Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

International Symposium on Formal Methods for Components and Objects

FMCO 2002: Formal Methods for Components and Objects pp 71–98Cite as

Understanding UML: A Formal Semantics of Concurrency and Communication in Real-Time UML

  • Conference paper

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 2852))

Abstract

We define a subset krtUML of UML which is rich enough to express all behavioural modelling entities of UML used for real-time applications, covering such aspects as active objects, dynamic object creation and destruction, dynamically changing communication topologies in inter-object communication, asynchronous signal based communication, synchronous communication using operation calls, and shared memory communication through global attributes. We define a formal interleaving semantics for this kernel language by associating with each model M ∈ krtUML a symbolic transition system STS(M). We outline how to compile industrial real-time UML models making use of generalisation hierarchies, weak- and strong aggregation, and hierarchical state-machines into krtUML, and propose modelling guidelines for real-time applications of UML. This work provides the semantical foundation for formal verification of real-time UML models described in the companion paper [11].

This research was partially supported by the German Research Council (DFG) within the priority program Integration of Specification Techniques with Engineering Applications under grant DA 206/7-3 and by the Information Society DG of the European Commission within the project IST-2001-33522 OMEGA (Correct Development of Real-Time Embedded Systems).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Telelogic AB. Telelogic Tau, 2003. http://www.telelogic.com/products/tau/index.cfm

    Google Scholar 

  2. Alvarez, J.M., Clark, T., Evans, A., Sammut, P.: An Action Semantics for MML. In: Gogolla, M., Kobryn, C. (eds.) UML 2001. LNCS, vol. 2185, p. 2. Springer, Heidelberg (2001), http://www.cs.york.ac.uk/puml/mmf/AlvarezUML2001.pdf

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  3. Börger, E., Cavarra, A., Riccobene, E.: An ASM Semantics for UML Activity Diagrams. In: Rus, T. (ed.) AMAST 2000. LNCS, vol. 1816, pp. 293–308. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  4. Börger, E., Cavarra, A., Riccobene, E.: Modeling the Dynamics of UML State Machines. In: Gurevich, Y., Kutter, P.W., Odersky, M., Thiele, L. (eds.) ASM 2000. LNCS, vol. 1912, pp. 223–241. Springer, Heidelberg (2000), DBLP http://dblp.uni-trier.de

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  5. Clark, T., Evans, A., Kent, S.: The Metamodelling Language Calculus: Foundation Semantics for UML. In: Hussmann, H. (ed.) FASE 2001. LNCS, vol. 2029, pp. 17–31. Springer, Heidelberg (2001), www.dcs.kcl.ac.uk/staff/tony/docs/MMLCalculus.ps

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  6. Clark, T., Evans, A., Kent, S., Brodsky, S., Cook, S.: 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. Clark, T., Evans, A., Kent, S., Sammut, P.: The MMF Approach to Engineering Object-Oriented Design Languages. In: Proc. Workshop on Language Descriptions, Tools and Applications, LDTA 2001 (2001), Available via http://www.puml.org

  8. Compton, K., Huggins, J., Shen, W.: A Semantic Model for the State Machine in the UML. In: Reggio, G., Knapp, A., Rumpe, B., Selic, B., Wieringa, R. (eds.) Dynamic Behaviour in UML Models: Semantic Questions, Workshop Proceedings, UML 2000 Workshop, Bericht 0006, October 2000. Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Institut für Informatik, pp. 25–31 (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. Damm, W., Josko, B., Pnueli, A., Votintseva, A.: 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. Damm, W., Westphal, B.: Live and Let Die: LSC-based Verification of UMLModels. In: de Boer, F.S., Bonsangue, M.M., Graf, S., de Roever, W.-P. (eds.) FMCO 2002. LNCS, vol. 2852, pp. 99–135. Springer, Heidelberg (2003) (to appear)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  12. Engels, G., Hausmann, J.H., Heckel, R., Sauer, S.: Dynamic Meta Modeling: A Graphical Approach to the Operational Semantics of Behavioral Diagrams in UML. In: Evans, A., Kent, S., Selic, B. (eds.) UML 2000. LNCS, vol. 1939, pp. 323–337. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Evans, R., France, K.: Lano, and B. Rumpe. The UML as a Formal Modeling Notation. In: The Unifed Modeling Language: the first international workshop. Springer, Heidelberg (June 1998)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Evans, A.S., Clark, A.N.: Foundations of the Unified Modeling Language. In: 2nd Northern Formal Methods Workshop, Ilkley, electronic Workshops in Computing. Springer, Heidelberg (1998), http://www.cs.york.ac.uk/puml/papers/nfmw97.ps

    Google Scholar 

  15. Harel, D., Gery, E.: Executable Object Modeling with Statecharts. IEEE Computer 30(7), 31–42 (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Hußmann, H.: 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)

    Google Scholar 

  17. I-Logix Inc. Rhapsody (2002), http://www.ilogix.com/products/rhapsody/index.cfm

  18. Kim, S.-K., Carrington, D.: Formalizing the UML Class Diagrams Using Object- Z. In: France, R.B., Rumpe, B. (eds.) UML 1999. LNCS, vol. 1723, pp. 83–98. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  19. Kleppe, A., Warmer, J.: Unification of Static and Dynamic Semantics of UML (2001), http://www.klasse.nl/english/uml/unification-report.pdf

  20. Kwon, G.: Rewrite Rules and Operational Semantics for Model Checking UML Statcharts. In: Evans, A., Kent, S., Selic, B. (eds.) UML 2000. LNCS, vol. 1939, pp. 528–540. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Lilius, J., Paltor, I.P.: vUML: a Tool for Verifying UML Models. Turku Centre for Computer Science, Abo Akademi University, Finland. Technical Report

    Google Scholar 

  22. Manna, Z., Pnueli, A.: The Temporal Logic of Reactive and Concurrent Systems: Specification. Springer, New York (1991)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  23. Ober, I.: Harmonizing Design Languages with Object-Oriented Extensions and an Executable Semantics, PhD Thesis. Institut National Polytechnique de Toulouse, France (April 2001)

    Google Scholar 

  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. Övergaard, G.: Formal Specification of Object-Oriented Meta-Modelling. In: Maibaum, T. (ed.) FASE 2000. LNCS, vol. 1783, p. 193. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  27. Övergaard, G.: Using the BOOM Framework for Formal Specification of the UML. In: Proceedings of Defining Precise Semantics for UML (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  28. Övergaard, G., Palmkvist, K.: A Formal Approach to Use Cases and Their Relationships. In: Bézivin, J., Muller, P.-A. (eds.) UML 1998. LNCS, vol. 1618, pp. 406–418. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  29. Reggio, G., Astesiano, E., Choppy, C., Hußmann, H.: Analyzing UML Active Classes and Associated State Machines - A Lightweight Formal Approach. In: FEAS (2000), ftp://ftp.disi.unige.it/pub/person/ReggioG/Reggio99a.ps

  30. Reggio, G., Cerioli, M., Astesiano, E.: Towards a Rigorous Semantics of UML Supporting Its Multiview Approach. In: Hussmann, H. (ed.) FASE 2001. LNCS, vol. 2029, p. 171. Springer, Heidelberg (2001), ftp://ftp.disi.unige.it/pub/person/CerioliM/FASE2001.pdf

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  31. Richters, M., Gogolla, M.: On Formalizing the UML Object Constraint Language OCL. In: Ling, T.-W., Ram, S., Li Lee, M. (eds.) ER 1998. LNCS, vol. 1507, pp. 449–464. Springer, Heidelberg (1998)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. OFFIS, Oldenburg, Germany

    Werner Damm, Bernhard Josko & Angelika Votintseva

  2. The Weizmann Institute of Science, Rehovot, Israel

    Amir Pnueli

Authors
  1. Werner Damm
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Bernhard Josko
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Amir Pnueli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Angelika Votintseva
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Centre for Mathematics and Computer Science, CWI, Kruislaan 413, 1098 SJ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Frank S. de Boer

  2. Leiden Institute of Advanced Computer Science, Leiden University, P.O. Box 9512, 2300 RA, Leiden, The Netherlands

    Marcello M. Bonsangue

  3. VERIMAG, 2 Avenue de Vignate, Centre Equitation, 38610, Grenoble-Gières, France

    Susanne Graf

  4. Institute of Computer Science and Applied Mathematics, Christian-Albrechts University Kiel, Hermann-Rodewald-Straße 3, 24118, Kiel, Germany

    Willem-Paul de Roever

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2003 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Damm, W., Josko, B., Pnueli, A., Votintseva, A. (2003). Understanding UML: A Formal Semantics of Concurrency and Communication in Real-Time UML. In: de Boer, F.S., Bonsangue, M.M., Graf, S., de Roever, WP. (eds) Formal Methods for Components and Objects. FMCO 2002. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 2852. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-39656-7_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-39656-7_3

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-20303-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-39656-7

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation