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

Proceedings of the ACM SIGSOFT Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering

Volumn , Issue , 2001, Pages 186-195

  Engels, Gregor ^a   Küster, Jochen M ^a   Heckel, Reiko ^a   Groenewegen, Luuk ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PADERBORN   (Germany)

^b LEIDEN UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Behavioral Consistency; CSP; Object Oriented Modeling; UML

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER PROGRAMMING LANGUAGES; COMPUTER SIMULATION; COMPUTER SYSTEM RECOVERY; PROBLEM SOLVING; SEMANTICS; SOFTWARE ENGINEERING;

UNIFIED MODELING LANGUAGE (UML);

OBJECT ORIENTED PROGRAMMING;

EID: 0035783443     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1145/503209.503235     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (23)

1. R. Allen and D. Garlan. A formal basis for architectural connection. ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology, 6(3):213-49, July 1997.
2. E. Boiten, H. Bowman, J. Derrick, P. Linington, and M. Steen. Viewpoint consistency in ODP. Computer Networks, 34(3):503-537, August 2000.
3. E. Boiten, H. Bowman, J. Derrick, and M. Steen. Viewpoint consistency in Z and LOTOS: A case study. In J. Fitzgerald, C.B. Jones, and P. Lucas, editors, FME'97: Industrial Applications and Strengthened Foundations of Formal Methods (Proc. 4th Intl. Symposium of Formal Methods Europe, Graz, Austria, September 1997), volume 1313 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 644-664. Springer-Verlag, Sept. 1997.
4. B. Cheng, L. Campbell, and E. Wang. Enabling automated analysis through the formalization of object-oriented modeling diagrams. In Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Dependable Systems and Networks. IEEE Computer Society, 2000.
5. G. Engels and L. Groenewegen. Object-oriented modeling: A roadmap. In A. Finkelstein, editor, Future Of Software Engineering 2000, pages 105-116. ACM, June 2000.
6. G. Engels, L. Greenewegen, and J.M. Küster. 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 München, TR-0006, Oct. 2000.
7. G. Engels, R. Heckel, and J.M. Küster. Rule-Based Specifications of Behavioral Consistency based on the UML Meta-Model. In Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on the Unified Modeling Language, 2001. To Appear.
8. A. Finkelstein, D. Gabbay, A. Hunter, J. Kramer, and B. Nuseibeh. Inconsistency handling in multi-perspective specifications. In I. Sommerville and M. Paul, editors, Proceedings of the Fourth European Software Engineering Conference, pages 84-99. Springer-Verlag, 1993.
9. P. Fradet, D.L. Métayer, and M. Périn. Consistency checking for multiple view software architectures. In O. Nierstrasz and M. Lemoine, editors, ESEC/FSE '99, volume 1687 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 410-428. Springer-Verlag / ACM Press, 1999.
10. C. Ghezzi and B.A. Nuseibeh. Special Issue on Managing Inconsistency in Software Development (1). IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 24(11), Nov. 1998.
11. C. Ghezzi and B.A. Nuseibeh. Special Issue on Managing Inconsistency in Software Development (2). IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 25(11), Nov. 1999.
12. J.-J. Hiemer. Statecharts in CSP: Ein Prozessmodell in CSP zur Analyse von Statemate-Statecharts. DrKovac Verlag, 1999.
13. C.A.R. Hoare. Communcating Sequential Processes. Prentice Hall, 1985.
14. J.M. Küster and J. Stroop. Consistent design of embedded real-time sytems with UML-RT. In Proceedings of the 4th IEEE International Symposium on Object-Oriented Real-Time Distributed Computing (ISORC'2001), pages 31 - 40. IEEE Computer Society, 2001.
15. 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.
16. 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, Springer.
17. A. Moreira and R. Clark. Combining object-oriented modeling and formal description techniques. In M. Tokoro and R. Pareschi, editors, Proceedings of the 8th European Conference on Object-Oriented Programming (ECOOP'94), pages 344 - 364. LNCS 821, Springer Verlag, 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. J. Rumbaugh, M. Blaha, W. Premerlani, F. Eddy, and W. Lorensen. Object-Oriented Modeling and Design. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, USA, 1991.
20. B. Rumpe, M. Schoenmakers, A. Radermacher, and A. Schürr. UML + ROOM as a standard ADL? In Proc. ICECCS'99 Fifth IEEE International Conference on Engineering of Complex Computer Systems, Las Vegas, USA. IEEE Computer Society Press, 1999.
21. B. Selic. Using UML for modeling complex real-time systems. In F. Mueller and A. Bestavros, editors, Languages, Compilers, and Tools for Embedded Systems, volume 1474 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 250-262. Springer Verlag, 1998.
22. G. Spanoudakis, A. Finkelstein, and D. Till. Overlaps in requirements engineering. Automated Software Engineering: An International Journal, 6(2):171-198, Apr. 1999.
23. M. von der Beeck. Behaviour specifications: Equivalence and refinement notions. In It. Giese and S. Phillippi, editors, Visuelle Verhaltensmodellierung verteilter und nebenläufiger Software- Systeme, 8. Workshop des Arbeitskreises GROOM der GI Fachgruppe 2.1.9 Objektorientierte Software-Entwicklung, 13.-16. November 2000, Universität Münster. Techreport 24/00-I.