Advertisement

Visualization, Simulation and Analysis of Reconfigurable Systems

  • Claudia Ermel
  • Karsten Ehrig
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5088)

Abstract

Meta-modeling is well known to define the basic concepts of domain-specific languages in an object-oriented way. Based on graph transformation, an abstract meta-model may be enhanced with information on concrete visualization of objects and relations, and the language syntax is defined by a graph grammar. Moreover, graph transformation can also formalize the semantic aspects of models, thus providing a basis for model validation by simulation.

Apart from editing and simulating the behavior of a system, there may be necessary reconfiguration operations which change the underlying system structure at runtime. In this paper, we focus on the interrelation of simulation and reconfiguration operations using formal verification techniques based on graph transformation. Our approach is demonstrated by the definition of a domain-specific language for building, simulating and reconfiguring small railway systems, using the Tiger tool environment. For further verification, we define a model transformation from the railway domain to Petri nets.

Keywords

Graph transformation model transformation reconfigurable system visualization simulation analysis 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Tolvanen, J., Rossi, M.: MetaEdit+: Defining and Using Domain-Specific Modeling Languages and Code Generators. In: Proc. Conf. on Object-oriented programming, systems, languages, and applications (OOPSLA 2003), pp. 92–93. ACM Press, New York (2003)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Object Management Group: Meta-Object Facility (MOF), Version 1.4 (2005), http://www.omg.org/technology/documents/formal/mof.htm
  3. 3.
    Kreowski, H.J., Hölscher, K., Knirsch, P.: Semantics of visual models in a rule-based setting. Electr. Notes Theor. Comput. Sci. 148(1), 75–88 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ehrig, H., Ehrig, K., Prange, U., Taentzer, G.: Fundamentals of Algebraic Graph Transformation. In: EATCS Monographs in Theor. Comp. Science. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ermel, C., Ehrig, K., Taentzer, G., Weiss, E.: Object Oriented and Rule-based Design of Visual Languages using TIGER. In: Proc. Workshop on Graph-Based Tools (GraBaTs 2006), Electronic Communications of the EASST, vol. 1 (2006)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Eclipse Consortium: Eclipse – Version 3.2.1 (2007), http://www.eclipse.org
  7. 7.
    Taentzer, G.: AGG: A Graph Transformation Environment for Modeling and Validation of Software. In: Pfaltz, J.L., Nagl, M., Böhlen, B. (eds.) AGTIVE 2003. LNCS, vol. 3062, pp. 446–456. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ehrig, H., Engels, G., Kreowski, H.J., Rozenberg, G. (eds.): Handbook of Graph Grammars and Computing by Graph Transformation. Applications, Languages and Tools, vol. 2. World Scientific, Singapore (1999)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Habel, A., Heckel, R., Taentzer, G.: Graph Grammars with Negative Application Conditions. Fundamenta Informaticae 26(3,4), 287–313 (1996) (special issue)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Tiger Project Team, Technical University of Berlin: Tiger: Generating Visual Environments in Eclipse (2005), http://www.tfs.cs.tu-berlin.de/tigerprj
  11. 11.
    Eclipse Consortium: Eclipse Graphical Editing Framework (GEF) – Version 3.2 (2006), http://www.eclipse.org/gef
  12. 12.
    Ehrig, H., Ehrig, K.: Overview of Formal Concepts for Model Transformations based on Typed Attributed Graph Transformation. In: Proc. Workshop on Graph and Model Transformation (GraMoT 2005). ENTCS, vol. 152. Elsevier, Amsterdam (2005)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
  14. 14.
    Ermel, C., Ehrig, H., Ehrig, K.: Semantical Correctness of Simulation-to-Animation Model and Rule Transformation. In: Proc. Workshop on Graph and Model Transformation (GraMoT 2006). EC-EASST, vol. 4 (2006)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ermel, C., Ehrig, H.: Behavior-preserving simulation-to-animation model and rule transformation. In: Proc. of Workshop on Graph Transformation for Verification and Concurrency (GT-VC 2007). ENTCS (to appear, 2008)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Reisig, W.: Systementwurf mit Netzen. Springer, Heidelberg (1985)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Biermann, E., Ermel, C., Hermann, F., Modica, T.: A Visual Editor for Reconfigurable Object Nets based on the Eclipse Graphical Editor Framework. In: Proc. Workshop on Algorithms and Tools for Petri Nets (2007)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Biermann, E., Modica, T.: Independence Analysis of Firing and Rule-based Net Transformations in Reconfigurable Object Nets. In: Proc. 7th Workshop on Graph Transformation and Visual Modeling Techniques. EC-EASST (to appear, 2008), http://tfs.cs.tu-berlin.de/gtvmt08/GTVMT-program.htm
  19. 19.
    Ehrig, H., Hoffmann, K., Padberg, J., Prange, U., Ermel, C.: Independence of net transformations and token firing in reconfigurable place/transition systems. In: Kleijn, J., Yakovlev, A. (eds.) ICATPN 2007. LNCS, vol. 4546, pp. 104–123. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    RWTH Aachen: Petrinetz-Tool Netlab (Windows) (2007), http://www.irt.rwth-aachen.de/typo3/index.php?id=101&L=0
  21. 21.
    CPN Group, University of Aarhus, Denmark: CPN Tools: Computer Tool for Coloured Petri Nets (2005), http://wiki.daimi.au.dk/cpntools/cpntools.wiki
  22. 22.
    Minas, M., Viehstaedt, G.: DiaGen: A Generator for Diagram Editors Providing Direct Manipulation and Execution of Diagrams. In: Proc. IEEE Symp. on Visual Languages, pp. 203–210 (1995)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    de Lara, J., Vangheluwe, H., Alfonseca, M.: Meta-Modelling and Graph Grammars for Multi-Paradigm Modelling in AToM3. Software and System Modeling 3(3), 194–209 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Padberg, J., Urbášek, M.: Rule-Based Refinement of Petri Nets: A Survey. In: Ehrig, H., Reisig, W., Rozenberg, G., Weber, H. (eds.) Petri Net Technology for Communication-Based Systems. LNCS, vol. 2472, pp. 161–196. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Matevska-Meyer, J., Hasselbring, W., Reussner, R.: Software architecture description supporting component deployment and system runtime reconfiguration. In: Proc. Workshop on Component-Oriented Programming (WCOP 2004) (2004)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Csertán, G., Huszerl, G., Majzik, I., Pap, Z., Pataricza, A., Varró, D.: VIATRA: Visual automated transformations for formal verification and validation of UML models. In: Proc. Automated Software Engineering, pp. 267–270. IEEE Press, Los Alamitos (2002)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Narayanan, A., Karsai, G.: Towards Verifying Model Transformations. In: Proc. Graph Transformation and Visual Modeling Techniques. ENTCS. Elsevier, Amsterdam (2006)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Eclipse Generative Modeling Tools (GMT) (2007), http://www.eclipse.org/gmt
  29. 29.
    Wikipedia: Reconfigurable computing (accessed 28-August-2007) (2007)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Claudia Ermel
    • 1
  • Karsten Ehrig
    • 2
  1. 1.Institut für Softwaretechnik und Theoretische InformatikTechnische Universität BerlinGermany
  2. 2.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of LeicesterUK

Personalised recommendations