On Integrating Structure and Behavior Modeling with OCL

Hamann, Lars; Hofrichter, Oliver; Gogolla, Martin

doi:10.1007/978-3-642-33666-9_16

Cited by 14 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Selection by message kind: object creation, object destruction, link insertion, link deletion, attribute assignment, operation call. 6. Selection by message number depth.…”

Section: Selection Focusing On Messagesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Behavior Modeling with Interaction Diagrams in a UML and OCL Tool

Gogolla

Hamann

Hilken

et al. 2014

Proceedings of the 2014 Workshop on Behaviour Modelling-Foundations and Applications

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This contribution discusses system modeling with UML behavior diagrams. We consider statecharts and both kinds of interaction diagrams, i.e., sequence and communication diagrams. We present new implementation features in a UML and OCL modeling tool: (1) Sequence diagram lifelines are extended with states from statecharts, and (2) communication diagrams are introduced as an alternative to sequence diagrams. We assess the introduced features and propose a systematic set of features which should be available in both kinds of interaction diagrams. We emphasize the role that OCL can play for such a feature set.

show abstract

“…Selection by message kind: object creation, object destruction, link insertion, link deletion, attribute assignment, operation call. 6. Selection by message number depth.…”

Section: Selection Focusing On Messagesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Behavior Modeling with Interaction Diagrams in a UML and OCL Tool

Gogolla

Hamann

Hilken

et al. 2014

Proceedings of the 2014 Workshop on Behaviour Modelling-Foundations and Applications

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The application of this runtime verification approach led to different extensions of the USE core. For example, protocol state machines were introduced to capture application states more easily (Hamann, Hofrichter, & Gogolla 2012b). One notable feature, required for runtime verification, is the use of so-called state-determination expressions (Hamann, Hofrichter, & Gogolla 2012a).…”

Section: The Evolution Of Usementioning

confidence: 99%

History of the USE Tool 20 Years of UML/OCL Modeling Made in Germany.

Hilken¹,

Hamann²

2020

JOT

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The UML-based Specification Environment (USE) originated as a modeling tool for validating UML and OCL models but has grown much larger over the years. The first version of USE was released in 1998. Since then, USE has been applied in several projects and had lots of contributors developing it, benefiting from a university environment and open source code basis. Its strong OCL evaluator allows for using it as a platform for other modeling projects but also applications in research projects and teaching have made USE a significant entry in the world of UML/OCL modeling tools. Countless case studies have been performed on the basis of USE. This contribution shows the evolution of USE by summarizing important extensions over the years. Furthermore, noteworthy applications of USE in teaching, research and industry are presented.

show abstract

“…To (semi)automatically check these properties, several methods and reasoning tools have been proposed so far. See, for instance, UMLtoCSP [8], USE [9], AuRUS [10] or UML2Alloy [11]. Unfortunately, since checking these properties is exponential with the UML class diagram alone [12], and the addition of OCL constraints increases its complexity, efficiency is currently one of the major issues of such tools [13].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Simplification of UML/OCL schemas for efficient reasoning

Oriol

Teniente

2017

Journal of Systems and Software

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ensuring the correctness of a conceptual schema is an essential task in order to avoid the propagation of errors during software development. The kind of reasoning required to perform such task is known to be exponential for UML class diagrams alone and even harder when considering OCL constraints. Motivated by this issue, we propose an innovative method aimed at removing constraints and other UML elements of the schema to obtain a simplified one that preserve the same reasoning outcomes. In this way, we can reason about the correctness of the initial artifact by reasoning on a simplified version of it. Thus, the efficiency of the reasoning process is significantly improved. In addition, since our method is independent from the reasoning engine used, any reasoning method may benefit from it.Peer ReviewedPostprint (author's final draft

show abstract

On Integrating Structure and Behavior Modeling with OCL

Cited by 14 publications

References 24 publications

Behavior Modeling with Interaction Diagrams in a UML and OCL Tool

Behavior Modeling with Interaction Diagrams in a UML and OCL Tool

History of the USE Tool 20 Years of UML/OCL Modeling Made in Germany.

Simplification of UML/OCL schemas for efficient reasoning

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About