., Piefel, M., Scheidgen, M.: A Metamodel for SDL-2000 in the Context of Metamodelling ULF. In: Fourth SDL And MSC Workshop (SAM 2004), pp. 208–223 (2004)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Gargantini, A., Riccobene, E.: Encoding Abstract State Machines in PVS. In: Gurevich, Y., Kutter, P.W., Odersky, M., Thiele, L. (eds.) ASM 2000. LNCS, vol. 1912, pp. 303–322. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    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
  27. 27.
    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
  28. 28.
    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
  29. 29.
    Gargantini, A., Riccobene, E., Scandurra, P.: A Metamodel-based Simulator for ASMs. In: 14th International ASM Workshop, Grimstad, Norway, June 7-9 (2007)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Holt, R., Schürr, A., Sim, S.E., Winter, A.: Graph eXchange Language,
  31. 31.
    OMG, Human-Usable Textual Notation, v1.0. Document formal/04-08-01,
  32. 32.
    Java Metadata Interface Specification, Version 1.0. (2002),
  33. 33.
    Jouault, F., Bézivin, J.: KM3: a DSL for Metamodel Specification. In: Gorrieri, R., Wehrheim, H. (eds.) FMOODS 2006. LNCS, vol. 4037, pp. 171–185. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    OMG. The Model Driven Architecture (MDA),
  35. 35.
    Nytun, J.P., Prinz, A., Tveit, M.S.: Automatic generation of modelling tools. In: Rensink, A., Warmer, J. (eds.) ECMDA-FA 2006. LNCS, vol. 4066, pp. 268–283. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    OCL Environment (OCLE),
  37. 37.
    The Object Managment Group (OMG),
  38. 38.
    Petri Net Markup Laguage (PNML),
  39. 39.
    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, New York (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Riccobene, E., Scandurra, P., Rosti, A., Bocchio, S.: A model-driven design environment for embedded systems. In: Proc. of the 43rd annual Conference on Design Automation (DAC 2006), pp. 915–918. ACM Press, New York (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Scandurra, P., Gargantini, A., Genovese, C., Genovese, T., Riccobene, E.: A Concrete Syntax derived from the Abstract State Machine Metamodel. In: 12th International Workshop on Abstract State Machines (ASM 2005), Paris, France, March 8-11 (2005)Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Schellhorn, G., Ahrendt, W.: Reasoning about Abstract State Machines: The WAM Case Study. Journal of Universal Computer Science 3(4), 377–413 (1997)zbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Schmid, J.: AsmGofer,
  44. 44.
    Taentzer, G.: Towards common exchange formats for graphs and graph transformation systems. In: Padberg, J. (ed.) UNIGRA 2001: Uniform Approaches to Graphical Process Specification Techniques, satellite workshop of ETAPS (2001)Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    The Timed Abstract State Machine (TASM) Language and Toolset,
  46. 46.
    Thibodeaux, R.: The Specification of Architectural Languages with Abstract State Machines. In: 14th International ASM Workshop, Grimstad, Norway, June 7-9 (2007)Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    OMG. The Unified Modeling Language (UML),
  48. 48.
    Varró, D., Varró, G., Pataricza, A.: Towards an XMI–based model interchange format for graph transformation systems. Technical report, Budapest University of Technology and Economics, Dept. of Measurement and Information Systems (September 2000)Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Winter, K.: Model Checking for Abstract State Machines. Journal of Universal Computer Science (J.UCS) 3(5), 689–701 (1997)zbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    XASM: The Open Source ASM Language,
  51. 51.
  52. 52.
    Gurevich, Y., Rossman, B., Schulte, W.: Semantic Essence of AsmL. Microsoft Research Technical Report MSR-TR-2004-27 (March 2004)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Angelo Gargantini
    • 1
  • Elvinia Riccobene
    • 2
  • Patrizia Scandurra
    • 1
  1. 1.Dip. di Ingegneria dell’Informazione e Metodi MatematiciUniversità degli Studi di BergamoItaly
  2. 2.Dip. di Tecnologie dell’InformazioneUniversità degli Studi di MilanoItaly

Personalised recommendations