Towards a UML virtual machine: implementing an interpreter for UML 2 actions and activities

ABSTRACT

An interpreter for UML 2 actions and activities is presented. It is based on two novel features in UML 2: the three-layer semantics architecture and the new token offer semantics for activities, which is intended to generalize the token flow semantics of Petri nets. The interpreter offers an array of analysis capabilities, ranging from random execution to reachability properties and assertion and deadlock checking. The design of the interpreter makes it suitable as the basis for a more comprehensive UML virtual machine.

REFERENCES

• 1: A UML-based Specification Environment. http://www.db.informatik.unibremen.de/projects/USE/, 2007. Web page of the USE project, from the University of Bremen.
• 2: C. Bock. UML 2 activity and action models, part 4: Object nodes. Journal of Object Technology, 3(1):27--41, 2004.
• 3: C. Bock. "re: Token/offer semantics for activities". E-mail to J. Dingel, Apr 25, 2008.
• 4: M. Broy, M. V. Cengarle, and B. Rumpe. Semantics of UML -- Towards a System Model for UML: The Structural Data Model. Tech. Report TUM-I0612, TUM, 2006.
• 5: M. Broy, M. V. Cengarle, and B. Rumpe. Semantics of UML -- Towards a System Model for UML: The Control Model. Tech. Report TUM-I0710, TUM, 2007.
• 6: M. Broy, M. V. Cengarle, and B. Rumpe. Semantics of UML -- Towards a System Model for UML: The State Machine Model. Tech. Report TUM-I0711, TUM, 2007.
• 7: M. V. Cengarle. System model for UML -- the interactions case. In Methods for Modelling Software Systems (MMOSS), number 06351 in Dagstuhl Seminar Proceedings, 2007.
• 8: M. V. Cengarle, H. Grönniger, and B. Rumpe. System model semantics of statecharts. Technical Report (to appear), Technische Universität Braunschweig, 2008.
• 9: Patrick Cousot, Abstract interpretation, ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR), v.28 n.2, p.324-328, June 1996 [doi>10.1145/234528.234740]
• 10: Michelle L. Crane , Juergen Dingel, Towards a Formal Account of a Foundational Subset for Executable UML Models, Proceedings of the 11th international conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems, September 28-October 03, 2008, Toulouse, France [doi>10.1007/978-3-540-87875-9_47]
• 11: Dolev Dotan , Andrei Kirshin, Debugging and testing behavioral UML models, Companion to the 22nd ACM SIGPLAN conference on Object oriented programming systems and applications companion, October 21-25, 2007, Montreal, Quebec, Canada [doi>10.1145/1297846.1297915]
• 12: G. Engels, C. Soltenborn, and H. Wehrheim. Analysis of UML activities using dynamic meta modeling. In 9th International Conference on Formal Methods for Open Object-Based Distributed Systems (FMOODS), volume 4468 of LNCS, pages 76--90. Springer, 2007.
• 13: Rik Eshuis, Symbolic model checking of UML activity diagrams, ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology (TOSEM), v.15 n.1, p.1-38, January 2006 [doi>10.1145/1125808.1125809]
• 14: D. Flater, P. A. Martin, and M. L. Crane. Rendering UML activity diagrams as human-readable text. Submitted.
• 15: D. Flater, P. A. Martin, and M. L. Crane. Rendering UML activity diagrams as human-readable text. Technical Report NISTIR 7469, National Institute of Standards and Technology, November 2007.
• 16: B. Gajanovic and B. Rumpe. ALICE: An advanced logic for interactive component engineering. In 4th International Verification Workshop (Verify'07), 2007.
• 17: Stephen J. Mellor , Marc Balcer , Ivar Jacoboson, Executable UML: A Foundation for Model-Driven Architectures, Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc., Boston, MA, 2002
• 18: Object Management Group. Semantics of a foundational subset for executable UML models. Request for Proposal ad/2005-04-02, Apr 2005.
• 19: Object Management Group. Unified Modeling Language: Superstructure version 2.1. Document ptc/06-01-02, Jan 2006.
• 20: Chris Raistrick , Paul Francis , John Wright, Model Driven Architecture with Executable UML(TM), Cambridge University Press, New York, NY, 2004
• 21: James Rumbaugh , Ivar Jacobson , Grady Booch, The Unified Modeling Language reference manual, Addison-Wesley Longman Ltd., Essex, UK, 1998
• 22: Nick Russell , Wil M. P. van der Aalst , Arthur H. M. ter Hofstede , Petia Wohed, On the suitability of UML 2.0 activity diagrams for business process modelling, Proceedings of the 3rd Asia-Pacific conference on Conceptual modelling, p.95-104, January 16-19, 2006, Hobart, Australia
• 23: S. Sarstedt, J. Kohlmeyer, A. Raschke, M. Schneiderhan, and D. Gessenharter. ActiveChartsIDE. Poster at ECMDA 2005, Nov 2005.
• 24: Tim Schattkowsky , Alexander Forster, On the Pitfalls of UML 2 Activity Modeling, Proceedings of the International Workshop on Modeling in Software Engineering, p.8, May 20-26, 2007 [doi>10.1109/MISE.2007.12]
• 25: B. Selic. On the semantic foundations of standard UML 2.0. In M. Bernardo and F. Corradini, editors, Formal Methods for the Design of Real-Time Systems (SFMRT 2004), volume 3185 of LNCS, pages 181--199. Springer, 2004.
• 26: B. Selic, UML 2: a model-driven development tool, IBM Systems Journal, v.45 n.3, p.607-620, July 2006
• 27: H. Störrle and J. Hausmann. Towards a formal semantics of UML 2.0 activities. In Software Engineering, volume 64 of LNI, pages 117--128, 2005.
• 28: Wil M. P. van der Aalst, Verification of Workflow Nets, Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Application and Theory of Petri Nets, p.407-426, June 23-27, 1997
• 29: Valdis Vitolins , Audris Kalnins, Semantics of UML 2.0 Activity Diagram for Business Modeling by Means of Virtual Machine, Proceedings of the Ninth IEEE International EDOC Enterprise Computing Conference, p.181-194, September 19-23, 2005 [doi>10.1109/EDOC.2005.29]

INDEX TERMS

Primary Classification:
  D. Software
  D.3 PROGRAMMING LANGUAGES
      D.3.2 Language Classifications

          Nouns: UML

Additional Classification:
  D. Software
  D.2 SOFTWARE ENGINEERING
      D.2.1 Requirements/Specifications
          Subjects: Languages

General Terms:
Languages