Understanding UML: A formal semantics of concurrency and communication in real-time UML

Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics)

Volumn 2852, Issue , 2003, Pages 71-98

  Damm, Werner ^a   Josko, Bernhard ^a   Pnueli, Amir ^b   Votintseva, Angelika ^a  

^a OFFIS INSTITUTE FOR INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY   (Germany)

^b WEIZMANN INSTITUTE OF SCIENCE   (Israel)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

SEMANTICS; UNIFIED MODELING LANGUAGE;

BEHAVIOURAL MODELLING; COMMUNICATION TOPOLOGIES; DYNAMIC OBJECT CREATION; INTERLEAVING SEMANTICS; REAL-TIME APPLICATION; SEMANTICAL FOUNDATIONS; SYMBOLIC TRANSITION SYSTEMS; SYNCHRONOUS COMMUNICATIONS;

FORMAL METHODS;

EID: 0142214575     PISSN: 03029743     EISSN: 16113349     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-540-39656-7_3     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Telelogic AB. Telelogic Tau, 2003. http://www.telelogic.com/products/tau/index.cfm.
2. J.M. Alvarez, T. Clark, A. Evans, and P. Sammut. An Action Semantics for MML. In Proc. UML 2001, 2001. http://www.cs.york.ac.uk/puml/mmf/AlvarezUML2001.pdf.
3. E. Börger, A. Cavarra, and E. Riccobene. An ASM Semantics for UML Activity Diagrams. In T. Rus, editor, Proc. AMAST 2000, volume 1816 of LNCS, pages 293-308. Springer-Verlag, 2000.
4. E. Börger, A. Cavarra, and E. Riccobene. Modeling the Dynamics of UML State Machines. In Y. Gurevich, Ph.W. Kutter, M. Odersky, and L. Thiele, editors, Abstract State Machines, Theory and Applications, International Workshop, ASM 2000, Proceedings, volume 1912 of LNCS, pages 223-241. Springer-Verlag, 2000. DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de.
5. T. Clark, A. Evans, and S. Kent. The Metamodelling Language Calculus: Foundation Semantics for UML. In Proc. FASE 2001, pages 17-31, 2001. www.dcs.kcl.ac.uk/staff/tony/docs/MMLCalculus.ps.
6. T. Clark, A. Evans, S. Kent, S. Brodsky, and S. Cook. A Feasibility Study in Rearchitecting UML as a Family of Languages Using a Precise OO Meta-Modelling Approach, version 1.0, September 2000. Available from http://www.puml.org.
7. T. Clark, A. Evans, S. Kent, and P. Sammut. The MMF Approach to Engineering Object-Oriented Design Languages. In Proc. Workshop on Language Descriptions, Tools and Applications (LDTA2001), 2001. Available via http://www.puml.org.
8. K. Compton, J. Huggins, and W. Shen. A Semantic Model for the State Machine in the UML. In G. Reggio, A. Knapp, B. Rumpe, B. Selic, and R. Wieringa, editors, Dynamic Behaviour in UML Models: Semantic Questions, Workshop Proceedings, UML 2000 Workshop, Bericht 0006, pages 25-31. Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Institut für Informatik, October 2000. http://www.kettering.edu/~jhuggins/papers/uml2000.ps.
9. Rational Software Corporation. Rational Rose Family, 2003. http://www.rational.com/products/rose/index.jsp.
10. W. Damm, B. Josko, A. Pnueli, and A. Votintseva. A Formal Semantics for a UML Kernel Language. Omega Technical report, part 1 of the deliverable D1.1.2, Project IST-2001-33522 OMEGA, January 2003. Available from http://www-omega.imag.fr/doc/d1000009_6/D112_KL.pdf.
11. W. Damm and B. Westphal. Live and Let Die: LSC-based Verification of UML-Models. In Proceedings FMCO'02, 2003. (to appear).
12. G. Engels, J.H. Hausmann, R. Heckel, and S. Sauer. Dynamic Meta Modeling: A Graphical Approach to the Operational Semantics of Behavioral Diagrams in UML. In Proceed. of the 3d International Conference on the UML 2000, October 2000.
13. A. Evans, R. France, K. Lano, and B. Rumpe. The UML as a Formal Modeling Notation. In The Unifed Modeling Language: the first international workshop, June 1998. Springer-Verlag, 1999.
14. A.S. Evans and A.N. Clark. Foundations of the Unified Modeling Language. In 2nd Northern Formal Methods Workshop, Ilkley, electronic Workshops in Computing. Springer-Verlag, 1998. http://www.cs.york.ac.uk/puml/papers/nfmw97.ps.
15. D. Harel and E. Gery. Executable Object Modeling with Statecharts. IEEE Computer, 30(7):31-42, 1997.
16. H. Hußmann. Loose Semantics for UML, OCL. In Proceedings 6th World Conference on Integrated Design and Process Technology (IDPT 2002). Society for Design and Process Science, June 2002.
17. I-Logix Inc. Rhapsody, 2002. http://www.ilogix.com/products/rhapsody/index.cfm.
18. S.-K. Kim and D. Carrington. Formalizing the UML Class Diagrams Using Object-Z. In France and Rumpe, editors, Proc. UML'99, volume 1723 of LNCS, pages 83-98. Springer-Verlag, 1999.
19. A. Kleppe and J. Warmer. Unification of Static and Dynamic Semantics of UML, 2001. http://www.klasse.nl/english/uml/unification-report.pdf.
20. G. Kwon. Rewrite Rules and Operational Semantics for Model Checking UML Statcharts. In Proceed. of the 3d International Conference on the UML 2000, University of York, October 2000.
21. J. Lilius and I.P. Paltor. vUML: a Tool for Verifying UML Models. Turku Centre for Computer Science, Abo Akademi University, Finland. Technical Report.
22. Z. Manna and A. Pnueli. The Temporal Logic of Reactive and Concurrent Systems: Specification. Springer-Verlag, New York, 1991.
23. I. Ober. Harmonizing Design Languages with Object-Oriented Extensions and an Executable Semantics, PhD Thesis. Institut National Polytechnique de Toulouse, France, April 2001.
24. Object Management Group. UML 1.4 with Action Semantics, Final Adopted Specification, ptc/02-01-09, January 2002. Available from http://www.kc.com/as_site/home.html.
25. Object Management Group. UML Profile for Schedulability, Performance, and Time Specification, ptc/02-03-02 OMG Adopted Specification, March 2002. Available from http://cgi.omg.org/docs/ptc/02-03-02.pdf.
26. G. Övergaard. Formal Specification of Object-Oriented Meta-Modelling. In T.Maibaum, editor, Proceedings Fundamental Approaches to Software Engineering, FASE, number 1783 in LNCS. Springer-Verlag, 2000.
27. G. Övergaard. Using the BOOM Framework for Formal Specification of the UML. In Proceedings of Defining Precise Semantics for UML, 2000.
28. G. Övergaard and K. Palmkvist. A Formal Approach to Use Cases and Their Relationships. In UML 1998, 1998.
29. G. Reggio, E. Astesiano, C. Choppy, and H. Hußmann. Analyzing UML Active Classes and Associated State Machines - A Lightweight Formal Approach. In FEAS 2000, 2000. ftp://ftp.disi.unige.it/pub/person/ReggioG/Reggio99a.ps.
30. G. Reggio, M. Cerioli, and E. Astesiano. Towards a Rigorous Semantics of UML Supporting Its Multiview Approach. In FASE 2001, 2001. ftp://ftp.disi.unige.it/pub/person/CerioliM/FASE2001.pdf.
31. M. Richters and M.Gogolla. On Formalizing the UML Object Constraint Language OCL. In T.-W. Ling, S. Ram, and M.L. Lee, editors, Proc. 17th International Conference Conceptual Modelling (ER'98), volume 1507 of LNCS, pages 449-464. Springer-Verlag, 1998.