DOCSLIB.ORG

Adaptation of Sysml Blocks and Verification of Temporal Properties Hamida Bouaziz

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Adaptation of Sysml Blocks and Verification of Temporal Properties Hamida Bouaziz Adaptation of SysML Blocks and Verification of Temporal Properties Hamida Bouaziz To cite this version: Hamida Bouaziz. Adaptation of SysML Blocks and Verification of Temporal Properties. Other [cs.OH]. Université de Franche-Comté, 2016. English. NNT : 2016BESA2015. tel-01428887 HAL Id: tel-01428887 https://tel.archives-ouvertes.fr/tel-01428887 Submitted on 6 Jan 2017 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. ; /9=!9=7:"3:#3 é c o l e d o c t o r a l e s c i e n c e s p o u r l ’ i n g é n i e u r e t m i c r o t e c h n i q u e s % 0 2 $ < 1 & 2 ; 6 7 < * 1 + 0 8 ) < , 8 ' ( ; 6 Adaptation of SysML Blocks and Verification of Temporal Properties Hamida Bouaziz ; /9!97:"3:#3 é c o l e d o c t o r a l e s c i e n c e s p o u r l ’ i n g é n i e u r e t m i c r o t e c h n i q u e s % 0 2 $ < 1 & 2 ; 6 7 < * 1 + 0 8 ) < , 8 ' ( ; 6 N◦ X X X THÈSE présentée par Hamida Bouaziz pour obtenir le Grade de Docteur de l'Université de Franche-Comté Spécialité : Informatique Adaptation of SysML Blocks and Verification of Temporal Properties Soutenue publiquement le 03 novembre 2016 devant le Jury composé de : Yamine AIT AMEUR Rapporteur Professeur, IRIT, ENSEEIHT Franck BARBIER Rapporteur Professeur, LIUPPA, Université de Pau Khalil DRIRA Examinateur Directeur de Recherche CNRS, LAAS, Université de Toulouse Hassan Mountassir Directeur de thèse Professeur, DISC, Université de Franche-Comté Samir Chouali Co-Directeur de thèse MCF, DISC, Université de Franche-Comté Ahmed Hammad Co-Directeur de thèse MCF, DISC, Université de Franche-Comté Contents 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Context and Challenges . 1 1.2 Contributions . 3 1.3 Publications . 5 1.4 Document Outline . 5 I Scientific Context and State of the Art 7 2 SE and SysML Language 9 2.1 SysML . 10 2.1.1 The Need of SE to SysML . 11 2.1.2 Who Created SysML? . 11 2.1.3 Principles of SYML . 11 2.2 Emergence of SysML . 12 2.3 SysML Diagrams . 13 2.3.1 Structural Diagrams . 14 2.3.2 Behavioural Diagrams . 16 2.3.3 Requirement Diagram . 17 2.4 Free Platforms for SysML Modelling . 18 2.4.1 TOPCASED . 18 2.4.2 Papyrus . 18 2.5 Conclusion . 18 3 Model-Driven Development and Models Transformation 19 3.1 Basic Concepts . 20 3.2 Model Transformations . 21 3.3 Transformation of SysML Diagrams . 23 3.4 Transformation of Sequence Diagram . 24 3.5 Interface Automata . 25 v vi CONTENTS 3.5.1 Operations on interface automata . 26 3.5.2 Refinement of interface automata . 28 3.6 Coloured Petri Nets . 28 3.7 Conclusion . 29 4 CBSE and Component Adaptation 31 4.1 Component-Based Software Engineering . 32 4.2 Definition of Software Component . 33 4.3 Abstraction of Components . 34 4.4 Component Interfaces . 35 4.5 Component Models . 35 4.6 Verification of Component Compatibility . 36 4.7 Formal Analysis of Assembled Systems . 37 4.8 Components Adaptation . 38 4.8.1 Adaptation Taxonomy . 38 4.8.2 General Adaptation Process . 40 4.8.3 Principal Adaptation Approaches . 41 Adaptation of π-calculus protocols . 41 Adaptation based on LTSs and Petri nets . 42 4.8.4 Other Approaches . 44 4.9 Conclusion . 47 II Contributions 49 5 Formalizing SysML Diagrams 51 5.1 Requirement Diagram (RD) . 52 5.2 Block Definition Diagram (BDD) . 53 5.2.1 BDD Formal Definition . 53 5.2.2 Block . 53 5.2.3 Ports . 54 5.2.4 Parts . 55 5.2.5 References . 55 5.2.6 BDD Relations . 56 5.3 Internal Block Diagram (IBD) . 57 5.4 Sequence Diagram (SD) . 59 CONTENTS vii 5.5 Conclusion . 59 6 A SysML Model Driven Approach to Verify Blocks Compatibility 61 6.1 Our Methodology . 62 6.2 Transforming SDs of Blocks into Interface Automata . 62 6.2.1 Sequence Diagram Meta-Model . 63 6.2.2 Interface Automata Meta-Model . 65 6.2.3 Basic Interaction Transformation Rules . 65 6.2.4 ALT Combined Fragment Transformation Rules . 68 6.3 Generation of Ptolemy Specification . 71 6.4 The Blocks Verification . 73 6.5 Case Study: CyCab . 74 6.6 Conclusion . 78 7 Exploiting The Hierarchy to Verify Blocks Compatibility 79 7.1 Hierarchical Protocol State Machine (HPSM) . 80 7.2 Hierarchical Interface Automata with Inter-Level Transitions (HIA-ILT) . 81 7.3 The Proposed Approach . 85 7.3.1 The Mapping Between HPSM and HIA-ILT . 85 7.3.2 The Consistency Verification of Blocks . 88 7.3.3 The Selection of Composite States to Flatten . 88 7.3.4 The Compatibility Verification Between Blocks . 89 7.4 Case Study . 89 7.5 Conclusion . 93 8 SysML Blocks Adaptation 95 8.1 Our Incremental Approach for Adapting SysML Blocks . 96 8.1.1 The First Phase: Defining a Specification for the Part to Develop . 96 8.1.2 The Second Phase: The Selection of the Reused Blocks {Bi}..... 98 8.1.3 The Third Step: the Contract and the Reused Blocks Verification . 99 8.1.4 The Fourth Step: Generating the Adapter . 99 8.2 Case Study . 103 8.2.1 Generate the Adapters . 103 8.2.2 Deduce the BDD and the IBDs of the Composite Blocks . 106 8.3 Conclusion . 107 viii CONTENTS 9 Incremental Verification of System Requirements 109 9.1 Our Approach . 110 9.1.1 Requirements Specification . 110 9.1.2 Problem definition . 111 9.1.3 The First Case : The Low Level Verification . 111 9.1.4 The Second Case : The High Level Verification . 114 9.1.5 The Verification Algorithm . 117 9.2 Case Study . 119 9.3 Conclusion . 123 10 Adaptation with Reordering of SysML Block Services 125 10.1 Our Adaptation Approach . 126 10.1.1 Computing the Global Interaction Protocol of the Reused Blocks GIR 127 10.1.2 Introducing the Specification of the Future Parent Block . 130 10.1.3 Deduce the Adapter . 133 10.1.4 Tool Support . 135 10.2 Case Study . 137 10.3 Conclusion . 139 III Conclusion 143 11 Conclusion and Perspectives 145 11.1 Conclusion . 145 11.2 Perspectives . 147 List of Figures 1.1 Thesis contributions. 4 2.1 Relation between SysML and UML [OMG12a]. 10 2.2 SysML Diagrams . 14 2.3 A Block Definition Diagram (BDD) . 15 2.4 An Internal Block Diagram (IBD) ..................... 15 2.5 Basic elements of a Sequence Diagram (SD) . 16 2.6 Basic elements of a requirement diagram . 17 3.1 The abstraction levels of modelling. ..
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Communication Diagram.Pdf
    TU2943: Information Engineering Methodology Lab Notes, 2009-2010, Faculty of Technology and Information Science, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia LAB 5: Interaction Diagram - UML Communication Diagram OBJECTIVES To understand the role of dynamic models in requirement analysis by reading and constructing UML Communication Diagram. INTRODUCTION Communication Diagram (a.k.a. Collaboration Diagram) Communication Diagram provides another way to model a scenario. Essentially is a part of Interaction Diagram (just like Sequence Diagram). Each object is represented by an object icon, and links are used to indicate communication paths on which messages are transmitted. Messages presented in the same way as those in sequence diagram. Formerly known as Collaboration Diagram in UML 1.x specification. Communication Diagram represents a combination of information taken from Use Case, Class and Sequence Diagrams describing both the static structure and dynamic behavior of the system. Comparing and Contrasting: Collaboration and Sequence Both diagrams show the same information: Objects/classes Messages Sequence Conditional Repetition Messages to self Sequence Diagram and Communication Diagram are two views of the same scenario. Collaboration diagrams emphasize who-is-talking-to-who. But the time-ordering of the messages who gets obscured. Sequence diagrams emphasize time-ordering. But the who-is-talking-to-who gets obscured. Use the diagram that you are most comfortable with. Structure and Notation of Communication Diagram Objects are named <an object name>:< its class> . Nor Samsiah Binti Sani 1 TU2943: Information Engineering Methodology Lab Notes, 2009-2010, Faculty of Technology and Information Science, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia Either <an object name> or <a class name> can be removed. Collaborations / communications are shown by lines between objects.
    [Show full text]
  • Development of an Entity Component System Architecture for Realtime Simulation
    Fachbereich 4: Informatik Development of an Entity Component System Architecture for Realtime Simulation Bachelorarbeit zur Erlangung des Grades Bachelor of Science (B.Sc.) im Studiengang Computervisualistik vorgelegt von Trevor Hollmann Erstgutachter: Prof. Dr.-Ing. Stefan Müller (Institut für Computervisualistik, AG Computergraphik) Zweitgutachter: Kevin Keul, M.Sc. (Institut für Computervisualistik, AG Computergraphik) Koblenz, im September 2019 Erklärung Ich versichere, dass ich die vorliegende Arbeit selbständig verfasst und keine anderen als die angegebenen Quellen und Hilfsmittel benutzt habe. Ja Nein Mit der Einstellung der Arbeit in die Bibliothek bin ich einverstanden. .................................................................................... (Ort, Datum) (Unterschrift) Abstract The development of a game engine is considered a non-trivial problem. [3] The architecture of such simulation software must be able to manage large amounts of simulation objects in real-time while dealing with “crosscutting concerns” [3, p. 36] between subsystems. The use of object oriented paradigms to model simulation objects in class hierar- chies has been reported as incompatible with constantly changing demands dur- ing game development [2, p. 9], resulting in anti-patterns and eventual, messy re-factoring. [13] Alternative architectures using data oriented paradigms re- volving around object composition and aggregation have been proposed as a result. [13, 9, 1, 11] This thesis describes the development of such an architecture with the explicit goals to be simple, inherently compatible with data oriented design, and to make reasoning about performance characteristics possible. Concepts are for- mally defined to help analyze the problem and evaluate results. A functional implementation of the architecture is presented together with use cases common to simulation software. Zusammenfassung Die Entwicklung einer Spiele-Engine wird als nichttriviales Problem betrach- tet.
    [Show full text]
  • Component Diagrams in UML
    9. UML Component Diagrams Page 1 of 4 Component Diagrams in UML The previous articles covered two of the three primary areas in which the UML diagrams are categorized (see Article 1)—Static and Dynamic. The remaining two UML diagrams that fall under the category of Implementation are the Component and Deployment diagrams. In this article, we will discuss the Component diagram. Basics The different high-level reusable parts of a system are represented in a Component diagram. A component is one such constituent part of a system. In addition to representing the high-level parts, the Component diagram also captures the inter- relationships between these parts. So, how are component diagrams different from the previous UML diagrams that we have seen? The primary difference is that Component diagrams represent the implementation perspective of a system. Hence, components in a Component diagram reflect grouping of the different design elements of a system, for example, classes of the system. Let us briefly understand what criteria to apply to model a component. First and foremost, a component should be substitutable as is. Secondly, a component must provide an interface to enable other components to interact and use the services provided by the component. So, why would not a design element like an interface suffice? An interface provides only the service but not the implementation. Implementation is normally provided by a class that implements the interface. In complex systems, the physical implementation of a defined service is provided by a group of classes rather than a single class. A component is an easy way to represent the grouping together of such implementation classes.
    [Show full text]
  • Affordit!: a Tool for Authoring Object Component Behavior in Virtual
    AffordIt!: A Tool for Authoring Object Component Behavior in Virtual Reality * † ‡ § Sina Masnadi Andres´ N. Vargas Gonzalez´ Brian Williamson Joseph J. LaViola Jr. Department of Computer Science University of Central Florida (a) (b) (c) (d) Figure 1: These figures show a sequence of steps followed to add a rotation affordance to the door of a washer machine. (a) An object in the scenario (b) Cylinder shape selection wrapping the door. (c) A user sets the amount of rotation the door will be constrained to. (d) An animation generated from the affordance can be visualized. ABSTRACT realistic experiences necessary to a VR scene, but not asset creation In this paper we present AffordIt!, a tool for adding affordances (a situation described in Hughes et al. [17]) which are needed to to the component parts of a virtual object. Following 3D scene build a virtual scene. To alleviate this problem, recent research has been focusing on frameworks to ease users’ authoring process as reconstruction and segmentation procedures, users find themselves with complete virtual objects, but no intrinsic behaviors have been seen in [9, 12, 35]. 3D scene reconstruction [32, 34, 44, 49] provides assigned, forcing them to use unfamiliar Desktop-based 3D editing a suitable solution to the problem. Initially a 3D reconstructed tools. AffordIt! offers an intuitive solution that allows a user to environment will be composed of a continuous mesh which can be segmented via autonomous tools as shown in George et al. [10] and select a region of interest for the mesh cutter tool, assign an intrinsic behavior and view an animation preview of their work.
    [Show full text]
  • Unified Modeling Language 2.0 Part 1 - Introduction
    UML 2.0 – Tutorial (v4) 1 Unified Modeling Language 2.0 Part 1 - Introduction Prof. Dr. Harald Störrle Dr. Alexander Knapp University of Innsbruck University of Munich mgm technology partners (c) 2005-2006, Dr. H. Störrle, Dr. A. Knapp UML 2.0 – Tutorial (v4) 2 1 - Introduction History and Predecessors • The UML is the “lingua franca” of software engineering. • It subsumes, integrates and consolidates most predecessors. • Through the network effect, UML has a much broader spread and much better support (tools, books, trainings etc.) than other notations. • The transition from UML 1.x to UML 2.0 has – resolved a great number of issues; – introduced many new concepts and notations (often feebly defined); – overhauled and improved the internal structure completely. • While UML 2.0 still has many problems, current version (“the standard”) it is much better than what we ever had formal/05-07-04 of August ‘05 before. (c) 2005-2006, Dr. H. Störrle, Dr. A. Knapp UML 2.0 – Tutorial (v4) 3 1 - Introduction Usage Scenarios • UML has not been designed for specific, limited usages. • There is currently no consensus on the role of the UML: – Some see UML only as tool for sketching class diagrams representing Java programs. – Some believe that UML is “the prototype of the next generation of programming languages”. • UML is a really a system of languages (“notations”, “diagram types”) each of which may be used in a number of different situations. • UML is applicable for a multitude of purposes, during all phases of the software lifecycle, and for all sizes of systems - to varying degrees.
    [Show full text]
  • Sysml, the Language of MBSE Paul White
    Welcome to SysML, the Language of MBSE Paul White October 8, 2019 Brief Introduction About Myself • Work Experience • 2015 – Present: KIHOMAC / BAE – Layton, Utah • 2011 – 2015: Astronautics Corporation of America – Milwaukee, Wisconsin • 2001 – 2011: L-3 Communications – Greenville, Texas • 2000 – 2001: Hynix – Eugene, Oregon • 1999 – 2000: Raytheon – Greenville, Texas • Education • 2019: OMG OCSMP Model Builder—Fundamental Certification • 2011: Graduate Certification in Systems Engineering and Architecting – Stevens Institute of Technology • 1999 – 2004: M.S. Computer Science – Texas A&M University at Commerce • 1993 – 1998: B.S. Computer Science – Texas A&M University • INCOSE • Chapters: Wasatch (2015 – Present), Chicagoland (2011 – 2015), North Texas (2007 – 2011) • Conferences: WSRC (2018), GLRCs (2012-2017) • CSEP: (2017 – Present) • 2019 INCOSE Outstanding Service Award • 2019 INCOSE Wasatch -- Most Improved Chapter Award & Gold Circle Award • Utah Engineers Council (UEC) • 2019 & 2018 Engineer of the Year (INCOSE) for Utah Engineers Council (UEC) • Vice Chair • Family • Married 14 years • Three daughters (1, 12, & 10) 2 Introduction 3 Our Topics • Definitions and Expectations • SysML Overview • Basic Features of SysML • Modeling Tools and Techniques • Next Steps 4 What is Model-based Systems Engineering (MBSE)? Model-based systems engineering (MBSE) is “the formalized application of modeling to support system requirements, design, analysis, verification and validation activities beginning in the conceptual design phase and continuing throughout development and later life cycle phases.” -- INCOSE SE Vision 2020 5 What is Model-based Systems Engineering (MBSE)? “Formal systems modeling is standard practice for specifying, analyzing, designing, and verifying systems, and is fully integrated with other engineering models. System models are adapted to the application domain, and include a broad spectrum of models for representing all aspects of systems.
    [Show full text]
  • Plantuml Language Reference Guide (Version 1.2021.2)
    Drawing UML with PlantUML PlantUML Language Reference Guide (Version 1.2021.2) PlantUML is a component that allows to quickly write : • Sequence diagram • Usecase diagram • Class diagram • Object diagram • Activity diagram • Component diagram • Deployment diagram • State diagram • Timing diagram The following non-UML diagrams are also supported: • JSON Data • YAML Data • Network diagram (nwdiag) • Wireframe graphical interface • Archimate diagram • Specification and Description Language (SDL) • Ditaa diagram • Gantt diagram • MindMap diagram • Work Breakdown Structure diagram • Mathematic with AsciiMath or JLaTeXMath notation • Entity Relationship diagram Diagrams are defined using a simple and intuitive language. 1 SEQUENCE DIAGRAM 1 Sequence Diagram 1.1 Basic examples The sequence -> is used to draw a message between two participants. Participants do not have to be explicitly declared. To have a dotted arrow, you use --> It is also possible to use <- and <--. That does not change the drawing, but may improve readability. Note that this is only true for sequence diagrams, rules are different for the other diagrams. @startuml Alice -> Bob: Authentication Request Bob --> Alice: Authentication Response Alice -> Bob: Another authentication Request Alice <-- Bob: Another authentication Response @enduml 1.2 Declaring participant If the keyword participant is used to declare a participant, more control on that participant is possible. The order of declaration will be the (default) order of display. Using these other keywords to declare participants
    [Show full text]
  • APECS: Polychrony Based End-To-End Embedded System Design and Code Synthesis
    APECS: Polychrony based End-to-End Embedded System Design and Code Synthesis Matthew E. Anderson Dissertation submitted to the faculty of the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Computer Engineering Sandeep K. Shukla, Chair Lamine Mili Alireza Haghighat Chao Wang Yi Deng April 3, 2015 Blacksburg, Virginia Keywords: AADL, CPS, Model-based code synthesis, correct-by-construction code synthesis, Polychrony, code generators, OSATE, Ocarina Copyright 2015, Matthew E. Anderson APECS: Polychrony based End-to-End Embedded System Design and Code Synthesis Matthew E. Anderson (ABSTRACT) The development of high integrity embedded systems remains an arduous and error-prone task, despite the efforts by researchers in inventing tools and techniques for design automa- tion. Much of the problem arises from the fact that the semantics of the modeling languages for the various tools, are often distinct, and the semantics gaps are often filled manually through the engineer's understanding of one model or an abstraction. This provides an op- portunity for bugs to creep in, other than standardising software engineering errors germane to such complex system engineering. Since embedded systems applications such as avionics, automotive, or industrial automation are safety critical, it is very important to invent tools, and methodologies for safe and reliable system design. Much of the tools, and techniques deal with either the design of embedded platforms (hardware, networking, firmware etc), and software stack separately. The problem of the semantic gap between these two, as well as between models of computation used to capture semantics must be solved in order to design safer embedded systems.
    [Show full text]
  • Systems Engineering with Sysml/UML Morgan Kaufmann OMG Press
    Systems Engineering with SysML/UML Morgan Kaufmann OMG Press Morgan Kaufmann Publishers and the Object Management Group™ (OMG) have joined forces to publish a line of books addressing business and technical topics related to OMG’s large suite of software standards. OMG is an international, open membership, not-for-profi t computer industry consortium that was founded in 1989. The OMG creates standards for software used in government and corporate environments to enable interoperability and to forge common development environments that encourage the adoption and evolution of new technology. OMG members and its board of directors consist of representatives from a majority of the organizations that shape enterprise and Internet computing today. OMG’s modeling standards, including the Unifi ed Modeling Language™ (UML®) and Model Driven Architecture® (MDA), enable powerful visual design, execution and maintenance of software, and other processes—for example, IT Systems Modeling and Business Process Management. The middleware standards and profi les of the Object Management Group are based on the Common Object Request Broker Architecture® (CORBA) and support a wide variety of industries. More information about OMG can be found at http://www.omg.org/. Related Morgan Kaufmann OMG Press Titles UML 2 Certifi cation Guide: Fundamental and Intermediate Exams Tim Weilkiens and Bernd Oestereich Real-Life MDA: Solving Business Problems with Model Driven Architecture Michael Guttman and John Parodi Architecture Driven Modernization: A Series of Industry Case Studies Bill Ulrich Systems Engineering with SysML/UML Modeling, Analysis, Design Tim Weilkiens Acquisitions Editor: Tiffany Gasbarrini Publisher: Denise E. M. Penrose Publishing Services Manager: George Morrison Project Manager: Mónica González de Mendoza Assistant Editor: Matt Cater Production Assistant: Lianne Hong Cover Design: Dennis Schaefer Cover Image: © Masterfile (Royalty-Free Division) Morgan Kaufmann Publishers is an imprint of Eslsevier.
    [Show full text]
  • UML Basics: the Component Diagram
    English Sign in (or register) Technical topics Evaluation software Community Events UML basics: The component diagram Donald Bell ([email protected]), IT Architect, IBM Corporation Summary: from The Rational Edge: This article introduces the component diagram, a structure diagram within the new Unified Modeling Language 2.0 specification. Date: 15 Dec 2004 Level: Introductory Also available in: Chinese Vietnamese Activity: 259392 views Comments: 3 (View | Add comment - Sign in) Average rating (629 votes) Rate this article This is the next installment in a series of articles about the essential diagrams used within the Unified Modeling Language, or UML. In my previous article on the UML's class diagram, (The Rational Edge, September 2004), I described how the class diagram's notation set is the basis for all UML 2's structure diagrams. Continuing down the track of UML 2 structure diagrams, this article introduces the component diagram. The diagram's purpose The component diagram's main purpose is to show the structural relationships between the components of a system. In UML 1.1, a component represented implementation items, such as files and executables. Unfortunately, this conflicted with the more common use of the term component," which refers to things such as COM components. Over time and across successive releases of UML, the original UML meaning of components was mostly lost. UML 2 officially changes the essential meaning of the component concept; in UML 2, components are considered autonomous, encapsulated units within a system or subsystem that provide one or more interfaces. Although the UML 2 specification does not strictly state it, components are larger design units that represent things that will typically be implemented using replaceable" modules.
    [Show full text]
  • Towards Fixing Sketchy UML Models by Leveraging Textual Notations: Application to Real-Time Embedded Systems
    Towards Fixing Sketchy UML Models by Leveraging Textual Notations: Application to Real-Time Embedded Systems Fr´ed´ericJouault and J´er^ome Delatour PRES Universit´eNantes Angers Le Mans (UNAM) TRAME team, ESEO, Angers, France [email protected] Abstract. During the development of real-time embedded system, the use of UML models as blueprints is a common practice with a focus on un- derstandability rather than comprehensiveness. However, further in the development, these models must be completed in order to achieve the necessary validation and verification activities. They are typically per- formed by using several formal tools. Each tool needs models of the sys- tem at a given abstraction level, which are precise and complete enough wrt. how the tool processes them. If UML is appropriate for capturing multiple concerns, its multiple partial views without a global one in- crease the difficulty of locating inconsistency or incompleteness issues. Therefore, ensuring completeness is time consuming, fastidious, and er- ror prone. We propose an approach based on the use of a UML textual syntax closely aligned to its metamodel: tUML. An initial prototype is described, and examples are given. 1 Introduction Using sketchy models is common during software systems development. Such models (also called contemplative models) are just drawings that cannot be au- tomatically processed (e.g., transformed into code, or verified). In the use of such models as blueprints, the focus is on communication rather than on com- pleteness. The UML language is a good candidate for that kind of practice. It is primarily a graphical notation, and it offers a relatively large set of diagrams for representing various concerns.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to Systems Modeling Languages
    Fundamentals of Systems Engineering Prof. Olivier L. de Weck, Mark Chodas, Narek Shougarian Session 3 System Modeling Languages 1 Reminder: A1 is due today ! 2 3 Overview Why Systems Modeling Languages? Ontology, Semantics and Syntax OPM – Object Process Methodology SySML – Systems Modeling Language Modelica What does it mean for Systems Engineering of today and tomorrow (MBSE)? 4 Exercise: Describe the “Mr. Sticky” System Work with a partner (5 min) Use your webex notepad/white board I will call on you randomly We will compare across student teams © source unknown. All rights reserved. This content is excluded from our Creative Commons license. For more information, see http://ocw.mit.edu/help/faq-fair-use/. 5 Why Systems Modeling Languages? Means for describing artifacts are traditionally as follows: Natural Language (English, French etc….) Graphical (Sketches and Drawings) These then typically get aggregated in “documents” Examples: Requirements Document, Drawing Package Technical Data Package (TDP) should contain all info needed to build and operate system Advantages of allowing an arbitrary description: Familiarity to creator of description Not-confining, promotes creativity Disadvantages of allowing an arbitrary description: Room for ambiguous interpretations and errors Difficult to update if there are changes Handoffs between SE lifecycle phases are discontinuous Uneven level of abstraction Large volume of information that exceeds human cognitive bandwidth Etc…. 6 System Modeling Languages Past efforts
    [Show full text]