Advertisement

A SysML Formal Framework to Combine Discrete and Continuous Simulation for Testing

  • Jean-Marie Gauthier
  • Fabrice Bouquet
  • Ahmed Hammad
  • Fabien Peureux
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9407)

Abstract

The increasing interactions between huge amount of software and hardware subsystem (hydraulics, mechanics, electronics, etc.) lead to a new kind of complexity that is difficult to manage during the validation of safety-critical and complex embedded systems. This paper introduces a formal SysML-based framework to combine both discrete and continuous simulation to validate physical systems at the early stage of development. This original modelling framework takes as input a SysML model annotated with Modelica code and OCL constraints. Such a model provides a precise and unambiguous description of the designed system and its environment, involving both discrete and continuous features. This formal framework enables to automatically generate Modelica code to perform real-time simulation. On the basis of a constraint system derived from the discrete SysML/OCL modelling artefacts, it also makes it possible to automatically generate black-box test cases that can be used to validate the simulated system as well as the corresponding physical device. This framework has been validated by conclusive experiments conducted to prototype a new energy manager system for aeronautics.

Keywords

SysML Model-driven engineering Real-time system Discrete & continuous simulation Modelica Constraint solving Model-based testing 

References

  1. 1.
    Qamar, A., During, C., Wikander, J.: Designing mechatronic systems, a model-based perspective, an attempt to achieve SysML-Matlab/Simulink model integration. In: International Conference on Advanced Intelligent Mechatronics (AIM 2009). IEEE CS, Singapore, Republic of Singapore, pp. 1306–1311, July 2009Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Sindico, A., Di Natale, M., Panci, G.: Integrating SysML with Simulink using open-source model transformations. In: 1st International Conference on Simulation and Modeling Methodologies, Technologies and Applications (SIMULTECH 2011). SciTePress, Noordwijkerhout, The Netherlands, pp. 45–56, July 2011Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Utting, M., Legeard, B.: Practical Model-Based Testing: A Tools Approach. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc., Massachusetts (2007). ISBN 978-0-08-046648-4Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Broekman, B.M.: Testing Enbredded Software. Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc, Boston, MA (2002). ISBN 0321159861Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Matinnejad, R., Nejati, S., Briand, L., Bruckmann, T.: MiL testing of highly configurable continuous controllers: scalable search using surrogate models. In: 29th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASE 2014). ACM, Vasteras, Sweden, pp. 163–174, September 2014Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Benigni, A., Monti, A.: Development of a platform for hardware in the loop testing of network controller. In: Grand Challenges on Modeling and Simulation Conference (GCMS 2011). Society for Modeling and Simulation International, Hague, Netherlands, pp. 124–128, June 2011Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Friedenthal, S., Moore, A., Steiner, R.: A Practical Guide to SysML: The Systems Modeling Language. Morgan Kaufmann, Massachusetts (2009). ISBN 978-0-12-374379-4Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Graves, H., Bijan, Y.: Using formal methods with SysML in aerospace design. Ann. Math. Artif. Intell. 63(1), 53–102 (2011)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ambert, F., Bouquet, F., Lasalle, J., Legeard, B., Peureux, F.: Applying a def-use approach on signal exchange to implement SysML model-based testing. In: Van Gorp, P., Ritter, T., Rose, L.M. (eds.) ECMFA 2013. LNCS, vol. 7949, pp. 134–151. Springer, Heidelberg (2013) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bouquet, F., Grandpierre, C., Legeard, B., Peureux, F., Vacelet, N., Utting, M.: A Subset of Precise UML for Model-based Testing. In: 3rd International Workshop on Advances in Model-based Testing, (A-MOST 2007). ACM, pp. 95–104, July 2007Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bouquet, F., Legeard, B., Peureux, F.: CLPS-B: a constraint solver to animate a B specification. Int. J. Soft. Tools Technol. Transf. STTT 6(2), 143–157 (2004)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ambert, F., Bouquet, F., Chemin, S., Guenaud, S., Legeard, B., Peureux, F., Vacelet, N., Utting, M.: BZ-TT: a tool-set for test generation from Z and B using Constraint Logic Programming. In: Hierons, R., Jéron, T. (eds.) Formal Approaches to Testing of Software (FATES 2002), pp. 105–120, August 2002Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Spataru, C., Gillott, M.: The use of intelligent systems for monitoring energy use and occupancy in existing homes. In: Howlett, R.J., Jain, L.C., Lee, S.H. (eds.) SEB 2010 SIST 7. SIST, vol. 7, pp. 247–256. Springer, Heidelberg (2011) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Macworth, A.K.: Consistency in networks of relations. J. Artif. Intell. 8(1), 99–118 (1977)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gauthier, J., Bouquet, F., Hammad, A., Peureux, F.: Tooled process for earlyvalidation of SysML models using Modelica simulation. In: 6th International Conference on Fundamentals of Software Engineering (FSEN 2015), Tehran, Iran, April 2015Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Zeigler, B.P., Praehofer, H., Kim, T.: Theory of Modeling and Simulation: Integrating Discrete Event and Continuous Complex Dynamic Systems, 2nd edn. Elsevier Science, San Diego, CA (2000). ISBN: 0-12-778455-1 Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lee, E.: Constructive models of discrete and continuous physical phenomena. Access, IEEE 2, 797–821 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Iqbal, M., Arcuri, A., Briand, L.: Environment modeling and simulation for automated testing of soft real-time embedded software. Soft. Syst. Model. 14(1), 483–524 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    McUmber, W.E., Cheng, B.H.C.: UML-based analysis of embedded systems using a mapping to VHDL. In: 4th International Symposium on High-Assurance Systems Engineering (HASE 1999). IEEE CS, Washington, DC, pp. 56–63, November 1999Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Vanderperren, Y., Dehaene, W.: From UML/SysML to Matlab/Simulink: current state and future perspectives. In: 9th International Conference on Design, Automation and Test in Europe (DATE 2006). EDAA, Munich, Germany, pp. 93–93, March 2006Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Boutekkouk, F.: Automatic SystemC code generation from UML models at early stages of systems on chip design. Int. J. Comput. Appl. 8(6), 10–17 (2010)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jean-Marie Gauthier
    • 1
  • Fabrice Bouquet
    • 1
  • Ahmed Hammad
    • 1
  • Fabien Peureux
    • 1
  1. 1.Institut FEMTO-ST – UMR CNRS 6174, Université Bourgogne Franche-ComtéBesançonFrance

Personalised recommendations