As UML 2.0 is evolving into a family of languages with individually specified semantics, there is an increasing need for automated and provenly correct model transformations that (i) assure the integration of local views (different diagrams) of the system into a consistent global view, and, (ii) provide a well–founded mapping from UML models to different semantic domains (Petri nets, Kripke automaton, process algebras, etc.) for formal analysis purposes as foreseen, for instance, in submissions for the OMG RFP for Schedulability, Performance and Time. However, such transformations into different semantic domains typically require the deep understanding of the underlying mathematics, which hinders the use of formal specification techniques in industrial applications. In the paper, we propose a multilevel metamodeling technique with precise static and dynamic semantics (based on a refinement calculus and graph transformation) where the structure and operational semantics of mathematical models can be defined in a UML notation without cumbersome mathematical formulae.
|
927
|
The model checker SPIN
– Holzmann
- 1997
|
|
631
|
The Unified Modeling Language, Reference Manual
– Rumbaugh, Jacobson, et al.
- 1999
|
|
214
|
Handbook of Graph Grammars and Computing by Graph Transformation
– Rozenberg, ed
|
|
83
|
Graph processes
– Corradini, Montanari, et al.
- 1996
|
|
66
|
UML 2001: A Standardization Odyssey
– KOBRYN
|
|
63
|
The generic modeling environment
– Ledeczi, Maroti, et al.
- 2001
|
|
59
|
vUML: A tool for verifying UML models
– Lilius, Paltor
- 1999
|
|
41
|
Designing the automatic transformation of visual languages
– Varró, Varró, et al.
|
|
39
|
Web Consortium
– Wide
|
|
35
|
A static analysis technique for graph transformation systems
– Baldan, Corradini, et al.
- 2001
|
|
34
|
The Essence of Multilevel Metamodeling
– Atkinson, Kühne
- 2001
|
|
33
|
Dynamic meta modeling: A graphical approach to the operational semantics of behavioral diagrams in UML
– Engels, Hausmann, et al.
- 2000
|
|
33
|
The Metamodelling Language Calculus: Foundation Semantics for UML
– Clark, Evans, et al.
- 2001
|
|
30
|
Model checking guided abstraction and analysis
– Saidi
- 2000
|
|
30
|
Systematic design of program transformation frameworks by abstract interpretation
– Cousot, Cousot
- 2002
|
|
29
|
An Overview of SAL
– Bensalem, Ganesh, et al.
- 2000
|
|
27
|
D.: VIATRA Visual Automated Transformations for Formal Verification and Validation of UML Models
– Csertán, Huszerl, et al.
- 2002
|
|
26
|
Efficient Parsing of Visual Languages based on Critical Pair Analysis and Contextual Layered Graph Transformation
– Bottoni, Schürr, et al.
- 2000
|
|
26
|
Towards Automatic Translation of UML Models into Semantic Domains
– Heckel, Küster, et al.
- 2002
|
|
25
|
Rule-based specification of behavioral consistency based on the UML meta-model
– Engels, Heckel, et al.
- 2001
|
|
25
|
Tool demonstration: The fujaba environment
– Nickel, Niere, et al.
- 2000
|
|
22
|
Confluence of typed attributed graph transformation systems
– Heckel, Küster, et al.
- 2002
|
|
21
|
A formal semantics of UML Statecharts by model transition systems
– Varró
- 2002
|
|
21
|
Towards common exchange formats for graphs and graph transformation systems
– Taentzer
- 2001
|
|
20
|
Approximating the behaviour of graph transformation systems
– Baldan, König
- 2002
|
|
20
|
Towards symbolic analysis of visual modelling languages
– Varró
- 2002
|
|
17
|
Consistency Checking and Visualization of OCL Constraints
– Bottoni, Koch, et al.
- 2000
|
|
17
|
A Formal Semantics of UML State Machines Based on Structured Graph Transformation
– Kuske
- 2001
|
|
15
|
Computer aided multi-paradigm modelling to process petri-nets and statecharts
– Lara, Vangheluwe
- 2002
|
|
15
|
Compositional verification of reactive systems specified by graph transformation
– Heckel
- 1998
|
|
15
|
Automatic verification of UML statechart diagrams using the SPIN model-checker
– Latella, Majzik, et al.
- 1999
|
|
15
|
Model Translation: A UML-based specification technique and active implementation approach
– Akehurst
- 2000
|
|
12
|
Checking general safety criteria on UML statecharts
– Pap, Majzik, et al.
- 2001
|
|
12
|
Transformations and software modeling languages: Automating transformations in UML
– Whittle
- 2002
|
|
11
|
An automatic verification tool for UML
– Compton, Gurevich, et al.
- 2000
|
|
11
|
Dependability analysis in the early phases of UML based system design
– Bondavalli, Cin, et al.
|
|
11
|
Formal Specification of Object-Oriented Meta-Modelling
– Övergaard
- 2000
|
|
9
|
Automatic program generation for and by model transformation systems
– Varró
- 2002
|
|
9
|
Quantitative analysis of dependability critical systems based on UML statechart models
– Huszerl, Majzik
- 2000
|
|
8
|
Consistency-preserving model evolution through transformations
– Engels, Heckel, et al.
- 2002
|
|
8
|
Integrating the specification techniques of graph transformation and temporal logic
– Heckel, Ehrig, et al.
- 1997
|
|
8
|
Metamodeling mathematics: A precise and visual framework for describing semantics domains of UML models
– Varró, Pataricza
- 2002
|
|
8
|
Mapping between levels in the metamodel architecture
– Alvarez, Evans, et al.
- 2001
|
|
8
|
Automatic dependability analyses for supporting design decisions in UML
– Bondavalli, Majzik, et al.
- 1999
|
|
7
|
From the general resource model to a general fault modeling paradigm
– Pataricza
- 2002
|
|
6
|
Defining a Basis for Metamodel Driven Model Migration
– Sprinkle, Karsai
- 2002
|
|
5
|
Semi-decisions in the validation of dependable systems
– Pataricza
- 2001
|
|
4
|
Automatic transformation of UML models for system verification
– Varró, Gyapay, et al.
- 2001
|
|
2
|
pushout approach and comparison with double pushout approach
– Ehrig, Heckel, et al.
- 1997
|
|
2
|
Rule invariants in graph transformation systems for analyzing safety-critical systems
– Padberg, Enders
- 2002
|
