DOCSLIB.ORG

OMG Systems Modeling Language (OMG Sysml™) Tutorial 25 June 2007

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

OMG Systems Modeling Language (OMG SysML™) Tutorial 25 June 2007 Sanford Friedenthal Alan Moore Rick Steiner (emails included in references at end) Copyright © 2006, 2007 by Object Management Group. Published and used by INCOSE and affiliated societies with permission. Status • Specification status – Adopted by OMG in May ’06 – Finalization Task Force Report in March ’07 – Available Specification v1.0 expected June ‘07 – Revision task force chartered for SysML v1.1 in March ‘07 • This tutorial is based on the OMG SysML adopted specification (ad-06-03-01) and changes proposed by the Finalization Task Force (ptc/07-03-03) • This tutorial, the specifications, papers, and vendor info can be found on the OMG SysML Website at http://www.omgsysml.org/ 7/26/2007 Copyright © 2006,2007 by Object Management Group. 2 Objectives & Intended Audience At the end of this tutorial, you should have an awareness of: • Benefits of model driven approaches for systems engineering • SysML diagrams and language concepts • How to apply SysML as part of a model based SE process • Basic considerations for transitioning to SysML This course is not intended to make you a systems modeler! You must use the language. Intended Audience: • Practicing Systems Engineers interested in system modeling • Software Engineers who want to better understand how to integrate software and system models • Familiarity with UML is not required, but it helps 7/26/2007 Copyright © 2006,2007 by Object Management Group. 3 Topics • Motivation & Background • Diagram Overview and Language Concepts • SysML Modeling as Part of SE Process – Structured Analysis – Distiller Example – OOSEM – Enhanced Security System Example • SysML in a Standards Framework • Transitioning to SysML • Summary 7/26/2007 Copyright © 2006,2007 by Object Management Group. 4 Motivation & Background SE Practices for Describing Systems Future Past • Specifications • Interface requirements • System design • Analysis & Trade-off • Test plans Moving from Document centric to Model centric 7/26/2007 Copyright © 2006,2007 by Object Management Group. 6 System Modeling Requirements Start Shift Accelerate Brake Control Power Vehicle Input Equations Dynamics Mass Properties ModelStructural Model Safety Model Cost Engine Transmission Transaxle Model Integrated System Model Must Address Multiple Aspects of a System 7/26/2007 Copyright © 2006,2007 by Object Management Group. 7 Model Based Systems Engineering Benefits • Shared understanding of system requirements and design – Validation of requirements – Common basis for analysis and design – Facilitates identification of risks • Assists in managing complex system development – Separation of concerns via multiple views of integrated model – Supports traceability through hierarchical system models – Facilitates impact analysis of requirements and design changes – Supports incremental development & evolutionary acquisition • Improved design quality – Reduced errors and ambiguity – More complete representation • Supports early and on-going verification & validation to reduce risk • Provides value through life cycle (e.g., training) • Enhances knowledge capture 7/26/2007 Copyright © 2006,2007 by Object Management Group. 8 System-of-Systems Interactions Boundaries Modeling Needed to Manage System Complexity 7/26/2007 Copyright © 2006,2007 by Object Management Group. 9 Modeling at Multiple Levels of the System MCE (CRC) MCE (CRC) AWACS MCE (CRC) LINK 16 LINK 16 AMDPCS FAAD C3I LINK 16 LINK 16 Patriot ICC E-2C AWACS F/A-18 RIVET JOINT MCE F-15C ABMOC Subsystem Voice Comm Operator Interface Power Hardware Power Generation Hardware includes MSE SIAP ACDS (CVN) and Distribution Power Data Processing Power Terminal Power TCIM JTIDS Hardware Operational Models Terminal DDG-51 AEGIS Destroyer Software Power CG EPLRS or SINGARS Force Level Terminal Control System TAOM Power Voice & TADIL-B Data PLGR (GPS) Patriot ICC Power A2C2 Subsystem Power Operator Interface Voice Comm Power Hardware Power Generation Hardware includes and Distribution MSE Power CEC Information Exchange Requirements - Classified SECRET when filled in Data Processing 12 34567891011 Terminal TCIM Sending Receiving Latency: SA/Eng Message FAAD C3I Voice & TADIL-B Data Rationale/UJTL Number Event/Action Information Characterization Critical Format Class Rem ar k s Hardware Power No de No de Support Error Rate Radar measurements to REF: CEC A-spec JTIDS Provide SA/Support OP 5.1.1 Com m Op Info support data fusion composite Host CEP Yes Binary IAW IDD Secret xx secs/xx secs xx % Table 3-3 and AMDPCS Terminal Engagements Software track ing Hos t r e qm ts IFF measurements to support Provide SA/Support OP 5.1.1 Com m Op Info data fusion and composite Host CEP Yes Binary IAW IDD Secret xx secs/xx secs xx % Engagements EPLRS or SINGARS track ing IFF interrogation requests to Terminal Provide SA/Support Respond when Power OP 5.1.1 Com m Op Info support data fusion and Host CEP Yes Binary IAW IDD Secret xx secs/xx secs xx % Engagements requested Force Level Power com posite tracking Provide SA/Support ID Changes to support data Control System OP 5.1.1 Com m Op Info Host CEP Yes Binary IAW IDD Secret xx secs/xx secs xx % PLGR Engagements fusion and composite tracking (GPS) Provide SA/Support Navigation data to support data REF:CEC SRS and Power OP 5.1.1 Com m Op Info Host CEP Yes Binary IAW IDD Secret xx secs/xx secs xx % Engagements fusion and composite tracking Host Nav. spec Engagement Support Requests Provide SA/Support OP 5.1.1 Com m Op Info to support data fusion and Host CEP Yes Binary IAW IDD Secret xx secs/xx secs xx % AEGIS only Engagements com posite tracking Track number management to Provide SA/Support Changes sent OP 5.1.1 Com m Op Info support data fusion and Host-CEP CEP-Host Yes Binary IAW IDD Secret xx secs/xx secs xx % Engagements immediately com posite tracking Composite Track State Update Provide SA/Support REF: CEC IDDs for OP 5.1.1 Com m Op Info to support data fusion and CEP Host Yes Binary IAW IDD Secret xx secs/xx secs xx % Engagements e ach host com posite tracking Associated Measurement REF: CEC A-spec Provide SA/Support OP 5.1.1 Com m Op Info Reports to support data fusion CEP Host Yes Binary IAW IDD Secret xx secs/xx secs xx % Table 3-3. SPY Engagements and com posite track ing only IFF As signments to support Provide SA/Support When assigned OP 5.1.1 Com m Op Info data fusion and composite CEP Host Yes Binary IAW IDD Secret xx secs/xx secs xx % Engagements or changed track ing ID recommendations to Network Plan Provide SA/Support When assigned OP 5.1.1 Com m Op Info support data fusion and CEP Host Yes Binary IAW IDD Secret xx secs/xx secs xx % Engagements or changed CID Criteria com posite tracking REF: CEC A-spec Provide SA/Support Sensor cues to support data OP 5.1.1 Com m Op Info CEP Host Yes Binary IAW IDD Secret xx secs/xx secs xx % Table 3-3. SPY Engagements fusion and composite tracking Network only Network Track Data Receive Network Track Data Track File 11 Correlate Track Correlated Track Files 12 Manage BMDS Track File Data BMDS Track JDN Correlation S/W Network Interface Track Management Module Correlation Module Track File HIC Module Module 13 Request Attempt to Track Data Correlate with Track Data Possible BMDS Track Network BMDS Track File Matches Interface S/W Network Track MSG Track File Request Track Data Send Track System Models Track Mangement S/W Module HIC File Data BMDS Track Data Correlate Tracks BMDS Track Data Correlation Results Session Activated Verify CID, Correlation, and Assoicated Track yes Update Track File Data Data Correlation no / initialize Possible CreateCorrelation New Complete ( Correlation BMDSResults Track ) [ set not null ] / Send Results Idle Network Track File Received ( File Data ) [ number tracks > 0 ] / Input Network Track Correlating TracksMonitor BMDS Track Display Correlation Receiving Network Track File On entry / match state vectorsProcess Data BMDS Track Data Do / corr state vectors Do / corr LPE On entry / receive file data Do / corr PIP Do / store track data Track MSG Data Send BMDS Do / corr RCS On exit / request matching data Track Data to Do / corr CID JDN <TITLE>System Design<TITLE> On exit / corr BMDS Track # Prepared Track MSG corr fail / is new BMDS Track corr success / is corr BMDS Track <META http-equiv="REFRESH" BMDS Track File Request Sent ( Request ) / Pull BMDS Track Files BMDS Track File Data Received ( File Data ) / <!--CSSDATA:966533483--> Correlate Tracks Receiving BMDS Track File Data <SCRIPT src="/virtual/2000/code On entry / receive file data Do / store track data <LINK rel="stylesheet" href="/ <SCRIPT language="javascript" Track Mangement Module HIC /current tracks /associated track data manages 1..* /CID data uses 1..* assign CID () 1..* JDN recommend CID () 1..* retrieve track file data () display track file data () communicates with ABMOC Subsystem 1 Voice Comm Operator Interface Power 0..* Hardware Hardware includes interface for Power Generation <<entity>> MSE 1 1 1 and Distribution Track File Power <<interface>> Correlation Module Track Number Network Interface Module Data Processing Power CID 0..* algorithm Terminal Power TCIM /State Vector buffer capacity /tracks to be correlated JTIDS /Date-Time correlation data Hardware /msg data Terminal received from decorrelation data send track data () receive msg () parse msg () correlate tracks () Power route msg data () decorrelate tracks () Software build msg () retrieve track data () send msg () send track data () EPLRS or SINGARS Force Level Terminal Control System
Recommended publications
  • 07 Requirements What About RFP/RFB/Rfis?

    07 Requirements What About RFP/RFB/Rfis?

    CMPSCI520/620 07 Requirements & UML Intro 07 Requirements SW Requirements Specification • Readings • How do we communicate the Requirements to others? • [cK99] Cris Kobryn, Co-Chair, “Introduction to UML: Structural and Use Case Modeling,” UML Revision Task Force Object Modeling with OMG UML Tutorial • It is common practice to capture them in an SRS Series © 1999-2001 OMG and Contributors: Crossmeta, EDS, IBM, Enea Data, • But an SRS doesn’t need to be a single paper document Hewlett-Packard, IntelliCorp, Kabira Technologies, Klasse Objecten, Rational Software, Telelogic, Unisys http://www.omg.org/technology/uml/uml_tutorial.htm • Purpose • [OSBB99] Gunnar Övergaard, Bran Selic, Conrad Bock and Morgan Björkande, “Behavioral Modeling,” UML Revision Task Force, Object Modeling with OMG UML • Contractual requirements Tutorial Series © 1999-2001 OMG and Contributors: Crossmeta, EDS, IBM, Enea elicitation Data, Hewlett-Packard, IntelliCorp, Kabira Technologies, Klasse Objecten, Rational • Baseline Software, Telelogic, Unisys http://www.omg.org/technology/uml/uml_tutorial.htm • for evaluating subsequent products • [laM01] Maciaszek, L.A. (2001): Requirements Analysis and System Design. • for change control requirements Developing Information Systems with UML, Addison Wesley Copyright © 2000 by analysis Addison Wesley • Audience • [cB04] Bock, Conrad, Advanced Analysis and Design with UML • Users, Purchasers requirements http://www.kabira.com/bock/ specification • [rM02] Miller, Randy, “Practical UML: A hands-on introduction for developers,”
  • Activity Diagram Inheritance1

    Activity Diagram Inheritance1

    Activity Diagram Inheritance1 Arnd Schnieders, Frank Puhlmann Hasso-Plattner-Institute for IT Systems Engineering at the University of Potsdam {schnieders, puhlmann}@hpi.uni-potsdam.de Abstract This paper outlines the ongoing work on the realization of a flexible inheritance mechanism for Activity Diagrams that assures the maintenance of syntactical correctness for the derived Activity Diagrams. The objective is to support the reuse of process models especially by applying Activity Diagram inheritance as a variability mechanism in the context of product line oriented software development. Keywords: Activity Diagrams, domain engineering, process inheritance, variability mechanism 1. Introduction In industry similar products are frequently developed and produced as product lines. One of the main advantages is a gain of efficiency in development and production since parts, which are common for several product line members, can be reused optimally. This approach has been transferred successfully to software development and is also known by the name domain engineering. Variability mechanisms are thereby important for the effectiveness of domain engineering. A great number of variability mechanisms has already been published [5, 9, 11, 13, 18]. Unfortunately, existing variability mechanisms only refer to the static aspects of a software system’s design while the impact of variability mechanisms on the process view on the system has been strongly neglected. Therefore, the first contribution of this paper is to contribute to closing this gap by making the important variability mechanism inheritance available for process design models in order to derive process model variants. The second contribution of this paper is to show how the defined process inheritance mechanism is realized concretely for UML 2.0 Activity Diagrams.
  • Customizing UML with Stereotypes

    Customizing UML with Stereotypes

    Customizing UML with Stereotypes Mirosáaw StaroĔ ii iii Blekinge Institute of Technology Dissertation Series No 2003:06 ISSN 1650-2140 ISBN 91-7295-028-5 Customizing UML with Stereotypes Mirosáaw StaroĔ Department of Software Engineering and Computer Science Blekinge Institute of Technology Sweden iv BLEKINGE INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY Blekinge Institute of Technology, situated on the southeast coast of Sweden, started in 1989 and in 1999 gained the right to run Ph.D programmes in technology. Research programmes have been started in the following areas: • Applied signal processing • Computer science • Computer systems technology • Design and digital media • Human work science with a special focus on IT • IT and gender research • Mechanical engineering • Software engineering • Spatial planning • Telecommunication systems Research studies are carried out in all faculties and about a third of the annual budget is dedicated to research. Blekinge Institute of Technology S-371 79 Karlskrona, Sweden http://www.bth.se v Jacket illustration: © 2003 GillWorth gallery, www.gillworthreptiles.co.uk Publisher: Blekinge Institute of Technology Printed by Kaserntryckeriet, Karlskrona, Sweden 2003 ISBN 91-7295-028-5 vi Abstract The Unified Modeling Language (UML) is a visual modeling language for documenting and specifying software. It is gaining popularity as a language for a variety of purposes. It was designed as a result of a unifying activity in the last decade. Since this general purpose language cannot suit all possible needs, it has built-in mechanisms for providing extensibility for specific purposes. One such mechanism is the notion of stereotype, which is a means of branding the existing model element with a new semantics.
  • Using the UML for Architectural Description?

    Using the UML for Architectural Description?

    Using the UML for Architectural Description? Rich Hilliard Integrated Systems and Internet Solutions, Inc. Concord, MA USA [email protected] Abstract. There is much interest in using the Unified Modeling Lan- guage (UML) for architectural description { those techniques by which architects sketch, capture, model, document and analyze architectural knowledge and decisions about software-intensive systems. IEEE P1471, the Recommended Practice for Architectural Description, represents an emerging consensus for specifying the content of an architectural descrip- tion for a software-intensive system. Like the UML, IEEE P1471 does not prescribe a particular architectural method or life cycle, but may be used within a variety of such processes. In this paper, I provide an overview of IEEE P1471, describe its conceptual framework, and investigate the issues of applying the UML to meet the requirements of IEEE P1471. Keywords: IEEE P1471, architectural description, multiple views, view- points, Unified Modeling Language 1 Introduction The Unified Modeling Language (UML) is rapidly maturing into the de facto standard for modeling of software-intensive systems. Standardized by the Object Management Group (OMG) in November 1997, it is being adopted by many organizations, and being supported by numerous tool vendors. At present, there is much interest in using the UML for architectural descrip- tion: the techniques by which architects sketch, capture, model, document and analyze architectural knowledge and decisions about software-intensive systems. Such techniques enable architects to record what they are doing, modify or ma- nipulate candidate architectures, reuse portions of existing architectures, and communicate architectural information to others. These descriptions may the be used to analyze and reason about the architecture { possibly with automated support.
  • Guidelines for UML Or Sysml Modelling Within an Enterprise Architecture

    Guidelines for UML Or Sysml Modelling Within an Enterprise Architecture

    Guidelines for UML or SysML modelling within an enterprise architecture Mälardalen University Academy of Innovation, Design and Technology Author: Charlie Höglund Email: [email protected] Bachelor of Science in Computer Science/Basic level, 15hp Date: 2017-06-08 Examiner: Jan Carlson Supervisor: Daniel Sundmark Company supervisor: Fredric Andréasson (Volvo Construction Equipment) Abstract Enterprise Architectures (EA) are used to describe an enterprise’s structure in a standardized way. An Enterprise Architecture also provides decision-support when choosing a direction or making changes at different levels of an enterprise, such as the business architecture or technology architecture level. This can involve decisions such as: What kind of enterprise should this be, what kind of technologies should be used for new system developments etcetera. Therefore, using the Unified Modelling Language (UML) or Systems Modelling Language (SysML) together with standardized guidelines that help you decide what to do before, during, and after modelling could be important for producing correct and useful system models, which later on will be used to develop actual systems. At the moment, standardized guidelines of this kind do not really exist. However, there are a lot of information about why you should use UML or SysML, what kinds of UML or SysML diagrams that exist, or what notations to follow when creating a specific UML or SysML diagram. In this thesis, the objective has been to research about the usefulness and creation of standardized guidelines for UML or SysML modelling in an Enterprise Architecture (i.e. mainly intended for the automotive industry domain). For this reason, the two research questions: “how can you create useful standardized guidelines for UML or SysML modelling?” and “what do useful standardized guidelines for UML or SysML modelling look like?” were chosen.
  • VI. the Unified Modeling Language UML Diagrams

    VI. the Unified Modeling Language UML Diagrams

    Conceptual Modeling CSC2507 VI. The Unified Modeling Language Use Case Diagrams Class Diagrams Attributes, Operations and ConstraintsConstraints Generalization and Aggregation Sequence and Collaboration Diagrams State and Activity Diagrams 2004 John Mylopoulos UML -- 1 Conceptual Modeling CSC2507 UML Diagrams I UML was conceived as a language for modeling software. Since this includes requirements, UML supports world modeling (...at least to some extend). I UML offers a variety of diagrammatic notations for modeling static and dynamic aspects of an application. I The list of notations includes use case diagrams, class diagrams, interaction diagrams -- describe sequences of events, package diagrams, activity diagrams, state diagrams, …more... 2004 John Mylopoulos UML -- 2 Conceptual Modeling CSC2507 Use Case Diagrams I A use case [Jacobson92] represents “typical use scenaria” for an object being modeled. I Modeling objects in terms of use cases is consistent with Cognitive Science theories which claim that every object has obvious suggestive uses (or affordances) because of its shape or other properties. For example, Glass is for looking through (...or breaking) Cardboard is for writing on... Radio buttons are for pushing or turning… Icons are for clicking… Door handles are for pulling, bars are for pushing… I Use cases offer a notation for building a coarse-grain, first sketch model of an object, or a process. 2004 John Mylopoulos UML -- 3 Conceptual Modeling CSC2507 Use Cases for a Meeting Scheduling System Initiator Participant
  • PART 3: UML Dynamic Modelling Notations • State Machines/Statecharts • Collaboration Diagrams • Sequence Diagrams • Activity Diagrams

    PART 3: UML Dynamic Modelling Notations • State Machines/Statecharts • Collaboration Diagrams • Sequence Diagrams • Activity Diagrams

    PART 3: UML Dynamic Modelling Notations • State machines/statecharts • Collaboration diagrams • Sequence diagrams • Activity diagrams. Chapter 19 of the textbook is relevant to this part. 1 State machines • State machines describe dynamic behaviour of objects, show life history of objects over time + object communications. • Used for real-time system design (eg., robotics); GUI design (states represent UI screens/modes). Example shows simple state machine with two states, On and Off and transitions between them. 2 Switch Off swon swoff On Simple state machine 3 State machines Elements of a state machine are: States: Rounded-corner boxes, containing state name. Transitions: Arrows from one state, source of transition, to another, target, labelled with event that causes transition. Default initial state: State of object at start of its life history. Shown as target of transition from initial pseudostate (black filled circle). Termination of state machine can be shown by `bullseye' symbol. 4 State machines UML divides state machines into two kinds: 1. Protocol state machines { describe allowed life histories of objects of a class. Events on transitions are operations of that class, transitions may have pre and post conditions. Transitions cannot have generated actions (although we will allow this). 2. Behaviour state machines { describe operation execution/implementation of object behaviour. Transitions do not have postconditions, but can have actions. State machines describe behaviour of objects of a particular class, or execution processing of an operation. 5 State machines • Class diagrams describe system data, independently of time. • State machines show how system/objects can change over time. • Switch state machine is protocol state machine for objects of Switch class.
  • Pivotpoint-Sparx Partnership Promotes Model-Based Systems

    Pivotpoint-Sparx Partnership Promotes Model-Based Systems

    PivotPoint-Sparx Partnership Promotes Model-Based Systems Engineering with SysML PivotPoint Technology and Sparx Systems today announced a technology partnership that will combine their complementary strengths in SysML training and tools for systems engineers. PivotPoint announced that its “SysML Distilled™ with Enterprise Architect™” workshop is immediately available, and will use Sparx’s new MDG Technology for SysML™ product. Fallbrook, California (PRWEB) - October 9, 2006 -- PivotPoint Technology and Sparx Systems today announced a technology partnership to promote model-based systems engineering with the Systems Modeling Language (SysML). SysML is the new domain-specific modeling language for systems engineering applications that was adopted by the Object Management Group as OMG SysML™ in July 2006, and is attracting users among systems engineers worldwide. Under the agreement, PivotPoint will be Sparx’s primary partner for training and consulting services that use Sparx’s new SysML product (MDG Technology for SysML™), which was released last week. PivotPoint showed its readiness to partner by announcing the immediate availability of a new “SysML Distilled™ with Enterprise Architect™” workshop, which combines both SysML language and tool training. SysML extends the Unified Modeling Language (UML), the industry standard for specifying software-intensive systems, so that it can also specify hardware, processes, personnel, and facilities. Systems engineers who want to follow a model-based systems engineering process gain at least two important advantages in using SysML. First, SysML is a smaller language than UML 2.0 since it has fewer diagrams and constructs, so it is easier for engineers to learn and apply. Second, SysML adds to the semantic expressiveness of UML with two new diagrams for defining requirements and parametric constraints, which systems engineers need to fully specify complex systems.
  • UML Tutorial: Sequence Diagrams

    UML Tutorial: Sequence Diagrams

    UML Tutorial: Sequence Diagrams. Robert C. Martin Engineering Notebook Column April, 98 In my last column, I described UML Collaboration diagrams. Collaboration diagrams allow the designer to specify the sequence of messages sent between objects in a collaboration. The style of the diagram emphasizes the relationships between the objects as opposed to the sequence of the messages. In this column we will be discussing UML Sequence diagrams. Sequence diagrams contain the same information as Collaboration diagrams, but emphasize the sequence of the messages instead of the relationships between the objects. The Cellular Phone Revisited Here again is the final collaboration diagram from last column’s Cellular Phone example. (See Figure 1.) 1*:ButtonPressed() :DigitButton Digit:Button 1.1:Digit(code) Adapter 2:ButtonPressed() :SendButton Send:Button :Dialler Adapter 2.1:Send() 1.1.2:EmitTone(code) 2.1.1:Connect(pno) 1.1.1:DisplayDigit(code) 2.1.1.1:InUse() :Cellular display display:Dialler :Speaker Radio :CRDisplay Display Figure 1: Collaboration diagram of Cellular Phone. The Sequence diagram that corresponds to this model is shown in Figure 2. It is pretty easy to see what the diagrams in Figure 2 are telling us, especially when we compare them to Figure 1. Let’s walk through the features. First of all, there are two sequence diagrams present. The first one captures the course of events that takes place when a digit button is pressed. The second captures what happens when the user pushes the ‘send’ button in order to make a call. At the top of each diagram we see the rectangles that represent objects.
  • 03-01-06 BPDM RFP.Pdf

    03-01-06 BPDM RFP.Pdf

    Business Process Definition Metamodel RFP Object Management Group First Needham Place 250 First Avenue, Suite 100 Needham, MA 02494 Telephone: +1-781-444-0404 Facsimile: +1-781-444-0320 Business Process Definition Metamodel Request For Proposal OMG Document: bei/2003-01-06 Letters of Intent due: June 16, 2003 Submissions due: August 18, 2003 Objective of this RFP This Request For Proposals solicits submissions that specify a business process definition metamodel, which is platform independent with respect to specific business process definition languages. This metamodel will define an abstract language for specification of executable business processes that execute within an enterprise (with or without human involvement); and may collaborate between otherwise- independent business processes executing in different business units or enterprises. The specification developed in response to this RFP is expected to achieve the following: • A common metamodel to unify the diverse business process definition graphical and textual notations that exist in the industry • A metamodel that complements existing UML metamodels so that business processes specifications can be part of complete system specifications to assure consistency and completeness bei/2003-01-06, January 31, 2003 1 Business Process Definition Metamodel RFP • The ability to integrate process models for workflow management processes, automated business processes, and collaborations between business units. • Support for the specification of choreography, describing the collaboration
  • Sysml, the Language of MBSE Paul White

    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.
  • A Model-Driven Engineering Approach to Support the Verification of Compliance to Safety Standards

    A Model-Driven Engineering Approach to Support the Verification of Compliance to Safety Standards

    A Model-Driven Engineering Approach to Support the Verification of Compliance to Safety Standards Rajwinder Kaur Panesar-Walawege, Mehrdad Sabetzadeh, Lionel Briand Simula Research Laboratory, Lysaker, Norway University of Oslo, Norway Email: {rpanesar,mehrdad,briand}@simula.no Abstract—Certification of safety-critical systems according to system development. This means that they will have to well-recognised standards is the norm in many industries where reconstruct the missing evidence after the fact. Doing so the failure of such systems can harm people or the environment. is often very expensive, and the outcomes might be far Certification bodies examine such systems, based on evidence that the system suppliers provide, to ensure that the relevant from satisfactory. On the certifier side, poorly structured and safety risks have been sufficiently mitigated. The evidence is incomplete evidence often leads to significant delays and aimed at satisfying the requirements of the standards used loss of productivity, and further may not allow the certifier for certification, and naturally a key prerequisite for effective to develop enough trust in the system that needs to be collection of evidence is that the supplier be aware of these certified. It is therefore very important to devise a systematic requirements and the evidence they require. This often proves to be a very challenging task because of the sheer size of the methodology, which is amenable to effective automated standards and the fact that the textual standards are amenable support, to specify, manage, and analyze the safety evidence to subjective interpretation. In this paper, we propose an ap- used to demonstrate compliance to standards.