Automating component-based system assembly

ABSTRACT

One of the major challenges in the development of large component-based software systems is the system assembly problem: from a sea of available components, which should be selected and how should they be connected, integrated, and assembled so that the overall system requirements are satisfied? We present a powerful framework for automatically solving the system assembly problem directly from system requirements. Our framework includes an expressive language for declaratively describing system-level requirements, including component interfaces and dependencies, resource requirements, safety properties, objective functions, and various types of constraints. We show how to automatically solve system assembly problems using verification technology that takes advantage of current advances in Boolean satisfiability methods. We have implemented our techniques in the CoBaSA tool (Component-Based System Assembly), and we have successfully applied it to several large-scale industrial examples.

REFERENCES

• 1: C. A. 651. Arinc report 651, draft 9. Technical Report 91-207/SAI-435, Airlines Electronic Engineering Committee, September 1991.
• 2: F. Aloul, A. Ramani, I. Markov, and K. Sakallah. PBS: A backtrack search pseudo-boolean solver. In Symposium on the Theory and Applications of Satisfiability Testing (SAT), 2002.
• 3: T. Asikainen, T. Männistö, and T. Soininen. Using a configurator for modelling and configuring software product lines based on feature models. In Workshop on Software Variability Management for Product Derivation, Software Product Line Conference (SPLC3), 2004.
• 4: Len Bass , Paul Clements , Rick Kazman, Software architecture in practice, Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc., Boston, MA, 1998
• 5: Don Batory , Bart J. Geraci, Composition Validation and Subjectivity in GenVoca Generators, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, v.23 n.2, p.67-82, February 1997 [doi>10.1109/32.585497]
• 6: Don Batory , Sean O'Malley, The design and implementation of hierarchical software systems with reusable components, ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology (TOSEM), v.1 n.4, p.355-398, Oct. 1992 [doi>10.1145/136586.136587]
• 7: Don Batory , Vivek Singhal , Jeff Thomas , Sankar Dasari , Bart Geraci , Marty Sirkin, The GenVoca Model of Software-System Generators, IEEE Software, v.11 n.5, p.89-94, September 1994 [doi>10.1109/52.311067]
• 8: D. S. Batory. Feature models, grammars, and propositional formulas. In Software Product Lines, SPLC 2005, volume 3714 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 7--20. Springer, 2005.
• 9: D. Benavides, P. T. Martín-Arroyo, and A. R. Cortés. Automated reasoning on feature models. In CAiSE, volume 3520 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 491--503. Springer, 2005.
• 10: A. Bertolino and R. Mirandola. Modeling and analysis of non-functional properties in component-based systems. In TACoS 2003: Proc. International Workshop on Test and Analysis of Component Based Systems, volume 82 of Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science, April 2003.
• 11: F. Cao, B. R. Bryant, C. C. Burt, R. R. Raje, A. M. Olson, and M. Auguston. A component assembly approach based on aspect-oriented generative domain modeling. Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer
• 12: John Cheesman , John Daniels, UML components: a simple process for specifying component-based software, Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc., Boston, MA, 2000
• 13: I. Crnkovic. Component-based software engineering - new challenges in software development. Software Focus, December 2001.
• 14: Ivica Crnkovic , Magnus Larsson, Building Reliable Component-Based Software Systems, Artech House, Inc., Norwood, MA, 2002
• 15: Ivica Crnkovic , Heinz W. Schmidt , Judith Stafford , Kurt Wallnau, Guest editorial: automated component-based software engineering, Journal of Systems and Software, v.74 n.1, p.1-3, January 2005 [doi>10.1016/j.jss.2003.11.016]
• 16: George T. Heineman , William T. Councill, Component-based software engineering: putting the pieces together, Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc., Boston, MA, 2001
• 17: P. Inverardi and M. Tivoli. Software architecture for correct components assembly. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Volume 2804, Nov 2003.
• 18: S. Lacour, C. Perez, and T. Priol. A software architecture for automatic deployment of CORBA components using grid technologies. In In Proceedings of the 1st Franco-phone Conference On Software Deployment and (Re)Configuration (DECOR 2004), Oct. 2004.
• 19: F. Martin and C. Fraboul. Modeling and simulation of integrated modular avionics. In Proceedings of the Sixth Euromicro Workshop on Parallel and Distributed Processing, 1998. PDP '98., pages 102--110, 1998.
• 20: Nenad Medvidovic , Richard N. Taylor, A Classification and Comparison Framework for Software Architecture Description Languages, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, v.26 n.1, p.70-93, January 2000 [doi>10.1109/32.825767]
• 21: M. Mikic-Rakic, S. Malek, N. Beckman, and N. Medvidovic. A tailorable environment for assessing the quality of deployment architectures in highly distributed settings. In Component Deployment, Second International Working Conference, CD 2004, volume 3083 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 1--17. Springer, 2004.
• 22: S. Mittal and F. Frayman. Towards a generic model of configuraton tasks. In IJCAI, pages 1395--1401, 1989.
• 23: Object Management Group (OMG). Response to the UML 2.0 OCL RfP Revised Submission, Version 1.6, 2003. http://www.omg.org/docs/ad/03-01-07.pdf.
• 24: Dewayne E. Perry , Alexander L. Wolf, Foundations for the study of software architecture, ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes, v.17 n.4, p.40-52, Oct. 1992 [doi>10.1145/141874.141884]
• 25: P. J. Prisaznuk. Integrated modular avionics. In Proceedings of the IEEE 1992 National Aerospace and Electronics Conference (NAECON 1992), volume 1, pages 39--45, 1992.
• 26: Rational Partners, Object Management Group. UML Notation Guide, Sept. 1997. http://www.omg.org/docs/ad/97-08-04.pdf.
• 27: Rational Partners, Object Management Group. UML Semantics, Sept. 1997. http://www.omg.org/docs/ad/97-08-04.pdf.
• 28: Miguel A. Sánchez-Puebla , Jesús Carretero, A new approach for distributed computing in avionics systems, Proceedings of the 1st international symposium on Information and communication technologies, September 24-26, 2003, Dublin, Ireland
• 29: Mary Shaw , Robert DeLine , Daniel V. Klein , Theodore L. Ross , David M. Young , Gregory Zelesnik, Abstractions for Software Architecture and Tools to Support Them, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, v.21 n.4, p.314-335, April 1995 [doi>10.1109/32.385970]
• 30: Timo Soininen , Juha Tiihonen , Tomi Männistö , Reijo Sulonen, Towards a general ontology of configuration, Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing, v.12 n.4, p.357-372, September 1998 [doi>10.1017/S0890060498124083]
• 31: Clemens Szyperski, Component Software: Beyond Object-Oriented Programming, Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc., Boston, MA, 2002
• 32: Kurt Wallnau , Scott A. Hissam , Robert C. Seacord, Building systems from commerical components, Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc., Boston, MA, 2001
• 33: K. Wallnau, J. Stafford, S. Hissam, and M. Klein. On the relationship of software architecture to software component technology. In Proceedings of the 6th ECOOP Workshop on Component-Oriented Programming, 2001.
• 34: R. Warrilow. The avionics platform, 2004. See URL www.smiths-aerospace.com/Press/TechPapers/.
• 35: Lintao Zhang , Sharad Malik, The Quest for Efficient Boolean Satisfiability Solvers, Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Automated Deduction, p.295-313, July 27-30, 2002

INDEX TERMS

Primary Classification:
  D. Software
  D.2 SOFTWARE ENGINEERING
        D.2.11 Software Architectures

General Terms:
Design

Keywords:
component-based software development, integrated modular avionics, pseudo-boolean satisfiability, system assembly problem