Behavior State Machine Diagram Example
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Xtuml: Current and Next State of a Modeling Dialect
xtUML: Current and Next State of a Modeling Dialect Cortland Starrett [email protected] 2 Outline • Introduc)on • Background • Brief History • Key Players • Current State • Related Modeling Dialects • Next State • Conclusion [email protected] 3 Introduc)on [email protected] 4 Background • Shlaer-Mellor Method (xtUML) – subject maers, separaon of concerns – data, control, processing – BridgePoint • data modeling (Object Oriented Analysis (OOA)) • state machines • ac)on language • interpre)ve execu)on • model compilaon [email protected] 5 History • 1988, 1991 Shlaer-Mellor Method published by Stephen Mellor and Sally Shlaer. • 2002 Executable UML established as Shlaer-Mellor OOA using UML notation. • 2004 Commercial Corporate Proprietary Licensed. • 2013 BridgePoint xtUML Editor goes open source under Apache 2.0. • 2014 all of BridgePoint (including Verifier and model compilers) goes open source under Apache and Creative Commons. • 2015 Papyrus Industry Consortium and xtUML/BridgePoint contribution • 2015 OSS of alternate generator engine (community building) • 2016 Papyrus-xtUML (BridgePoint) Eclipse Foundation governance • 2016 OSS contributions from industry, university and individuals [email protected] 6 Key Players • Saab • UK Crown • Agilent • Ericsson • Fuji-Xerox • Academia [email protected] 7 Current State • body of IP • self-hosng • Papyrus (and Papyrus Industry Consor)um) [email protected] 8 Related Dialects • MASL • Alf • UML-RT [email protected] -
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 -
EB GUIDE Documentation Version 6.1.0.101778 EB GUIDE Documentation
EB GUIDE documentation Version 6.1.0.101778 EB GUIDE documentation Elektrobit Automotive GmbH Am Wolfsmantel 46 D-91058 Erlangen GERMANY Phone: +49 9131 7701-0 Fax: +49 9131 7701-6333 http://www.elektrobit.com Legal notice Confidential and proprietary information. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. No part of this publication may be copied in any form, by photocopy, microfilm, retrieval system, or by any other means now known or hereafter invented without the prior written permission of Elektrobit Automotive GmbH. ProOSEK®, tresos®, and street director® are registered trademarks of Elektrobit Automotive GmbH. All brand names, trademarks and registered trademarks are property of their rightful owners and are used only for description. Copyright 2015, Elektrobit Automotive GmbH. Page 2 of 324 EB GUIDE documentation Table of Contents 1. About this documentation ................................................................................................................ 15 1.1. Target audiences of the user documentation ......................................................................... 15 1.1.1. Modelers .................................................................................................................. 15 1.1.2. System integrators .................................................................................................... 16 1.1.3. Application developers ............................................................................................... 16 1.1.4. Extension developers ............................................................................................... -
UML 2 Toolkit, Penker Has Also Collaborated with Hans- Erik Eriksson on Business Modeling with UML: Business Practices at Work
UML™ 2 Toolkit Hans-Erik Eriksson Magnus Penker Brian Lyons David Fado UML™ 2 Toolkit UML™ 2 Toolkit Hans-Erik Eriksson Magnus Penker Brian Lyons David Fado Publisher: Joe Wikert Executive Editor: Bob Elliott Development Editor: Kevin Kent Editorial Manager: Kathryn Malm Production Editor: Pamela Hanley Permissions Editors: Carmen Krikorian, Laura Moss Media Development Specialist: Travis Silvers Text Design & Composition: Wiley Composition Services Copyright 2004 by Hans-Erik Eriksson, Magnus Penker, Brian Lyons, and David Fado. All rights reserved. Published by Wiley Publishing, Inc., Indianapolis, Indiana Published simultaneously in Canada No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, scanning, or otherwise, except as permitted under Section 107 or 108 of the 1976 United States Copyright Act, without either the prior written permission of the Publisher, or authorization through payment of the appropriate per-copy fee to the Copyright Clearance Center, Inc., 222 Rose- wood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923, (978) 750-8400, fax (978) 646-8700. Requests to the Pub- lisher for permission should be addressed to the Legal Department, Wiley Publishing, Inc., 10475 Crosspoint Blvd., Indianapolis, IN 46256, (317) 572-3447, fax (317) 572-4447, E-mail: [email protected]. Limit of Liability/Disclaimer of Warranty: While the publisher and author have used their best efforts in preparing this book, they make no representations or warranties with respect to the accuracy or completeness of the contents of this book and specifically disclaim any implied warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose. -
UML Profile for Communicating Systems a New UML Profile for the Specification and Description of Internet Communication and Signaling Protocols
UML Profile for Communicating Systems A New UML Profile for the Specification and Description of Internet Communication and Signaling Protocols Dissertation zur Erlangung des Doktorgrades der Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftlichen Fakultäten der Georg-August-Universität zu Göttingen vorgelegt von Constantin Werner aus Salzgitter-Bad Göttingen 2006 D7 Referent: Prof. Dr. Dieter Hogrefe Korreferent: Prof. Dr. Jens Grabowski Tag der mündlichen Prüfung: 30.10.2006 ii Abstract This thesis presents a new Unified Modeling Language 2 (UML) profile for communicating systems. It is developed for the unambiguous, executable specification and description of communication and signaling protocols for the Internet. This profile allows to analyze, simulate and validate a communication protocol specification in the UML before its implementation. This profile is driven by the experience and intelligibility of the Specification and Description Language (SDL) for telecommunication protocol engineering. However, as shown in this thesis, SDL is not optimally suited for specifying communication protocols for the Internet due to their diverse nature. Therefore, this profile features new high-level language concepts rendering the specification and description of Internet protocols more intuitively while abstracting from concrete implementation issues. Due to its support of several concrete notations, this profile is designed to work with a number of UML compliant modeling tools. In contrast to other proposals, this profile binds the informal UML semantics with many semantic variation points by defining formal constraints for the profile definition and providing a mapping specification to SDL by the Object Constraint Language. In addition, the profile incorporates extension points to enable mappings to many formal description languages including SDL. To demonstrate the usability of the profile, a case study of a concrete Internet signaling protocol is presented. -
A Dynamic Analysis Tool for Textually Modeled State Machines Using Umple
UmpleRun: a Dynamic Analysis Tool for Textually Modeled State Machines using Umple Hamoud Aljamaan, Timothy Lethbridge, Miguel Garzón, Andrew Forward School of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science University of Ottawa Ottawa, Canada [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] Lethbridge.book Page 299 Tuesday, November 16, 2004 12:22 PM Abstract— In this paper, we present a tool named UmpleRun 4 demonstrates the tool usage. Subsequent sections walk that allows modelers to run the textually specified state machines through an example of instrumenting our example system and under analysis with an execution scenario to validate the model's performing dynamic analysis. dynamic behavior. In addition, trace specification will output Section 8.2 State diagrams 299 execution traces that contain model construct links. This will permit analysis of behavior at the model level. II. EXAMPLE CAR TRANSMISSION MODEL TO BE EXECUTED In this section, we will present the car transmission model Keywords— UmpleRun; Umple; UML; MOTL; stateNested machine; substates that and will guard be conditions our motivating example through this paper. It will execution trace; analysis Aalso state be diagram used to can explain be nested Umple inside and a state.MOTL The syntax. states of The the innerCar diagram are calledtransmission substates model. was inspired by a similar model in I. INTRODUCTION LethbridgeFigure 8.18 and shows Lagani a stateère’s diagram book [4] of. anThe automatic model consists transmission; of at the top one class with car transmission behavior captured by the state Umple [1,2] is a model-oriented programming language level this has three states: ‘Neutral’, ‘Reverse’ and a driving state, which is not machine shown in Fig. -
Complete Code Generation from UML State Machine
Complete Code Generation from UML State Machine Van Cam Pham, Ansgar Radermacher, Sebastien´ Gerard´ and Shuai Li CEA, LIST, Laboratory of Model Driven Engineering for Embedded Systems, P.C. 174, Gif-sur-Yvette, 91191, France Keywords: UML State Machine, Code Generation, Semantics-conformance, Efficiency, Events, C++. Abstract: An event-driven architecture is a useful way to design and implement complex systems. The UML State Machine and its visualizations are a powerful means to the modeling of the logical behavior of such an archi- tecture. In Model Driven Engineering, executable code can be automatically generated from state machines. However, existing generation approaches and tools from UML State Machines are still limited to simple cases, especially when considering concurrency and pseudo states such as history, junction, and event types. This paper provides a pattern and tool for complete and efficient code generation approach from UML State Ma- chine. It extends IF-ELSE-SWITCH constructions of programming languages with concurrency support. The code generated with our approach has been executed with a set of state-machine examples that are part of a test-suite described in the recent OMG standard Precise Semantics Of State Machine. The traced execution results comply with the standard and are a good hint that the execution is semantically correct. The generated code is also efficient: it supports multi-thread-based concurrency, and the (static and dynamic) efficiency of generated code is improved compared to considered approaches. 1 INTRODUCTION Completeness: Existing tools and approaches mainly focus on the sequential aspect while the concurrency The UML State Machine (USM) (Specification and of state machines is limitedly supported. -
State and Activity Diagrams in UML Last Revised December 4, 2018 Objectives: 1
CPS122 Lecture: State and Activity Diagrams in UML last revised December 4, 2018 Objectives: 1. To show how to create and read State Diagrams 2. To introduce UML Activity Diagrams Materials: 1. Answers to quick check questions from chapter 7 plus chapter 8 a, b, g 2. Demonstration of “Racers” program 3. Handout and Projectable on Web: State diagram for Session 4. Handout: Code for Session class performSession() method 5. Projectable of text figures 7.12, 7.13 6. Handout of Activity diagram for Racers 7. Projectable of text figure 8.10 I. Introduction A.Go over quick check questions chapter 7 + chapter 8 a, b, g only B. We have drawn a distinction between the static aspects of a system and its dynamic aspects. The static aspects of a system have to do with its component parts and how they are related to one another; the dynamic aspects of a system have to do with how the components interact with one another and/or change state internally over time. C. We have been looking at one aspect of the dynamic behavior of a system - the way various objects interact to carry out the various use cases. We have looked at two ways of describing this: 1. Sequence diagrams 2. Communication diagrams D.We now want to look two additional aspects of dynamic behavior !1 1. How an individual object changes state internally over time. a) Example: As part of doing the domain analysis of a traffic light system, it is important to note that individual signals go through a series of states in a prescribed order - modeled by the following state diagram: ! (Note: this is correct for the US but not for all countries in the world!) An important “business rule” that any traffic light system must obey is that the light must be yellow for a certain minimum period of time (related to vehicle speed in the intersection) between displaying green and displaying red. -
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. -
Verification of UML State Diagrams Using a Model Checker
Verification of UML State Diagrams using a Model Checker A Manuscript Submitted to the Department of Computer Science and the Faculty of the University of Wisconsin-La Crosse La Crosse, Wisconsin by Yiwei Zou in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Software Engineering August, 2013 Verification of UML State Diagrams using a Model Checker By Yiwei Zou We recommend acceptance of this manuscript in partial fulfillment of this candidates re- quirements for the degree of Master of Software Engineering in Computer Science. The candidate has completed the oral examination requirement of the capstone project for the degree. Dr.Kasi Periyasamy Date Examination Committee Chairperson Dr.Mao Zheng Date Examination Committee Member Dr.Tom Gendreau Date Examination Committee Member ii Abstract Zou, Yiwei, Verification of UML State Diagrams using a Model Checker, Master of Software Engineering, August 2013. (Advisor: Kasi Periyasamy, Ph.D). This manuscript describes the process of verifying the UML state diagrams by using model checker. A UML state diagram describes the behavior of an object which includes a sequence of states that the object visits during its lifetime. Verification of UML state dia- gram is important because if one state diagram is incorrect, the object’s behavior will not be displayed correctly which leads to incorrect coding and eventually may lead to the possible failure of the system. However, it is hard to verify UML state diagram without the aid of other tools. Therefore, model checker is introduced to verify the UML state diagram. Since model checkers use different syntax, one needs to convert state diagrams from UML tools to the syntax used by the model checker. -
Mutating UML State Machine Behavior with Semantic Mutation Operators
Mutating UML State Machine Behavior with Semantic Mutation Operators Anna Derezinska a and Łukasz Zaremba Institute of Computer Science, Warsaw University of Technology, Nowowiejska 15/19, Warsaw, Poland Keywords: Model-Driven Software Development, State Machine, Code Generation, Mutation Testing, Framework for Executable UML (FXU), C#. Abstract: In Model-Driven Software Development (MDSD), an application can be built using classes and their state machines as source models. The final application can be tested as any source code. In this paper, we discuss a specific approach to mutation testing in which modifications relate to different variants of behavioural features modelled by UML state machines, while testing deals with standard executions of the final application against its test cases. We have proposed several mutation operators aimed at mutating behaviour of UML state machines. The operators take into account event processing, time management, behaviour of complex states with orthogonal regions, and usage of history pseudostates. Different possible semantic interpretations are associated with each operator. The operators have been implemented in the Framework for eXecutable UML (FXU). The framework, that supports code generation from UML classes and state machines and building target C# applications, has been extended to realize mutation testing with use of multiple libraries. The semantic mutation operators have been verified in some MDSD experiments. 1 INTRODUCTION satisfying selected criteria (Jia and Harman, 2011). In a standard mutation testing process, syntactic Model-Driven Software Development (MDSD) can changes, so-called mutations, are injected into a be aimed at production of high quality software in a source code and supposed to be detected by test cases. -
Mastering the Unified Modeling Language -- State Transition Diagrams
Mastering the Unified Modeling Language -- State Transition Diagrams -- © Josef Schiefer, IBM Watson Outline nested state diagrams States & Transitions Combinatorial Explosion concurrent state machines Solution: Statecharts Statecharts messages ... UML State Diagrams 12/7/2000 - v2 states Stubbed Transitions transitions Synchronization events Concurrency vs. Orthogonality Diagram Elements UML State Machines actions History Indicator guards Sending Messages conditions Compound Transitions UML State Machines 1 Introduction to State Diagrams Interaction diagrams are very good for communication – between clients and designers – between designers and other designers – between designers and implementors But they are not part of the constructive core – Constructive core means that part from which an actual implementation could be generated The constructive core of the UML is – class diagrams (for the static part) – state diagrams (for the dynamic part) State diagrams can bescribe very complex dynamic behavior UML State Machines Elements of State Diagrams The basic elements of state diagrams are – states – the state in which the object finds itself at any moment – transitions – take the object from one state to another – events – cause the transition from one state to another – actions – take place as a result of a transition In the UML, many other extensions have been added, such as: – generalization/Inheritance among events (i.e. a mouse click and keyboard input as subclasses of user interface events) – hierarchical diagrams for managing complexity (from StateCharts) – guards – conditions on transitions State Diagrams should only be used for objects with significant dynamic behavior UML State Machines 2 Types of Events ChangeEvent (i.e.: when(x>y)) – A change event models an event that occurs when an explicit boolean expression becomes true as a result of a change in value of one or more attributes or associations.