Swinging UML: How to make class diagrams and state machines amenable to constraint solving and proving

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

Volumn 1939, Issue , 2000, Pages 162-177

  Padawitz, Peter ^a  

^a TU DORTMUND UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER CIRCUITS; FORMAL LOGIC; FORMAL METHODS; MESSAGE PASSING; OBJECT ORIENTED PROGRAMMING; SEMANTICS; SPECIFICATIONS; VERIFICATION;

CONSTRAINT SOLVING; DESIGNING SOFTWARES; DYNAMIC COMPONENT; INFORMAL SEMANTICS; OBJECT MANIPULATION; SPECIFICATION AND VERIFICATION; SPECIFICATION TECHNIQUE; TRANSITION SYSTEM;

UNIFIED MODELING LANGUAGE;

EID: 33947387089     PISSN: 03029743     EISSN: 16113349     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1007/3-540-40011-7_12     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (36)

1. E. Astesiano, H.-J. Kreowski, B. Krieg-Brückner, eds., Algebraic Foundations of Systems Specification, IFIP State-of-the-Art Report, Springer 1999
2. E. Astesiano, G. Reggio, Algebraic Specification of Concurrency, Proc. WADT’91, Springer LNCS 655 (1993) 1-39
3. J.C.M. Baeten, W.P. Weijland, Process Algebra, Cambridge University Press 1990
4. M. Bidoit, R. Hennicker, Proving the Correctness of Behavioural Implementations, Proc. AMAST ’95, Springer LNCS 936 (1995) 152-168
5. M. Bidoit, R. Hennicker, M. Wirsing, Behavioural and Abstractor Specifications, Science of Computer Programming 25 (1995) 149-186
6. The CoFI Task Group on Language Design, CASL: The Common Algebraic Specification Language, 1998, www.brics.dk/Projects/CoFI/Documents/CASL
7. E.F. Codd, A Relational Model for Large Shared Data Banks, Communications of the ACM 13 (1970) 377-387
8. B. Demuth, H. Hußmann, Using UML/OCL Constraints for Relational Database Design, Proc. UML ’99, 1999
9. H. Ehrig, H.-J. Kreowski, B. Mahr, P. Padawitz, Algebraic Implementation of Abstract Data Types, Theoretical Computer Science 20 (1982) 209-263
10. H. Ehrig, B. Mahr, Fundamentals of Algebraic Specification 1, Springer 1985
11. M. Gogolla, M. Richters, Transformation Rules for UML Class Diagrams, Proc. UML ’98, Springer LNCS 1618 (1998) 92-106
12. J.A. Goguen, R. Diaconescu, An Oxford Survey of Order Sorted Algebra, Mathematical Structures in Computer Science 4 (1994) 363-392
13. J.A. Goguen, G. Malcolm, A Hidden Agenda, UCSD Technical Report CS97-538, San Diego 1997, www-cse.ucsd.edu/users/goguen/ps/ha.ps.gz
14. J.A. Goguen, J.W. Thatcher, E.G. Wagner, An Initial Algebra Approach to the Specification, Correctness and Implementation of Abstract Data Types, in: R. Yeh, ed., Current Trends in Programming Methodology 4, Prentice-Hall (1978) 80-149
15. J. Guttag, E. Horowitz, D.R. Musser Abstract Data Types and Software Validation, Report ISI/RR-76-48, University of Southern California 1976
16. C.A.R. Hoare, Proof of Correctness of Data Representations, Acta Informatica 1 (1972) 271-281
17. A. Hamie, F. Civello, J. Howe, S. Kent, R. Mitchell, Reflections on the Object Constraint Language, Proc. UML ’98, 1998
18. H. Hußmann, M. Cerioli, G. Reggio, F. Tort, Abstract Data Types and UML Models, Report DISI-TR-99-15, University of Genova 1999
19. D. Harel, M. Politi, Modeling Reactive Systems With Statecharts: The STATEMATE Approach, McGraw-Hill 1998
20. B. Jacobs, Behaviour-Refinement of Coalgebraic Specifications with Coinductive Correctness Proofs, Proc. TAPSOFT ’97, Springer LNCS 1214 (1997) 787-802
21. B. Jacobs, J. Rutten, A Tutorial on (Co)Algebras and (Co)Induction, EATCS Bulletin 62 (June 1997) 222-259
22. J. Lilius, I.P. Paltor, The Semantics of UML State Machines, TUCS Technical Report 273, Turku Centre for Computer Science 1999
23. G. Malcolm, J.A. Goguen, Proving Correctness of Refinement and Implementation, Technical Monograph PRG-114, Oxford University Computing Lab 1994
24. OCL Specification, Version 1.1
25. P. Padawitz, Swinging Types = Functions + Relations + Transition Systems, Report, University of Dortmund 1998, ls5.cs.uni-dortmund.de/∼peter/Rome.ps.gz, to appear in Theoretical Computer Science
26. P. Padawitz, Sample Swinging Types, Report, University of Dortmund 1998, ls5.cs.uni-dortmund.de/∼peter/BehExa.ps.gz
27. P. Padawitz, Modular Swinging Types, Report, University of Dortmund 1999, ls5.cs.uni-dortmund.de/∼peter/MST.ps.gz
28. P. Padawitz, Swinging Types and Coalgebras, Report, University of Dortmund 2000, ls5.cs.uni-dortmund.de/∼peter/BehCoalg.ps.gz
29. H. Reichel, An Approach to Object Semantics based on Terminal Coalgebras, Math. Structures in Comp. Sci. 5 (1995) 129-152
30. M. Richters, M. Gogolla, On Formalizing the UML Object Constraint Language OCL, in: Proc. Conceptual Modeling- ER ’98, Springer LNCS 1507 (1998) 449-464
31. J. Rumbaugh, I. Jacobson, G. Booch, The Unified Modeling Language Reference Manual, Addison-Wesley 1999
32. J.J.M.M. Rutten, Universal Coalgebra: A Theory of Systems, Report CS-R9652, CWI, SMC Amsterdam 1996
33. D. Sannella, A. Tarlecki, Toward Formal Development of Programs from Algebraic Specifications: Implementations Revisited, Acta Informatica 25 (1988) 233-281
34. M. Wand, Specifications, Models, and Implementations of Data Abstractions, Theoretical Computer Science 20 (1982) 3-32
35. J.B. Warmer, A.G. Kleppe, The Object Constraint Language, Addison-Wesley 1999
36. M. Wirsing, Algebraic Specification, in: J. van Leeuwen, ed., Handbook of Theoretical Computer Science, Elsevier (1990) 675-788