DOCSLIB.ORG

From System Specifications to Component Behavioral Models

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
From System Specifications to Component Behavioral Models From System Specifications to Component Behavioral Models Ivo Krka, George Edwards, Yuriy Brun, and Nenad Medvidovic Computer Science Department University of Southern California Los Angeles, CA 90089-0781, USA fkrka,gedwards,ybrun,[email protected] Abstract express partial but straightforward views of the system that are useful for communicating intent among stakeholders. Early system specifications, such as use-case scenarios Numerous existing techniques [4,9, 10, 11] leverage sce- and properties, rarely completely specify the system. Partial nario and/or property specifications to derive concrete be- models of system-level behavior, derived from these speci- havioral models of system components that can be lever- fications, have proven useful in early system analysis. We aged for architectural analysis and assessment. However, believe that the scope of possible analyses can be enhanced these approaches ignore the partial and limited nature of by utilizing component-level partial models. In this pa- such specifications by attempting to generate complete be- per, we outline an algorithm for deriving a component-level havioral models. Instead, we argue that designers need for- Modal Transition System (MTS) from system-level scenario mal models that describe systems in terms of (1) behavior and property specifications. The generated MTSs capture required by the scenarios, (2) behavior prohibited by the the possible component implementations that (1) necessar- constraints, and (3) potential behavior that is neither re- ily provide the behavior required by the scenarios, (2) re- quired nor forbidden by the specifications. strict behavior forbidden by the properties, and (3) leave the Recently, researchers have developed automated pro- behavior that is neither explicitly required nor forbidden as cesses for deriving Modal Transition Systems (MTSs) [3], undefined. We discuss how these generated models can help a partial behavior modeling formalism, from system sce- discover system-design flaws, support requirements elicita- narios and properties [6,7]. An MTS describes the be- tion, and help select off-the-shelf components. havior of a system via states with transitions, which are labeled as either required or potential transitions. MTSs have proven useful in requirements elicitation, architectural 1 Introduction refinement [6,7], and verification that a system implemen- tation satisfies specified properties [2]. Design activities that take place during the early phases Current approaches to MTS derivation adopt a system- of system development, such as elicitation, definition, and wide view and synthesize only system-level MTSs. How- refinement of requirements, occur in the context of incom- ever, modern systems are typically built from indepen- plete information and uncertainty. These activities benefit dent components, and behavioral models that exploit a from, and also result in, partial system specifications that component-oriented perspective are required for rigorous capture high-level system behavior while deferring many architectural analysis. We are developing algorithms and decisions to subsequent design phases. Two commonly methods for (1) deriving component-level MTSs from sys- used types of such specifications are (1) scenarios (e.g., tem-level scenarios and properties, and (2) leveraging com- UML sequence diagrams) that model examples of impor- ponent-level MTSs in system development. tant system use cases, and (2) properties (e.g., OCL con- In this paper, we outline our algorithm for component- straints) that model conditions and constraints on as well as level MTS generation from system scenarios and properties relationships among system elements. (Section3) and describe how our algorithm can help dis- Scenarios and properties form a basis for gradual defi- cover system-design flaws (Section4). We also envision nition and refinement of system requirements and architec- component-level MTSs (1) assisting in requirements elic- ture, and can be used for early system analysis (e.g., dis- itation, (2) supporting selection of candidate off-the-shelf covery of design defects and conflicting requirements). The components, and (3) enabling comparison of as-intended utility of scenarios and properties arises from their ability to and as-implemented systems. ICSE’09, May 16–24, 2009, Vancouver, Canada 978-1-4244-3494-7/09/$25.00 c 2009 IEEE 315 Companion Volume Scenario: Constraints: System specifications Phase 3 Sequence Client Cache Server requestCacheData() responseCacheData() SDs Diagram requestServerData() pre: cached = true annotation post: responseServerData() OCL constraints Annotated sequence responseCacheData() requestServerData() diagrams pre: cached = false OCL, SDs, requestCacheData() post: interfaces Component- Phase 4 responseCacheData() responseServerData() level constr. Final MTS pre: generation generation post: cached = true Phase 1 Interfaces: Client Final MTSs provided: dataUpdate() Initial MTSs responseCacheData() pre: OCL constraints post: cached = false Cache Initial MTS provided: Server dataChanged() generation requestCacheData() provided: pre: Phase 2 responseServerData() requestServerData() post: cached = false dataChanged() dataUpdate() Figure 2. Phases of the MTS-generation algorithm Figure 1. Scenario, property, and component inter- face specifications for a web cache system. specification, which is not realistic during early design [8]. The work we present here addresses this problem by generating partial component-level behavioral models from 2 Background and Related Work partial system-level specifications. Furthermore, the main conceptual distinction between our work and the work done in [6,7] is that we generate component-level MTS models In order to ease the adoption of our techniques, we em- as opposed to the system-level MTS models. By moving the ploy previously defined specification formalisms that are al- focus from the system-wide perspective to a component- ready in widespread use [3,5]. We use basic UML sequence level perspective, we enable the benefits outlined in Sec- diagrams [5] to depict scenarios and OCL [5] to capture in- tion1. tended system properties. Like other research on behavioral models [8, 10], we leverage only a subset of OCL: con- junctive (AND) clauses of Boolean expressions on system 3 Generating Component-Level MTSs variables that define pre- and postconditions of system op- erations. Figure1 illustrates an example specification of a In this section, we outline our algorithm for generating web cache system (described in further detail in Section3). component-level MTSs from scenario and property spec- The MTS [3] formalism extends on the LTS formal- ifications. Figure2 depicts four phases of the algorithm. ism [9] to permit modeling of potential transitions (in ad- The inputs to the algorithm are UML sequence diagrams dition to required transitions). The strong refinement rela- describing system execution scenarios and OCL constraints tion [1] of MTSs results in the conversion of potential tran- defining pre- and postconditions on component operations. sitions into required transitions or removal of the potential The scenarios can be defined on different sets of compo- transitions, based on new knowledge about system behav- nent operations, while the OCL constraints are defined on a ior. MTS N is a refinement of MTS M if and only if every set of system state variables. Additionally, we assume the required transition in M is also required in N and every po- availability of provided interface specifications for system tential transition in N is also potential in M. We refer the components, e.g., such as those typically provided in UML reader to [1] for formal, complete definitions of MTSs and class diagrams. the strong refinement relation. The algorithm first derives component-level constraints In related work, Whittle and Schumann [10] proposed (Phase 1), which are later used to define the state space an algorithm to generate component statecharts from sce- of generated MTSs (Phase 2) and derive the conditions narios and properties. Makinen¨ and Systa¨ [4] developed a on system state variables under which scenarios can exe- semi-automated approach for synthesizing statecharts from cute (Phase 3). The returned set of component-level MTSs sequence diagrams with architect guidance. The method (Phase 4) requires all behavior specified in scenarios and of Ziadi et al. [11] synthesizes component statecharts from allows behavior that does not conflict with component-level sequence diagrams with complex constructs (such as refer- constraints as potential behavior. ences, loops, and forks). Finally, Uchitel et al. [9] put for- Figure1 depicts an example specification for a simple ward a technique to generate component-level LTS models web caching system. In the given scenario, a Client requests and compose those models to discover implied scenarios. data from the Cache, which then fetches the data from the All four of the above approaches presume complete system Server. The Cache handles the subsequent request from the 316 Client. We now provide the functional descriptions of the agrams. For component A, we refine potential behavior in phases of the algorithm. the initial MTS by adding required behavior captured in Phase 1: Component-level constraint generation. The the corresponding annotated scenario. A potential transi- first phase of our algorithm translates the system-level con- tion from state S to state P on operation o is changed to a straints, defined on system state variables, into constraints required transition
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 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]
  • 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]
  • 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]
  • 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]
  • Part I Environmental Diagrams
    Adaptive Software Engineering G22.3033-007 Session 3 – Sub-Topic Presentation 1 Use Case Modeling Dr. Jean-Claude Franchitti New York University Computer Science Department Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences 1 Part I Environmental Diagrams 2 1 What it is • Environmental Diagram Rent Video Video Store Pay Information System Employees Clerk Customer Payroll Clerk 3 What it is • A picture containing all the important players (Actors) • Includes players both inside and outside of the system • Actors are a critical component • External events are a second critical component 4 2 Creating the Diagram • To create an environmental diagram • 1. Identify all the initiating actors • 2. Identify all the related external events associated with each actor 5 Why it is used • A diagram is needed to show the context or scope of the proposed system • At this time actors and external events are the critical components • It is helpful to include all the participants as well 6 3 Creating the Diagram • 3. Identify all the participating Actors • These actors may be inside (internal) or outside (external) to the system 7 Creating the Diagram • Examples of an internal actor – Clerk who enters the purchase into a Point of Sale terminal – Clerk who places paper in the printer – Accountant who audits report 8 4 Creating the Diagram • Examples of an external actor – Accountant who audits report – A credit authorizing service – A DMV check for renting a car 9 Creating the Diagram •4.Draw a cloud • 5. Then draw initiating actors on the left of the cloud • 6. Then draw participating external actors outside the cloud • 7.
    [Show full text]
  • Revco Ultra-Low Temperature Freezers
    New! Thermo Scientific Revco Ultra-Low Temperature Freezers Optimum storage capacity with ultimate protection and energy savings your samples our obsession your samples our obsession To the rest of the world, these are samples. To us, they are a scientist's life's work. A lab’s mission. A company’s breakthrough. We are obsessed with sample integrity. Every one of our cold storage solutions is optimized for the best protection of critical samples. Our Revco ® ultra-low temperature freezers offer a complete range of upright and chest configurations designed for maximum sample protection. Thermo Scientific Revco Ultra-Low Temperature Freezers Introducing the Thermo Scientific Revco UxF Series, Pages 4-15 • Your samples need to stay cold. Period. That’s why our Revco ® UxF Series freezers offer outstanding door opening recovery rates and consistent temperature uniformity. To ensure the safety of your samples, our new freezers endured the equivalent of more than 26 years of run time before making their way to the market. • Your samples are precious – and so is your lab space. With our Revco UxF Series freezers, it really is possible to fit more samples into less physical space. With five convenient sizes to choose from, we’ve got a freezer that will fit just right. • Sample protection should be easy. Our Revco UxF Series freezers feature an easy-to-use, touch screen panel with an innovative health monitor that lets you see what’s going on inside without opening the door. Onboard data logging provides you with a downloadable record. • Protect your samples and the environment, too.
    [Show full text]
  • A Requirements Modeling Language for the Component Behavior of Cyber Physical Robotics Systems
    A Requirements Modeling Language for the Component Behavior of Cyber Physical Robotics Systems Jan Oliver Ringert, Bernhard Rumpe, and Andreas Wortmann RWTH Aachen University, Software Engineering, Aachen, Germany {ringert,rumpe,wortmann}@se-rwth.de Abstract. Software development for robotics applications is a sophisticated en- deavor as robots are inherently complex. Explicit modeling of the architecture and behavior of robotics application yields many advantages to cope with this complexity by identifying and separating logically and physically independent components and by hierarchically structuring the system under development. On top of component and connector models we propose modeling the requirements on the behavior of robotics software components using I/O! automata [29]. This approach facilitates early simulation of requirements model, allows to subject these to formal analysis and to generate the software from them. In this paper, we introduce an extension of the architecture description language MontiArc to model the requirements on components with I/O! automata, which are defined in the spirit of Martin Glinz’ Statecharts for requirements modeling [10]. We fur- thermore present a case study based on a robotics application generated for the Lego NXT robotic platform. “In der Robotik dachte man vor 30 Jahren, dass man heute alles perfekt beherrschen würde”, Martin Glinz [38] 1 Introduction Robotics is a field of Cyber-Physical Systems (CPS) which yields complex challenges due to the variety of robots, their forms of use and the overwhelming complexity of the possible environments they have to operate in. Software development for robotics ap- plications is still at least as complex as it was 30 years ago: even a simple robot requires the integration of multiple distributed software components.
    [Show full text]
  • UML Basics: the Component Diagram
    IBM Copyright http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/rational/library/dec04/bell/index.html Country/region [select] Terms of use All of dW Home Products Services & solutions Support & downloads My account developerWorks > Rational > UML basics: The component diagram Level: Introductory Contents: The diagram's purpose Donald Bell The notation IBM Global Services, IBM The basics 15 Dec 2004 Beyond the basics from The Rational Edge: This article introduces the component diagram, a structure diagram Conclusion within the new Unified Modeling Language 2.0 specification. Notes About the author This is the next installment in a series of articles about the essential diagrams used within the Unified Modeling Language, Rate this article or UML. In my previous article on the UML’s class diagram, Subscriptions: (The Rational Edge, September 2004), I described how the dW newsletters class diagram’s notation set is the basis for all UML 2’s structure diagrams. Continuing down the track of UML 2 structure dW Subscription diagrams, this article introduces the component diagram. (CDs and downloads) The Rational Edge 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.
    [Show full text]
  • AUTOSAR and Sysml – a Natural Fit? Andreas Korff
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Archive Ouverte en Sciences de l'Information et de la Communication AUTOSAR and SysML – A Natural Fit? Andreas Korff To cite this version: Andreas Korff. AUTOSAR and SysML – A Natural Fit?. Conference ERTS’06, Jan 2006, Toulouse, France. hal-02270421 HAL Id: hal-02270421 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-02270421 Submitted on 25 Aug 2019 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. AUTOSAR and SysML – A Natural Fit? Andreas Korff1 1: ARTiSAN Software Tools GmbH, Eupener Str. 135-137, D-50933 Köln, [email protected] Abstract: This paper should give some ideas on how the UML 2 and the SysML can help defining the 2. AUTOSAR different AUTOSAR artifacts and later applying the specified AUTOSAR part to real implementations. 2.1 The AUTOSAR Initiative The AUTOSAR definitions are currently being In July 2003 the AUTOSAR (AUTomotive Open defined on top of the UML 2.0. In parallel, the OMG System ARchitecture) partnership was formally started in 2003 a Request for Proposal to define a launched by its core partners: BMW Group, Bosch, UML-based visual modeling language for Systems Continental, DaimlerChrysler, Siemens VDO and Engineering.
    [Show full text]