Modular semantics for a UML statechart diagrams kernel and its extension to multicharts and branching time model-checking

被引:25
作者
Gnesi, S
Latella, D
Massink, M
机构
[1] CNR, Ist Elaboraz Informaz, I-56100 Pisa, Italy
[2] CNR, Ist Cnuce, I-56100 Pisa, Italy
来源
JOURNAL OF LOGIC AND ALGEBRAIC PROGRAMMING | 2002年 / 51卷 / 01期
关键词
formal specification; formal semantics; formal verification; model-checking; UML; ACTL; JACK;
D O I
10.1016/S1567-8326(01)00012-1
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Statechart diagrams provide a graphical notation to model dynamic aspects of system behaviour within the unified modelling language (UML). In this paper, we present a formal operational semantics for a behavioural subset of UML statechart diagrams (UMLSDs) including a formal proof of their correctness with respect to major UML semantics requirements concerning behavioural issues. We show how the modularity of our semantics definition can be exploited to define extensions, in particular we show an extension to models composed of collections of communicating statechart diagrams, which we call multicharts. Finally we present all the conceptual issues related to building a tool for action based branching time model-checking, for the automatic verification of formal correctness of UML multicharts. The approach we propose preserves all the information necessary to report the results of model-checking in terms of the original UMLSD specification. The reference verification environment used for this model-checking approach is JACK. where automata are represented in a standard format which facilitates the use of a collection of tools for automatic verification. (C) 2002 Elsevier Science Inc. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:43 / 75
页数:33
相关论文
共 38 条
[1]   A formal verification environment for railway signaling system design [J].
Bernardeschi, C ;
Fantechi, A ;
Gnesi, S ;
Larosa, S ;
Mongardi, G ;
Romano, D .
FORMAL METHODS IN SYSTEM DESIGN, 1998, 12 (02) :139-161
[2]  
Bouali A., 1994, Bulletin of the European Association for Theoretical Computer Science, P207
[3]  
BOWMAN H, 1999, 3 INT C FORM METH OP, P213
[4]  
BROERSEN J, 1997, UNPUB INTERPRETING U
[5]   EXPRESSIBILITY RESULTS FOR LINEAR-TIME AND BRANCHING-TIME LOGICS [J].
CLARKE, EM ;
DRAGHICESCU, IA .
LECTURE NOTES IN COMPUTER SCIENCE, 1989, 354 :428-437
[6]   AUTOMATIC VERIFICATION OF FINITE-STATE CONCURRENT SYSTEMS USING TEMPORAL LOGIC SPECIFICATIONS [J].
CLARKE, EM ;
EMERSON, EA ;
SISTLA, AP .
ACM TRANSACTIONS ON PROGRAMMING LANGUAGES AND SYSTEMS, 1986, 8 (02) :244-263
[7]   Formal methods: State of the art and future directions [J].
Clarke, EM ;
Wing, JM .
ACM COMPUTING SURVEYS, 1996, 28 (04) :626-643
[8]  
CLEAVELAND R, 1996, LECT NOTES COMPUTER, V1102, P394
[9]  
CLEAVELAND R, 1990, PROTOCOL SPECIFICATI, V10, P287
[10]  
D'Argenio P. R., 1999, Proceedings 20th IEEE Real-Time Systems Symposium (Cat. No.99CB37054), P104, DOI 10.1109/REAL.1999.818832