Advertisement

Modeling and Analyzing Mobile Software Architectures

  • Clemens Schäfer
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4344)

Abstract

The emerging behavior of a mobile system is determined by its software architecture (structure, dynamics, deployment), the underlying communication networks (topology, properties like bandwidth etc.) and interactions undertaken by the users of the system. In order to assess whether a mobile system fulfills its non-functional requirements like response times or availability already at design time, the emergent behavior of such a system can be simulated by using an architectural model of the system and applying an simulation approach where a network model and a user interaction model are used for providing the contextual information.

In this paper we show how such an architectural model can expressed in our ADL Con Moto, how functional and non-functional properties of an architecture can be modeled and how simulation of the mobile system can be used to yield the desired properties.

Keywords

Software Architecture Mobile System Logical Connector Logical Connection Architecture Description 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Aagedal, J.Ø.: Quality of Service Support in Development of Distributed Systems. PhD thesis, University of Oslo (2001)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Fuggetta, A., Picco, G.P., Vigna, G.: Understanding Code Mobility. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 24(5), 342–361 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gruhn, V., Schäfer, C.: Architecture Description for Mobile Distributed Systems. In: Morrison, R., Oquendo, F. (eds.) EWSA 2005. LNCS, vol. 3527, pp. 239–246. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hermanns, H., Katoen, J.-P.: Performance Evaluation:= (Process Algebra + Model Checking) × Markov Chains. In: Larsen, K.G., Nielsen, M. (eds.) CONCUR 2001. LNCS, vol. 2154, pp. 59–81. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Issarny, V., Tartanoglu, F., Liu, J., Sailhan, F.: Software Architecture for Mobile Distributed Computing. In: Proceedings of the Fourth Working IEEE/IFIP Conference on Software Architecture (WICSA 2004), pp. 201–210. IEEE, Los Alamitos (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lamport, L.: Specifying Systems: The TLA+ Language and Tools for Hardware and Software Engineers. Addison-Wesley, Reading (2002)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Mascolo, C., Picco, G.P., Roman, G.-C.: A fine-grained model for code mobility. In: Nierstrasz, O., Lemoine, M. (eds.) ESEC 1999 and ESEC-FSE 1999. LNCS, vol. 1687, pp. 39–56. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Medvidovic, N., Taylor, R.N.: A Classification and Comparison Framework for Software Architecture Description Languages. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 26(1), 70–93 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Milner, R.: Communicating and Mobile Systems: the π-Calculus. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1999)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Milner, R.: Communicating and Mobile Systems: the π-Calculus. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1999)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    OMG: Unified Modeling Language (UML) Specification: Superstructure, Version 2.0 (formal/05-07-04)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Oquendo, F.: π-ADL: An Architecture Description Language based on the Higher-Order Typed π-Calculus for Specifying Dynamic and Mobile Software Architectures. ACM Software Engineering Notes 29 (May 2004)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Oquendo, F.: π-ADL: An Architecture Description Language based on the Higher-Order Typed π-Calculus for Specifying Dynamic and Mobile Software Architectures. ACM Software Engineering Notes 29 (May 2004)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Pierce, B.C., Turner, D.N.: Pict: A programming language based on the pi-calculus. In: Plotkin, G., Stirling, C., Tofte, M. (eds.) Proof, Language and Interaction: Essays in Honour of Robin Milner. MIT Press, Cambridge (2000)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Roman, G.-C., Picco, G.P., Murphy, A.L.: Software Engineering for Mobility: A Roadmap. In: Proceedings of the Conference on the Future of Software Engineering, pp. 241–258. ACM Press, New York (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Shaw, M., Garlan, D.: Formulations and Formalisms in Software Architecture. In: van Leeuwen, J. (ed.) Computer Science Today. LNCS, vol. 1000, pp. 307–323. Springer, Heidelberg (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Zschaler, S.: Formal specification of non-functional properties of component-based software. In: Bruel, J.-M., Georg, G., Hussmann, H., Ober, I., Pohl, C., Whittle, J., Zschaler, S. (eds.) Workshop on Models for Non-functional Aspects of Component-Based Software (NfC 2004) at UML conference 2004 (September 2004)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Clemens Schäfer
    • 1
  1. 1.Chair for Applied Telematics / e-BusinessUniversity of LeipzigGermany

Personalised recommendations