Modeling techniques for software-intensive systems

Designing Software-Intensive Systems: Methods and Principles

Volumn , Issue , 2008, Pages 21-57

  Giese, Holger ^a   Henkler, Stefan ^b   Hirsch, Martin ^b   Rubin, Vladimir ^b   Tichy, Matthias ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF POTSDAM   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY OF PADERBORN   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 77954702014     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-59904-618-1.ch002     Document Type: Chapter

References (46)

1. Aalst, W. (1998). The application of petri nets to workflow management. The Journal of Circuits, Systems and Computers, 8(1), 21-66.
2. Aalst, W., Hee, K., & Houben, G. (1994). Modelling workflow management systems with high-level Petri nets. In G. Michelis, C. Ellis, & G. Memmi (Eds.), Proceedings of the Second Workshop on Computer-supported Cooperative Work, Petri Nets and Related Formalisms, (pp. 31-50).
3. Aalst, W., Hofstede, A. H. M. T., Kiepuszewski, B., & Barros, A. P. (2003). Workflow patterns. Distributed Parallel Databases, 14(1), 5-51.
4. Arkin, A., Askary, S., Bloch, B., Curbera, F., Goland, Y., & Kartha, N. (2005). Web services business process execution language version 2.0. WS-BPEL TC OASIS.
5. Becker, B., Beyer, D., Giese, H., Klein, F., & Schilling, D. (2006). Symbolic invariant verification for systems with dynamic structural adaptation. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE), Shanghai, China, (pp. 21-81). ACM Press.
6. Burmester, S., Giese, H., & Hirsch, M.(2005, October). Syntax and semantics of hybrid components (Tech. Rep. No. tr-ri-05-264). University of Paderborn.
7. Burmester, S., Giese, H., & Oberschelp, O. (2005, March). Hybrid UML components for the design of complex self-optimizing mechatronic systems. In J. Braz, H. Araújo, A. Vieira, & B.Encarnacao (Eds.), Informatics in control, automation and robotics. Springer-Verlag.
8. Burmester, S., Giese, H., & Schäfer, W. (2005, November). Model-driven architecture for hard real-time systems: From platform independent models to code. In Proceedings of the European Conference on Model Driven Architecture-foun dations and Applications (ECMDA-FA'05), Nürn-berg, Germany, (pp. 25-40). Springer-Verlag.
9. Fenelon, P., McDermid, J. A., Nicolson, M., & Pumfrey, D. J. (1994). Towards integrated safety analysis and design. ACM SIGAPP Applied Computing Review, 2(1), 21-32.
10. Föllinger, O. (2005). Regelungstechnik: Ein-führung in die Methoden und ihre Anwendung. Hüthig.
11. Giese, H., & Burmester, S. (2004, May). Analysis and synthesis for parameterized timed sequence diagrams. In H. Giese & I. Krüger (Eds.), Proceedings of the 3rd International Workshop on Scenarios and State Machines: Models, Algorithms, and Tools (ICSE 2003 Workshop W5), Edinburgh, Scotland, (pp. 43-50). IEE.
12. Giese, H., & Henkler, S. (2006, December). A survey of approaches for the visual model-driven development of next generation software-intensive systems. Journal of Visual Languages and Computing, 17, 528-550.
13. Giese, H., Henkler, S., Hirsch, M., & Klein, F. (2006, May). Nobody's perfect: Interactive synthesis from parametrized real-time scenarios. In Proceedings of the ICSE 2006 Workshop on Scenarios and State Machines: Models, Algorithms and Tools (SCESM'06), Shanghai, China, (pp. 67-74). ACM Press.
14. Giese, H., & Tichy, M. (2006, September). Component-based hazard analysis: Optimal designs, product lines, and online-reconfiguration. In Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Computer Safety, Security and Reliability (SAFECOMP), Gdansk, Poland, (pp. 156-169). Springer-Verlag.
15. Giese, H., Tichy, M., Burmester, S., Schäfer, W., & Flake, S. (2003, September). Towards the compositional verification of real-time UML designs. In Proceedings of the 9th European Software Engineering Conference held jointly with the 11th ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Foundations of Software Engineering (ESEC/ FSE-11), (pp. 38-47). ACM Press.
16. Grimm, K. (2003). Software technology in an automotive company: Major challenges. In ICSE'03: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Software Engineering, (pp. 498-503). Washington, DC, USA: IEEE Computer Society.
17. Grunske, L. (2003). Transformational patterns for the improvement of safety. In Proceedings of the Second Nordic Conference on Pattern Languages of Programs (vikingplop 03). Microsoft Buisness Press.
18. Grunske, L., & Neumann, R. (2002, October 6). Quality improvement by integrating non-functional properties in software architecture specification. In Proceedings of the Second Workshop on Evaluating and Architecting System Dependability (easy), San Jose, CA, USA.
19. Hahn, G., Philipps, J., Pretschner, A., & Stauner, T. (2003, June). Prototype-based tests for hybrid reactive systems. In Proceedings of the 14th IEEE International Workshop on Rapid System Prototyping (RSP'03), (pp. 78-85).
20. Hardung, B., Kölzow, T., & Krùger, A. (2004). Reuse of software in distributed embedded automotive systems. In EMSOFT'04: Proceedings of the 4th ACM International Conference on Embedded Software, (pp. 203-210). New York, USA: ACM Press.
21. Harel, D. and Marelly, R. (2002). Playing with time: On the specification and execution of time-enriched LSCs. In Proceedings of the 10th IEEE international Symposium on Modeling, Analysis, and Simulation of Computer and Telecommunications Systems (MASCOTS'02) (p. 193). Washington, DC: IEEE Computer Society.
22. Isermann, R., Matko, D., & Lachmann, K.-H. (1992). Adaptive control systems. Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA: Prentice Hall.
23. J.Bank. (1993). The essence of total quality management. Prentice Hall.
24. Jensen, K., & Rozenberg, G. (Eds.). (1991). Highlevel Petri nets: Theory and application. London, UK: Springer-Verlag.
25. Kaiser, B., Liggesmeyer, P., & Maeckel, O.(2003, October 9-10). A new component concept for fault trees. In Proceedings of the 8th National Workshop on Safety Critical Systems and Software (scs 2003), Canberra, Australia, (Vol. 33, pp. 37-46). Darlinghurst, Australia: Australian Computer Society.
26. Keller, G., Nüttgens, M., & Scheer, A. (1992). Semantische Processmodellierung auf der Grundlage Ereignisgesteuerter Processketten (EPK). Veröffentlichungen des Instituts für Wirtschaftsinformatik, Heft 89 (in German). University of Saarland, Saarbrücken.
27. Kindler, E. (2006). On the semantics of EPCs: Resolving the vicious circle. Data Knowledge Eng., 56(1), 23-40.
28. Laprie, J. C. (Ed.). (1992). Dependability: Basic concepts and terminology in English, French, German, Italian and Japanese [IFIP WG 10.4, Dependable Computing and Fault Tolerance] (Vol. 5). Wien: Springer-Verlag.
29. McDermid, J. A. (2003). Trends in systems safety: A European view? P. Lindsay (Ed.), Seventh Australian Workshop on Industrial Experience with Safety Critical Systems and Software, (Vol. 15, pp. 3-8). Adelaide, Australia: ACS.
30. McDermid, J., & Pumfrey, D. (1994). A development of hazard analysis to aid software design. In Proceedings of the Ninth Annual Conference on Computer Assurance (compass94), (pp. 17-25). Gaithersburg, MD, USA: National Institute of Standards and Technology.
31. OMG. (2006, February). Business process modeling notation (BPMN) specification. Retrieved March 6, 2008, from http://www.bpmn.org/ (Final Adopted Specification)
32. Papadopoulos, Y., McDermid, J., Sasse, R., & Heiner, G. (2001, March). Analysis and synthesis of the behaviour of complex programmable electronic systems in conditions of failure. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 71, 229-247.
33. Recommended Practice for Architectural Description of Software-intensive Systems, IEEE-Std-1471-2000. (2000, October). 345 East 47th Street, New York, 10017-2394, USA.
34. Reisig, W., & Rozenberg, G.(Eds.). (1998). Lectures on petri nets I: Basic models (Vol. 1491). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
35. Russell, N., Aalst, W., Hofstede, A., & Wohed, P. (2006). On the suitability of UML activity diagrams for business process modelling. In M. Stumptner, S. Hartmann, & Y. Kiyoki (Eds.), Proceedings of the Third Asia-Pacific Conference on Conceptual Modelling (apccm 2006) (Vol. 53, pp. 95-104). Hobart, Australia: ACS.
36. Scheer, A. (2000). ARIS: Business process modelling. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
37. CMM. (2002, March). Capability Maturity Model® Integration (CMMISM), Version 1.1 (Tech. Rep. No. CMU/SEI-2002-TR-012). Carnegie Mellon, Software Engineering Institute.
38. Sengupta, B., & Cleaveland, R. (2002, November). Triggered message sequence charts. W. G. Griswold (Ed.), Proceedings of the Tenth ACM SIGSOFT Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering (FSE-10). Charleston, SC, USA: ACM Press.
39. SysML-v1.0 Systems Modeling Language (SysML) Specification. (2006).
40. UML 2.0 Superstructure. (2003). Superstructure specification. Document ptc/03-08-02.
41. UML 2.1.1 Superstructure. (2006, October). UML 2.1.1 superstructure specification. Document: ptc/06-10-05 (convenience document).
42. UML for System Engineering Request for Proposal, ad/03-03-2003 (2003), UML-RFP-03-03-28 UML for System Engineering Request for Proposal, ad/03-03-41. UML for System Engineering Request for Proposal, ad/03-03-41. (2003, March)
43. VDI2206, (2004). VDI guideline 2206-design methodology for mechatronic systems. VDI-Verlag.
44. WFMC. (1994). Workf low reference model (Tech. Rep.). Brussels: Workflow Management Coalition.
45. Wirsing, M. (Ed.). (2004, May). Report on the EU/NSF Strategic Workshop on Engineering Software-Intensive Systems. Edinburgh, GB.
46. Wohed, P., Aalst, W., Dumas, M., Hofstede, A., & Russell, N. (2006). On the suitability of BPMN for business process modelling. In S. Dustdar, J. Faideiro, & A. Sheth (Eds.), International Conference on Business Process Management (BPM 2006) (Vol. 4102, pp. 161-176). Springer-Verlag.