From UML activity diagrams to stochastic Petri nets: Application to software performance engineering

Proceedings of the Fourth International Workshop on Software and Performance, WOSP'04

Volumn , Issue , 2004, Pages 25-36

  López Grao, Juan Pablo ^a   Merseguer, José ^a   Campos, Javier ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ZARAGOZA   (Spain)

Author keywords

Activity diagrams; CASE tool; Compositionality; Generalized Stochastic Petri Nets; Software performance; UML; UML Profile for schedulability performance and time specification

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER SIMULATION; FORMAL LANGUAGES; PETRI NETS; QUEUEING NETWORKS; SEMANTICS; SOFTWARE PROTOTYPING; STOCHASTIC CONTROL SYSTEMS;

ACTIVITY DIAGRAMS; COMPOSITIONALITY; GENERALIZED STOCHASTIC PETRI NETS; SOFTWARE PERFORMANCE; UML; UML PROFILE FOR SCHEDULABILITY PERFORMANCE AND TIME SPECIFICATION;

COMPUTER AIDED SOFTWARE ENGINEERING;

EID: 3543103813     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (31)

1. M. Ajmone Marsan, G. Balbo, G. Conte, S. Donatelli, and G. Franceschinis. Modelling with Generalized Stochastic Petri Nets. John Wiley Series in Parallel Computing - Chichester, 1995.
2. D. Akehurst, G. Waters, P. Utton, and G. Martin. Predictive Performance Analysis for Distributed Systems - PERMABASE position. In One Day Workshop on Software Performance Prediction extracted from Designs, Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh, November 1999.
3. nd Int. Workshop on Software and Performance (WOSP2000), pages 47-57, Ottawa, Canada, September 2000. ACM Press.
4. ArgoUML project, http://argouml.tigris.org/.
5. nd Int. Workshop on Software and Performance (WOSP2000), pages 71-76, Ottawa, Canada, September 2000. ACM Press.
6. rd Int. Workshop on Software and Performance (WOSP2002), pages 35-45, Rome, Italy, July 2002. ACM Press.
7. th Int. Conference on Information Technology Interfaces (ITI2001), Pula, Croatia, 2001.
8. G. Chiola. GreatSPN 1.5 software architecture. Technical report, Università di Torino, April 1991.
9. S. Donatelli and G. Franceschinis. PSR Methodology: integrating hardware and software models. LNCS 1091, in Proc. Application and Theory of Petri Nets, pages 133-152, June 1996.
10. R. Eshuis and R. Wieringa. A comparison of Petri net and activity diagram variants. In Reisig Weber, Ehrig, editor, Proc. of 2nd Int. Collaboration on Petri Net Technologies for Modelling Communication Based Systems, pages 93-104. DFG Research Group "Petri Net Technology", September 2001.
11. R. Eshuis and R. Wieringa. A real-time execution semantics for UML activity diagrams. In Heinrich Hußmann, editor, LCNS 2029, in Fundamental Approaches to Software Engineering (FASE2001), pages 76-90. Springer-Verlag, 2001.
12. S. Gilmore and L. Kloul. A unified approach to performance modelling and verification. Paper presented at Dagstuhl seminar on "Probabilistic Methods in Verification and Planning".
13. The GreatSPN tool. http://www.di.unito.it/~greatspn.
14. Object Management Group. XML Metadata Interchange (XMI) specification, January 2002. version 1.2.
15. rd Int. Conference on Formal Methods for Open Object-Based Distributed Systems (FMOODS99), pages 331-347, Florence, Italy, February 1999. Kluwer.
16. J. Lilius and I.P. Paltor. The semantics of UML state machines. Technical report no. 273 - Turku Centre for Computer Science, Finland, May 1999.
17. nd Int. Workshop on Software and Performance (WOSP2000), pages 12-17, Ottawa, Canada, September 2000. ACM Press.
18. th Int. Symposium On Computer and Information Sciences (ISCIS2002), pages 405-409, Orlando, Florida, October 2002. CRC Press.
19. J. Medina, M. González, and J. M. Drake. MAST-UML: Visual modeling and analysis suite for real-time applications with UML. http://mast.unican.es/ umlmast/.
20. J. Merseguer. Software Performance Engineering based on UML and Petri nets. PhD thesis, Departamento de Informatica e Ingenieria de Sistemas. Universidad de Zaragoza, Spain, March 2003.
21. th Int. Workshop on Discrete Event Systems (WODES2002), pages 295-302, Zaragoza, Spain, October 2002. IEEE Computer Society Press.
22. rd Int. Conference on Software Engineering Research and Practice (SERP'03), pages 43-47, Las Vegas, USA, June 2003. CSREA Press.
23. J. Merseguer, J. Campos, and E. Mena. Analysing internet software retrieval systems: Modeling and performance comparison. Wireless Networks: The Journal of Mobile Communication, Computation and Information, 9(3), May 2003.
24. M.K. Molloy. Fundamentals of Performance Modelling. Macmillan, 1989.
25. Object Management Group, http:/www.omg.org. UML Profile for Schedulabibity, Performance and Time Specification, March 2002.
26. Object Management Group, http:/www.omg.org. OMG Unified Modeling Language Specification, March 2003. version 1.5.
27. D. Petriu and H. Shen. Applying the UML performance profile: Graph grammar-based derivation of LQN models from UML specifications. In Tony Field, Peter G. Harrison, Jeremy Bradley, and Uli Harder, editors, LNCS 2324, in TOOLS 2002, pages 159-177, London, UK, April 2002. Springer-Verlag.
28. Object Management Group, http://www.omg.org.
29. A.J.H. Simons. On the compositional properties of UML statechart diagrams. In Proc. of Rigorous Object-Oriented Methods (ROOM2000), January 2000.
30. C. U. Smith. Performance Engineering of Software Systems. The Sei Series in Software Engineering. Addison-Wesley, 1990.
31. nd Int. Workshop on Graph Transformation and Visual Modeling Techniques (GT-VMT2001). Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science. Springer-Verlag, July 2001.