A methodology for specifying and analyzing consistency of object-oriented behavioral models

ABSTRACT

Object-oriented modeling favors the modeling of object behavior from different viewpoints and the successive refinement of behavioral models in the development process. This gives rise to consistency problems of behavioral models. The absence of a formal semantics for UML models and the numerous possibilities of employing behavioral models within the development process lead to the rise of a number of different consistency notions. In this paper, we discuss the issue of consistency of behavioral models in the UML and present a general methodology how consistency problems can be dealt with. According to the methodology, those aspects of the models relevant to the consistency are mapped to a semantic domain in which precise consistency tests can be formulated. The choice of the semantic domain and the definition of consistency conditions can be used to construct different consistency notions. We show the applicability of our methodology by giving an example of a concrete consistency problem of concurrent object-oriented models.

REFERENCES

• 1: Robert Allen , David Garlan, A formal basis for architectural connection, ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology (TOSEM), v.6 n.3, p.213-249, July 1997 [doi>10.1145/258077.258078]
• 2: Eerke Boiten , Howard Bowman , John Derrick , Peter Linington , Maarten Steen, Viewpoint consistency in ODP, Computer Networks: The International Journal of Computer and Telecommunications Networking, v.34 n.3, p.503-537, Sept. 2000 [doi>10.1016/S1389-1286(00)00114-6]
• 3: Eerke A. Boiten , Howard Bowman , John Derrick , Maarten Steen, Viewpoint Consistency in Z and LOTOS: A Case Study, Proceedings of the 4th International Symposium of Formal Methods Europe on Industrial Applications and Strengthened Foundations of Formal Methods, p.644-664, September 15-19, 1997
• 4: Betty H. C. Cheng , Laura A. Campbell , Enoch Y. Wang, Enabling Automated Analysis through the Formalization of Object-Oriented Modeling Diagrams, Proceedings of the 2000 International Conference on Dependable Systems and Networks (formerly FTCS-30 and DCCA-8), p.305, June 25-28, 2000
• 5: Gregor Engels , Luuk Groenewegen, Object-oriented modeling: a roadmap, Proceedings of the Conference on The Future of Software Engineering, p.103-116, June 04-11, 2000, Limerick, Ireland [doi>10.1145/336512.336541]
• 6: G. Engels, L. Groenewegen, and J. M. K. uster . Modelling concurrent behaviour through consistent statechart views. In G. Reggio, A. Knapp, B. Rumpe, B. Selic, and R. Wieringa, editors, Proceedings of the Workshop Dynamic Behaviour in UML Models: Semantic Questions, pages 44-49. LMU M. unchen, TR-0006, Oct. 2000.
• 7: Gregor Engels , Reiko Heckel , Jochen Malte Küster, Rule-Based Specification of Behavioral Consistency Based on the UML Meta-model, Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on The Unified Modeling Language, Modeling Languages, Concepts, and Tools, p.272-286, October 01-05, 2001
• 8: Anthony Finkelstein , Dov M. Gabbay , Anthony Hunter , Jeff Kramer , Bashar Nuseibeh, Inconsistency Handling in Multi-Perspective Specifications, Proceedings of the 4th European Software Engineering Conference on Software Engineering, p.84-99, September 13-17, 1993
• 9: Formal Systems Europe (Ltd). Failures-Divergence-Refinement: FDR2 User Manual, 1997.
• 10: Pascal Fradet , Daniel Le Métayer , Michaël Périn, Consistency checking for multiple view software architectures, Proceedings of the 7th European software engineering conference held jointly with the 7th ACM SIGSOFT international symposium on Foundations of software engineering, p.410-428, September 06-10, 1999, Toulouse, France
• 11: C. Ghezzi and B. A. Nuseibeh. Special Issue on Managing Inconsistency in Software Development (1). IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 24(11), Nov. 1998.
• 12: C. Ghezzi and B. A. Nuseibeh. Special Issue on Managing Inconsistency in Software Development (2). IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 25(11), Nov. 1999.
• 13: J.-J. Hiemer. Statecharts in CSP: Ein Prozessmodell in CSP zur Analyse von STATEMATE-Statecharts. DrKovac Verlag, 1999.
• 14: C. A. R. Hoare, Communicating sequential processes, Prentice-Hall, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ, 1985
• 15: Consistent Design of Embedded Real-Time Systems with UML-RT, Proceedings of the Fourth International Symposium on Object-Oriented Real-Time Distributed Computing, p.31, May 02-04, 2001
• 16: X. Li and J. Lilius. Timing analysis of UML sequence diagrams. In R. France and B. Rumpe, editors, UML'99 - The Unified Modeling Language. Beyond the Standard. Second International Conference, Fort Collins, CO, USA, October 28-30. 1999, Proceedings, volume 1723 of LNCS, pages 661-674. Springer, 1999.
• 17: Ana M. D. Moreira , Robert G. Clark, Combining Object-Oriented Analysis and Formal Description Techniques, Proceedings of the 8th European Conference on Object-Oriented Programming, p.344-364, July 04-08, 1994
• 18: Object Modeling Group. Unified Modelling Language Specification, version 1.3, June 1999. URL: uml.shl.com:80/docs/UML1.3/99-06-08.pdf.
• 19: James Rumbaugh , Michael Blaha , William Premerlani , Frederick Eddy , William Lorensen, Object-oriented modeling and design, Prentice-Hall, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ, 1991
• 20: B. Rumpe , M. Schoenmakers , A. Radermacher , A. Schürr, UML + ROOM as a Standard ADL?, Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Engineering of Complex Computer Systems, p.43, October 18-22, 1999
• 21: Bran Selic, Using UML for Modeling Complex Real-Time Systems, Proceedings of the ACM SIGPLAN Workshop on Languages, Compilers, and Tools for Embedded Systems, p.250-260, June 01, 1998
• 22: George Spanoudakis , Anthony Finkelstein , David Till, Overlaps in Requirements Engineering, Automated Software Engineering, v.6 n.2, p.171-198, April 1999 [doi>10.1023/A:1008718614166]
• 23: M. von der Beeck. Behaviour specifications: Equivalence and refinement notions. In H. Giese and S. Phillippi, editors, Visuelle Verhaltensmodellierung verteilter und nebenl. aufiger Software- Systeme, 8. Workshop des Arbeitskreises GROOM der GI Fachgruppe 2.1.9 Objektorientierte Software-Entwicklung, 13.-14. November 2000, Universit. at M. unster. Techreport 24/00-I.

INDEX TERMS

Primary Classification:
  D. Software
  D.2 SOFTWARE ENGINEERING
      D.2.2 Design Tools and Techniques
          Subjects: Object-oriented design methods

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

          Nouns: UML

General Terms:
Design, Languages, Verification

Keywords:
CSP, UML, behavioral consistency, object-oriented modeling