Model-Driven Consistency Checking of Behavioural Specifications

Graaf, B.; Deursen, Arie van

doi:10.1109/mompes.2007.12

Cited by 14 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…• A model-driven approach for checking the conformance of state-based and interaction-based behavioural models [24].…”

Section: Results and Contributionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Model-Driven Evolution of Software Architectures

Graaf

2007

11th European Conference on Software Maintenance and Reengineering (CSMR'07)

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper gives an overview of a Ph.D.-project that investigates approaches to support the evolution of software architectures. Particularly, we focus on the use of model-driven techniques in the context of software product-lines. We recognise four tasks related to software evolution: evaluation, conformance checking, migration, and documentation. We propose model-driven solutions for these tasks. By their application in industrial case studies we investigate the extent to which the evolution tasks can be automated, the impact of the use of software product lines, and the possibilities and difficulties to integrate these solutions in industrial practice.

show abstract

“…• A model-driven approach for checking the conformance of state-based and interaction-based behavioural models [24].…”

Section: Results and Contributionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…All case studies have been performed and most of the results have been published in international workshops, conferences, and journals [9,22,23,24,25].…”

Section: Results and Contributionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Model-Driven Evolution of Software Architectures

Graaf

2007

11th European Conference on Software Maintenance and Reengineering (CSMR'07)

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A different approach for consistency checking is presented by Graaf and Van Deursen [12] who suggest to synthesize a state machine from the given sequence diagram as in [28] and then compare the automatically generated state machine to the given state machine. Therefore, they realize normalization, transformation, and comparison steps, respectively.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

A SAT-Based Debugging Tool for State Machines and Sequence Diagrams

Kaufmann

Kronegger

Pfandler

et al. 2014

Software Language Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. An effective way to model message exchange in complex settings is to use UML sequence diagrams in combination with state machine diagrams. A natural question that arises in this context is whether these two views are consistent, i.e., whether a desired or forbidden scenario modeled in the sequence diagram can be or cannot be executed by the state machines. In case of an inconsistency, a concrete communication trace of the state machines can give valuable information for debugging purposes on the model level. This trace either hints to a message in the sequence diagram where the communication between the state machines fails, or describes a concrete forbidden communication trace between the state machines. To detect and explain such inconsistencies, we propose a novel SAT-based formalization which can be solved automatically by an off-the-shelf SAT solver. To this end, we present the formal and technical foundations needed for the SAT-encoding, and an implementation inside the Eclipse Modeling Framework (EMF). We evaluate the effectiveness of our approach using grammar-based fuzzing.

show abstract

“…Furthermore, for automatic processing of models (e.g., for code generation) the complexity of UML results in complex model transformations [5,6]. Documentation Because in industrial practice a software architecture is too complex to describe in a single stroke different views are used for its documentation.…”

Section: Software Architecturementioning

confidence: 99%

“…More in particular, in the context of MDE, our experience in industrial case studies [5,6] indicates that the use of a general-purpose language, such as UML, leads to (unnecessary) complex model transformations, for instance to generate code. As such, the introduction of MDE typically requires the development of DSMLs.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Visualisation of Domain-Specific Modelling Languages Using UML

Graaf

Deursen

2007

14th Annual IEEE International Conference and Workshops on the Engineering of Computer-Based Systems (ECBS'07)

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Currently, general-purpose modelling tools are often only used to draw diagrams for the documentation. The introduction of model-driven software development approaches involves the definition of domain-specific modelling languages that allow code generation. Although graphical representations of the involved models are important for documentation, the development of required visualisations and editors is cumbersome. In this paper we propose to extend the typical model-driven approach with the automatic generation of diagrams for documentation. We illustrate the approach using the Model Driven Architecture in the domains of software architecture and control systems.

show abstract

Model-Driven Consistency Checking of Behavioural Specifications

Cited by 14 publications

References 7 publications

Model-Driven Evolution of Software Architectures

Model-Driven Evolution of Software Architectures

A SAT-Based Debugging Tool for State Machines and Sequence Diagrams

Visualisation of Domain-Specific Modelling Languages Using UML

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About