Intuitive Mapping of UML 2 Activity Diagrams into Fundamental Modeling Concept Petri Net Diagrams and Colored Petri Nets

Staines, Tony Spiteri

doi:10.1109/ecbs.2008.12

Cited by 68 publications

(34 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This is formally defined by formulae (15)(16). In addition, after an instance of m j , there can be a new instance of the same message only after a new occurrence of m i ; this is stated by formula (17), which defines that, after m j , there will not be a new occurrence of m j until there is an occurrence of m i .…”

Section: Diagram-related Formulaementioning

confidence: 99%

“…If, for example, formulae (15)(16)(17) are instantiated for SD checkingSMS of Figure 2, one obtains formulae (18)(19)(20).…”

Section: Diagram-related Formulaementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Störrle analyzes the semantics of these diagrams and proposes an approach to their formalization [18]. More recently, Staines formalizes UML2 activity diagrams using Petri nets and proposes a technique to achieve this transformation [17]. Also, Lam formalizes the execution of activity diagrams using the π − Calculus, thus providing them with a sound theoretical foundation [13].…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

From Interaction Overview Diagrams to Temporal Logic

Baresi¹,

Morzenti²,

Motta³

et al. 2011

Models in Software Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract.In this paper, we use UML Interaction Overview Diagrams as the basis for a user-friendly, intuitive, modeling notation that is wellsuited for the design of complex, heterogeneous, embedded systems developed by domain experts with little background on modeling softwarebased systems.To allow designers to precisely analyze models written with this notation, we provide (part of) it with a formal semantics based on temporal logic, upon which a fully automated, tool supported, verification technique is built. The modeling and verification technique is presented and discussed through the aid of an example system.

show abstract

Section: Diagram-related Formulaementioning

confidence: 99%

“…If, for example, formulae (15)(16)(17) are instantiated for SD checkingSMS of Figure 2, one obtains formulae (18)(19)(20).…”

Section: Diagram-related Formulaementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

From Interaction Overview Diagrams to Temporal Logic

Baresi¹,

Morzenti²,

Motta³

et al. 2011

Models in Software Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…According to the translation rule in Definition 7, the activity diagram  is first translated into the dependency structure td() = ⟨, I, T, S, C, P, F⟩ where  = {0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39, i, f 1, f 2, f 3, f 4, f 5}, I = {{i}}, T = {({i}, {0}), ({0}, {3}), ({0}, {1}), ({1}, {2}), ({2}, {4}), ({2}, {8}), ({4}, {7}), ({7, 8}, {11}), ({3}, {5}), ({5}, {6}), ({6}, {f 1}), ({5}, {9}), ({9}, {10}), ({11}, {12}), ({12}, {13}), ({13}, {f 2}), ({12}, {14}), ({14}, {15}), ({15}, {16}), ({16}, {18}), ({18}, {f 3}), ({16}, {2}), ({15}, {17}), ({17}, {19}), ({10}, {20}), ({19}, {20}), ({20}, {21}), ({20}, {22}), ({21, 22}, {23}), ({23}, {24}), ({24}, {27}), ({27}, {29}),({29}, {30}),({29}, {31}),({30}, {28}),({30}, {25}),({28}, {26}),({26}, {25}), ({25}, {f 4}), ({31}, {20}), ({31}, {32}), ({32}, {33}), ({32}, {36}), ({33}, {34}), ({33}, {35}), ({34, 35}, {37}), ({37}, {38}), ({36}, {39}), ({38}, {39}), ({39}, {f 5})}, S = {{7, 8}, {21, 22}, {34, 35}}, C = {{1, 3}, {6, 9}, {13, 14}, {16, 17}, {25, 28}, {20, 32}, {33, 36}}, P = ∅, and F = {{f 1}, {f 2}, {f 3}, {f 4}, {f 5}}.…”

Section: Figurementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Similarly, if an activity diagram is translated into a Petri net, the places in such a Petri net also need to be additionally created. 19,20 Process algebras are an action/activity-based calculus. If an activity diagram is mapped to a process, one must add the synchronous event names that express the synchronization controls of the activity diagrams.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Decomposition of UML activity diagrams

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummaryIn software engineering, UML activity diagrams in general can be useful for a modeling system functional behavior, ranging from the sequences of activities/actions from business processes within an organization or among organizations down to the detail of an algorithm. The stepwise refinement process makes activity diagrams more and more complex. To guarantee the behavior consistency and correctness under refinement, the activity diagrams must be decomposed according to the divide-and-conquer strategy. Traditional decomposition methods adopt manual techniques and cannot ensure the independence and completeness of the obtained subdiagrams. In this paper, a novel decomposition approach is proposed, which can automatically divide an activity diagram into atomic and correct subdiagrams (subdiagrams without abnormal behavioral problems) at the same level. When such an activity diagram specifies the whole functional behavior of a software system, the approach can in fact decompose a system into multiple atomic subsystems. Every atomic subsystem is a completely independent system. It may be independently developed, independently tested, and independently deployed. The method facilitates the management, development, and maintenance of a software system. With the help of a prototype tool, a case study demonstrates the decomposition method.

show abstract

1.4.2 Synthesizing and Specifying Architectures for System of Systems

Kenley¹,

Dannenhoffer²,

Wood³

et al. 2014

INCOSE International Symp

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Based on our experience with defining and evaluating system of systems and architectures using agent-based modeling, we describe the steps that we have employed in the context of a well-known process for defining system architectures and identify which steps of the process capture the unique characteristics of a system of systems. We describe a particular method that we developed to automate the generation of the communications links needed for executable simulation models when evaluating a large architectural design space, and we review model-based systems engineering methods that are applicable to specifying systems of systems and that support developing executable agent-based simulation models.

show abstract

Intuitive Mapping of UML 2 Activity Diagrams into Fundamental Modeling Concept Petri Net Diagrams and Colored Petri Nets

Cited by 68 publications

References 21 publications

From Interaction Overview Diagrams to Temporal Logic

From Interaction Overview Diagrams to Temporal Logic

Decomposition of UML activity diagrams

1.4.2 Synthesizing and Specifying Architectures for System of Systems

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About