Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A methodology for verifying SysML requirements using activity diagrams

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Innovations in Systems and Software Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Designing complex and critical systems needs a methodology to ensure the correctness of their specifications. Within an overall approach which considers the validation of SysML designs, this paper proposes a methodology for verifying SysML requirements on activity diagrams. The objective is to define a complete process to formalize and verify SysML functional requirements related to activity diagrams. Our contributions lie, first, in the definition of AcTRL (Activity Temporal Requirement Language), a new language for the formalization of functional requirements at SysML level. Second, in the proposed verification methodology which is guided by the verify relationships between SysML requirements and activity diagrams. The verification is enabled by formalizing SysML activities with hierarchical coloured Petri nets (HCPNs) and by automatically translating SysML requirements expressed on AcTRL into temporal logic. Our methodology takes into account the hierarchical structure of SysML activities and their relations with SysML requirements to provide a modular and incremental verification. A case study for a ticket vending machine is presented to illustrate the different steps and the benefits of the proposed methodology.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17
Fig. 18
Fig. 19

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Alavi H, Avrunin G, Corbett J, Dillon L, Dwyer M, Pasareanu C. Specification patterns. http://patterns.projects.cis.ksu.edu. Accessed 22 May 2016

  2. Autili M, Inverardi P, Pelliccione P (2007) Graphical scenarios for specifying temporal properties: an automated approach. Autom Softw Eng 14(3):293–340

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Berard B, Bidoit M, Finkel A, Laroussinie F, Petit A, Petrucci L, Schnoebelen P (2010) Systems and software verification: model-checking techniques and tools, 1st edn. Springer Publishing Company, Incorporated, Berlin

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  4. Cheng A, Christensen S, Mortensen KH (1997) Model checking Coloured Petri Nets-exploiting strongly connected components. DAIMI Report Series 26(519). doi:10.7146/dpb.v26i519.7048

  5. Damm W, Harel D (2001) LSCs: breathing life into message sequence charts. Form Methods Syst Des 19(1):45–80

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  6. Debbabi M, Hassaine F, Jarraya Y, Soeanu A, Alawneh L (2010) Verification and validation in systems engineering: assessing UML/SysML design models, 1st edn. Springer-Verlag New York, Inc, New York

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  7. Dwyer MB, Avrunin GS, Corbett JC (1999) Patterns in property specifications for finite-state verification. In: Proceedings of the international conference on software engineering, pp 411–420. IEEE

  8. Engels G, Soltenborn C, Wehrheim H (2007) Analysis of UML activities using dynamic meta modeling. In: Formal methods for open object-based distributed systems. Springer, Berlin, pp 76–90

  9. Eshuis R (2006) Symbolic model checking of UML activity diagrams. ACM Trans Softw Eng Methodol 15(1):1–38

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Eshuis R, Wieringa R (2002) Verification support for workflow design with UML activity graphs. In: Proceedings of the 24th international conference on software engineering. ACM, pp 166–176

  11. Eshuis R, Wieringa R (2004) Tool support for verifying UML activity diagrams. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 30(7):437–447

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Farail P, Goutillet P, Canals A, Le Camus C, Sciamma D, Michel P, Crégut X, Pantel M (2006) The TOPCASED project: a toolkit in open source for critical aeronautic systems design. Ingenieurs de l’Automobile 781:54–59

    Google Scholar 

  13. Foures D, Albert V, Pascal JC, Nketsa A (2012) Automation of SysML activity diagram simulation with model-driven engineering approach. In: Proceedings of the 2012 symposium on theory of modeling and simulation—DEVS integrative M&S symposium, TMS/DEVS ’12. Society for Computer Simulation International, San Diego, pp 11:1–11:6

  14. Jensen K, Kristensen LM, Wells L (2007) Coloured Petri nets and CPN tools for modelling and validation of concurrent systems. Int J Softw Tools Technol Transf 9(3):213–254

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Kanso B, Taha S (2013) Temporal constraint support for OCL. In: Software language engineering. Springer, Berlin, pp 83–103

  16. Knorreck D, Apvrille L, de Saqui-Sannes P (2011) TEPE: a SysML language for time-constrained property modeling and formal verification. ACM SIGSOFT Softw Eng Notes 36(1):1–8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Linhares MV, de Oliveira RS, Farines J-M, Vernadat F (2007) Introducing the modeling and verification process in SysML. In: Emerging technologies and factory automation (ETFA) IEEE conference. IEEE, pp 344–351

  18. Michael W, Ekkart K (2003) The Petri net markup language. In: Petri net technology for communication-based systems. Springer, Berlin, pp 124–144

  19. Nejati S, Sabetzadeh M, Falessi D, Briand L, Coq T (2012) A SysML-based approach to traceability management and design slicing in support of safety certification: framework, tool support, and case studies. Inf Softw Technol 54(6):569–590

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. OMG (2010) OMG Systems Modeling Language (OMG SysML\(^{{\rm TM}}\)) Version 1.2 Downloadable from http://www.omg.org

  21. Rahim M, Boukala-Ioualalen M, Hammad A (2014) Petri nets based approach for modular verification of SysML requirements on activity diagrams. In: PNSE’14, a satellite event of Petri Nets 2014 and ACSD 2014, Tunis, Tunisia, pp 233–248

  22. Rahim M, Hammad A, Ioulalen M (2013) Modular and distributed verification of SysML activity diagrams. In: MODELSWARD 2013, 1st international conference on model-driven engineering and software development, Barcelona, Spain, pp 202–205

  23. Siamak R (2008) Formal modeling and verification of software models. In: Proceedings of World academy of science, engineering and technology, pp 276–282

  24. Staines TS (2008) Intuitive mapping of UML 2 activity diagrams into fundamental modeling concept Petri net diagrams and colored Petri nets. In: 15th annual IEEE international conference and workshop on the engineering of computer based systems, 2008. ECBS 2008. IEEE, pp 191–200

  25. Störrle H (2005) Semantics and verification of data flow in UML 2.0 activities. Electron Notes Theor Comput Sci 127(4):35–52

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Ziemann P, Gogolla M (2003) OCL extended with temporal logic. In: Perspectives of system informatics. Springer, Berlin, pp 351–357

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. FEMTO-ST Institute, UMR CNRS 6174, Besancon, France

    Messaoud Rahim & Ahmed Hammad

  2. MOVEP, Computer Science Department, USTHB, Algiers, Algeria

    Messaoud Rahim & Malika Ioualalen

Authors
  1. Messaoud Rahim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ahmed Hammad
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Malika Ioualalen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ahmed Hammad.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Rahim, M., Hammad, A. & Ioualalen, M. A methodology for verifying SysML requirements using activity diagrams. Innovations Syst Softw Eng 13, 19–33 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11334-016-0281-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11334-016-0281-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation