Verifying UML/OCL Operation Contracts

Cabot, Jordi; Clarisó, Robert; Riera, Daniel

doi:10.1007/978-3-642-00255-7_4

Cited by 48 publications

(45 citation statements)

References 16 publications

(25 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Model transformation experts found in logic programming a resource to implement and experiment with transformations and techniques related to transformations. With the development of the technology around model transformation, logic programming is not abandoned [15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26], given that experts investigate new aspects of model transformation that existent languages and tools do not cover. Moreover, some authors argue that Prolog is still suitable to learn about model transformations.…”

Section: Model Transformation and Prologmentioning

confidence: 99%

PTL: A model transformation language based on logic programming

Almendros-Jiménez¹,

Iribarne²,

López-Fernández³

et al. 2016

Journal of Logical and Algebraic Methods in Programming

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper we present a model transformation language based on logic programming. The language, called PTL (Prolog based Transformation Language), can be considered as a hybrid language in which ATL (Atlas Transformation Language)-style rules are combined with logic rules for defining transformations. ATL-style rules are used to define mappings from source models to target models while logic rules are used as helpers. The implementation of PTL is based on the encoding of the ATL-style rules by Prolog rules. Thus, PTL makes use of Prolog as a transformation engine. We have provided a declarative semantics to PTL and proved the semantics equivalent to the encoded program. We have studied an encoding of OCL (Object Constraint Language) with Prolog goals in order to map ATL to PTL. Thus a subset of PTL can be considered equivalent to a subset of ATL. The proposed language can be also used for model validation, that is, for checking constraints on models and transformations. We have equipped our language with debugging and tracing capabilities which help developers to detect programming errors in PTL rules. Additionally, we have developed an Eclipse plugin for editing PTL programs, as well as for debugging, tracing and validation. Finally, we have evaluated the language with several transformation examples as well as tested the performance with large models.

show abstract

Section: Model Transformation and Prologmentioning

confidence: 99%

PTL: A model transformation language based on logic programming

Almendros-Jiménez¹,

Iribarne²,

López-Fernández³

et al. 2016

Journal of Logical and Algebraic Methods in Programming

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The verification process may be enhanced by the addition of semantic information. For example, Cabot et al [5] verify the behavioral aspects of UML class diagrams annotated with so-called operation contracts, which are declarative descriptions of operations specified as OCL pre-and postconditions. The class diagram and the operation contracts are thereby transformed into a constraint satisfaction problem, which is solved with respect to a set of consistency properties expressing, e.g., the applicability or the executability of an operation.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards Semantics-Aware Merge Support in Optimistic Model Versioning

Brosch

Egly

Gabmeyer

et al. 2012

Models in Software Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Current optimistic model versioning systems, which are indispensable to coordinate the collaboration within teams, are able to detect several kinds of conflicts between two concurrently modified versions of one model. These systems support the detection of syntactical problems such as contradicting changes, violations of the underlying metamodel, and violations of OCL constraints. However, violations of the semantics remain unreported. In this paper, we suggest to use redundant information inherent in models to check if the semantics is violated during the merge process. In particular, we exploit the information encoded in state machine diagrams to validate evolving sequence diagrams by means of the model checker SPIN.

show abstract

“…For example, Cabot et al in [6] developed a tool called UMLtoCSP to do the formalization. Also Shah et al in [31] used UMLtoAlloy and Alloy Analyzer to do the formalization and model checking respectively.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Providing modeller friendly feedback to report the model checking results has been addressed only a few times in the literature. The authors in [6,31] proposed presenting the model checking results (e.g., counterexample) as an object diagram that represents a snapshot of the system during the error. Alternatively, Mrugalla et al in [21] presents the counter-example as sequence and timing diagrams.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

An integrated framework for checking the behaviour of fUML models using CSP

Abdelhalim

Schneider

Treharne

2012

Int J Softw Tools Technol Transfer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Transforming UML models into a formal representation to check certain properties has been addressed many times in the literature. However, the lack of automatic formalization for executable UML models and provision of model checking results as modellerfriendly feedback has inhibited the practical use of such approaches in real life projects. In this paper we address those issues by performing the automatic formalization of the fUML (Foundational subset for executable UML) models into CSP without any interaction with the modeller, who should be isolated from the formal methods domain. The formal analysis provides the modeller with a UML sequence diagram that represents the model checking result in the case where an error has been found in the model. This work also considers the formalization of systems that depend on asynchronous communication between components in order to allow checking of the dynamic concurrent behaviour of systems.We have designed a comprehensive framework that is implemented as a plugin to MagicDraw (the CASE tool we use) that we call Compass. The framework depends on Epsilon as a model transformation tool that utilizes the Model Driven Engineering (MDE) approach. It also implements an optimization approach to be able to model check concurrent systems using FDR2, and at the same time comply with the fUML inter-object communication mechanism. In order to validate our frame-

show abstract

Verifying UML/OCL Operation Contracts

Cited by 48 publications

References 16 publications

PTL: A model transformation language based on logic programming

PTL: A model transformation language based on logic programming

Towards Semantics-Aware Merge Support in Optimistic Model Versioning

An integrated framework for checking the behaviour of fUML models using CSP

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About