Tool Support for Checking Consistency of UML Model

Conference paper


Static structure, processes and other aspect models give the details of different concerns of information system (IS). This is one of the reasons of model consistency conflicts. Consistency issue is very important for IS design, model transformation and, finally, code generation tasks. In order to improve ensuring consistency of IS model, expressed in UML, in design phase, the method of checking consistency of IS model is proposed. The method is based on rules among different aspect models and one aspect model defined for metamodel.


Model Check Class Diagram Suggested Approach Aspect Model Case Tool 
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.


  1. Berkenkötter K (2008) Reliable UML models and profiles. Electron Notes Theor Comput Sci (ENTCS) 217:203–220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Boger M, Graham E, Köster M (2006) Poseidon for UML: user guide. URL: 13 Apr 2011
  3. Chen Z, Motet G (2009) A language-theoretic view on guidelines and consistency rules of UML. In: Model-driven architecture foundations and applications: LNCS 5562. Springer, Berlin, pp 66–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Dubauskaitė R, Vasilecas O (2009a) Ensuring models consistency in the OMT, Booch, and OOSE object-oriented methods, information sciences, Lithuania, vol 50. Vilnius University Publishing House, Vilnius, pp 160–167. (CEEOL)Google Scholar
  5. Dubauskaitė R, Vasilecas O (2009b) UML taisyklių modelių darnos tikrinimo galimybės, naudojant MagicDraw UML ir PowerDesigner įrankius (Checking consistency of UML models using MagicDraw UML and PowerDesigner Tools). Informatika: 12-osios Lietuvos jaunųjų mokslininkų konferencijos “Mokslas – Lietuvos ateitis” pranešimų rinkinys (Proceedings of the 12th conference of Lithuanian‘s researchers) (in press)Google Scholar
  6. Egyed A (2007) Fixing inconsistencies in UML design models. In: Proceedings of the 29th international conference on software engineering (ICSE), Minneapolis, USA. IEEE Computer Society, New York, pp 292–301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. IBM (2010) Rational Software Architect – what’s new in the 8.0 releases. URL: 19 Apr 2011
  8. IBM (2011a) Validating UML models and diagrams [disc]. In: Rational Software Architect 8.0.2 help systemGoogle Scholar
  9. IBM (2011b). Identifying validation rules for UML models [disc]. In: Rational Software Architect 8.0.2 help systemGoogle Scholar
  10. Lucas FJ, Molina F, Toval A (2009) A systematic review of UML model consistency management. Inf Softw Technol 51:1631–1645CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. MagicDraw (2008a). MagicDraw architecture made simple: user’s manual [disc]. In: MagicDraw UML 15.0 help systemGoogle Scholar
  12. MagicDraw (2008b) MagicDraw architecture made simple: OPEN API user’s guide [diskas]. iš MagicDraw UML 15.0 vartotojų vadovaiGoogle Scholar
  13. Miic D (2005) Authoring UML profiles using Rational Software Architect and Rational Software Modeler: technical documentation. URL: 19 Apr 2011
  14. Mokhati F, Gagnon P, Badri M (2007) Verifying UML diagrams with model checking: a rewriting logic based approach. In: Proceedings of the seventh international conference on quality software, USA, pp 356–362Google Scholar
  15. OMG (2007b) OMG Unified Modeling Language (OMG UML), superstructure, v2.1.2, OMG document: formal/2007-11-04. Available at Last visit 4 Jan 2009
  16. Pakalnickiene E, Nemuraite L (2007) Checking of conceptual models with integrity constraints. Inf Technol Control 36(3):285–294Google Scholar
  17. Rozanski N, Woods E (2005) Software system architecture. Addison-Wesley, London, p 546Google Scholar
  18. Shen W, Compton K, Huggins J (2002) A toolset for supporting UML static and dynamic model checking. In: Proceedings of the 26th international computer software and applications conference (COMPSAC 2002), prolonging software life: development and redevelopment, Oxford, England. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, pp 147–152Google Scholar
  19. Silingas D, Butleris R (2009) Towards implementing a framework modelling software requirements in MagicDraw UML. Inf Technol Control 38(2):153–164Google Scholar
  20. Sybase (2008) Customizing and extending power designer [disc]. PowerDesigner 15.0: help systemGoogle Scholar
  21. Van Der Straeten R, Simmonds J, Mens T, Jonckers V (2003) Using description logic to maintain consistency between UML models. In: UML 2003: LNCS 2863. Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg, pp 326–340Google Scholar
  22. Vasilecas O, Dubauskaitė R, Rupnik R (2011) Consistency checking of UML business model. Technol Econ Dev Econ 17(1):133–150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Vavpotič D, Bajec M (2009) An approach for concurrent evaluation of technical and social aspects of software development methodologies. Inf Softw Technol 51(2):528–545CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. VeTIS (2009) Business rules solutions for information systems development. Project reg. No. B-07042, Lithuanian State Science and Studies FoundationGoogle Scholar
  25. Zwanziger A, Holliday C, Herden S, McMackin T (2011) Use the topology editor in Rational Software Architect to add a custom validator: tutorial. URL: 19 Apr 2011

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Vilnius Gediminas Technical UniversityVilniusLithuania

Personalised recommendations