Validation of Component and Service Federations in Automotive Software Applications

  • Luciano Baresi
  • Carlo Ghezzi
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4147)


The automotive domain is one of the most promising areas for component and service technologies in the near future. Vehicles are increasingly becoming integrated systems where both intra-vehicle and inter-vehicles interactions require that a set of federated components (services) be properly orchestrated. The interactions and cooperations among the members of such federations suggest the use of well-known architectural styles to properly design new systems. Among the various styles, we explore the use of the publish-subscribe paradigm for intra-vehicle cooperations and the service-oriented paradigm for vehicle-to-vehicle and vehicle-to-environment interactions. We argue that available modeling notations provide adequate support to specification, but still lack proper support to the validation phase.

In this paper we discuss component models and their validation in the context of the automotive domain. In particular, we show how publish/subscribe and service-oriented applications can be analyzed through model-checking techniques by drawing simple examples from the automotive domain.


Model Check Sequence Diagram Graph Transformation Architectural Style Passenger Compartment 
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.
    Automotive UML Consortium. Automotive UML Web page,
  2. 2.
    Baresi, L., Ghezzi, C., Guinea, S.: Towards Self-healing Compositions of Services. In: Proceedings of PRISE 2004, First Conference on the Principles of Software Engineering (November 2004)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Baresi, L., Heckel, R.: Tutorial Introduction to Graph Transformation: A Software Engineering Perspective. In: Corradini, A., Ehrig, H., Kreowski, H.-J., Rozenberg, G. (eds.) ICGT 2002. LNCS, vol. 2505, pp. 402–429. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Baresi, L., Heckel, R., Thöne, S., Varrò, D.: Specification of Generic and SOA-specific Style,
  5. 5.
    Baresi, L., Heckel, R., Thöne, S., Varrò, D.: Modeling and Validation of Service-Oriented Architectures: Application vs. Style. In: Proceedings of the European Software Engineering Conference and ACM SIGSOFT Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering (ESEC/FSE), pp. 68–77. ACM Press, New York (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Champion, M., Ferris, C., Newcomer, E., Orchard, D.: Web Service Architecture, W3C Working Draft (2002),
  7. 7.
    Compton, K., Gurevich, Y., Huggins, J., Shen, W.: An automatic verification tool for UML. Technical Report, University of Michigan, CSE-TR-423-00 (2000)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Garlan, D., Khersonsky, S., Kim, J.S.: Model Checking Publish-Subscribe Systems. In: Ball, T., Rajamani, S.K. (eds.) SPIN 2003. LNCS, vol. 2648, pp. 166–180. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Damm, W., Harel, D.: LSCs: Breathing Life into Message Sequence Charts. Formal Methods in System Design 19(1), 45–80 (2001)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    From UML to Java and Back Again: The Fujaba Web page,
  11. 11.
    Gnesi, S., Latella, D., Massink, M.: Model Checking UML Statecharts Diagrams using JACK. In: Proceedings of the Fourth IEEE International Symposium on High Assuarance Systems Enginering (HASE), pp. 46–55. IEEE Press, Los Alamitos (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hatcliff, J., Deng, W., Dwyer, M.D., Jung, G., Ranganath, V.: Cadena: An Integrated Development, Analysys, and Verification Environment for Component-based Systems. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Software Engineering, ICSE 2003 (2003)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hirsch, D., Montanari, M.: Synchronized Hyperedge Replacement with Name Mobility. In: Larsen, K.G., Nielsen, M. (eds.) CONCUR 2001. LNCS, vol. 2154, pp. 121–136. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Holzmann, G.J.: The Model Checker SPIN. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 23(5), 279–295 (1997)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Inverardi, P., Muccini, H., Pelliccione, P.: Automated Check of Architectural Models Consistency using SPIN. In: Proceedings of the 16th IEEE International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASE), p. 349. IEEE Press, Los Alamitos (2001)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Keller, A., Ludwig, H.: The WSLA Framework: Specifying and Monitoring Service Level Agreements for Web Services. Technical Report RC22456 (W0205-171), IBM Research Division, T.J. Watson Research Center (May 2002)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Krüger, I.: Researcher in Focus,
  18. 18.
    Krüger, I., Mathew, R.: Systematic Development and Exploration of Service-Oriented Software Architectures. In: Proceedings of the 4th Working IEEE/IFIP Conference on Software Architecture (WICSA 2004), pp. 177–187 (2004)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Le Métayer, D.: Software Architecture Styles as Graph Grammars. In: Proceedings of the Fourth ACM SIGSOFT Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering, ACM Software Engineering Notes, October 16-18, vol. 216, pp. 15–23. ACM Press, New York (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lilius, J., Paltor, I.P.: vUML: a Tool for Verifying UML Models. In: Proceedings of the 14th IEEE International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASE), October 1999, pp. 255–258 (1999)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Felber, P.A., Eugster, P.T., Guerraoui, R., Kermarrec, A.M.: The Many Faces of Publish/ Subscribe. ACM Computing Surveys 35(2), 114–131 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Schäfer, T., Knapp, A., Merz, S.: Model Checking UML State Machines and Collaborations. Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science 55(3), 13 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Taentzer, G., Goedicke, M., Meyer, T.: Dynamic Change Manegement by Distributed Graph Transformation: Towards Configurable Distributed Systems. In: Ehrig, H., Engels, G., Kreowski, H.-J., Rozenberg, G. (eds.) TAGT 1998. LNCS, vol. 1764, pp. 179–193. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Varrò, D.: Towards Automated Formal Verification of Visual Modeling Languages by Model Checking. Journal of Software and Systems Modelling (2003)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Wermelinger, M., Fiadero, J.L.: A Graph Transformation Approach to Software Architecture Reconfiguration. Science of Computer Programming 44(2), 133–155 (2002)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Zanolin, L., Ghezzi, C., Baresi, L.: An Approach to Model and Validate Publish/Subscribe Architectures. In: Proceedings of SAVCBS 2003: ESEC/FSE Workshop on Specification and Verification of Component-Based Systems, September 2003, pp. 35–41 (2003); Technical Report #03-11, Department of Computer Science, Iowa State UniversityGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Luciano Baresi
    • 1
  • Carlo Ghezzi
    • 1
  1. 1.Dipartimento di Elettronica e Informazione – Politecnico di MilanoMilanoItaly

Personalised recommendations