Transformation of an activity model into a Colored Petri Net model

Abstract

As the Unified Modeling Language (UML) becomes an industrial standard for object-oriented software development, many system models have been specified in UML notation. A system can be described in terms of the functional view through the use case model, the static view through the class model, and the dynamic view through activity or sequence model. In particular, activity model has more to do with the subject of the modeling and the experience of the modeler; for business modeling, for modeling the logic captured by a single use case or for modeling the detailed logic of a business rule. In this paper we propose mapping rules and a transformation algorithm to translate a UML activity diagram into a Colored Petri Nets (CPNs).

Formalization of fUML: An Application to Process Verification

“…All of these formalisms have been investigated for the verification of UML AD. Jung et al [16] propose a transformation from UML AD to Colored Petri Nets. Dong et al [7] presents an approach for formalizing UML AD using π-calculus, a kind of computing models for representing concurrent systems and express the interactions between evolving processes.…”

Alloy4SPV : A Formal Framework for Software Process Verification

“…Many approaches have origins in the Petri Nets formalism, either because the modeling language is based on it (e.g., Workflow Nets [9]) or through a mapping to it [10]. In [9], Van der Aalst et al introduce the Workflow Nets, a particular class of Petri Nets dedicated to the modeling of workflow with an augmented graphical notation (e.g., AND-splits, AND-joins and so on).…”

“…In [6] a large number of industrial business processes have been successfully checked on the soundness properties using the LoLa model checker. In [10], the process modeled in UML AD is mapped to Colored Petri Nets [22] in order to enable automatic verification. Due to the fact that Petri Nets enjoy an easily understandable and graphical notation as well as a plethora of mature tools enabling efficient analysis, they have been widely applied in the process analysis field.…”

“…In the case of UML AD verification, all these formalisms have been investigated: (1) process algebra using π-calculus [28] and CSP (Communicating Sequential Processes) [29], (2) automaton using NuSMV formalism [2] and Promela (Process or Protocol Meta Language) [8], and (3) Petri Nets formalism through transformation [10]. However, only the work of Abdelhalim et al [29] is based on the fUML semantics, but lacks by focusing the verification only on deadlocks.…”

“…Whatever the process modeling language, a formal semantics is given to the language by mapping its constructs to either variants of automata [2,8], Petri Nets [9,10,7,6,5] or process algebra [3,4]. However this means that we are relying on the semantics and concepts of the targeted formal language in terms of expressiveness, e.g.…”