skip to main content
column

Low-level dynamic system formation with high-level automation: extending UML in support of UPnP

Published:11 May 2010Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

One way of defining system evolvability is in terms of the lowlevel discrete-systems composition and dynamic bindings. Evidently, direct low-level implementation has its drawbacks and might be expensive for the performance of system formation process and system integrity. Engaging high-level design capabilities based on a standard method in support of low-level system formation can find a crucial role in this setting. Universal Plug and Play (UPnP) is a well-known standard facilitating dynamic integration of devices into networks. Operating as a low-level programming method, UPnP might be composed with high-level design facilities. This paper presents a conceptual framework to provide UPnP with native UML support through UML extensions. An implemented UML to UPnP conversion model offers the contribution of this research as an automated solution for the high-level support.

References

  1. Bastani, B., H. Bastani (Nov. 2007): High-Level Open Evolvable Systems Design by Process-Oriented Modeling: Application to DNA Replication Mechanism. ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes, Volume 32, Issue 6. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Vilei, A., et al. (2006): A New UPnP Architecture for Distributed Video Voice over IP. Mobile and Ubiquitous Multimedia; Vol. 193. Proceedings of the 5th international conference on Mobile and ubiquitous multimedia, Stanford, California. ISBN:1-59593-607-6. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. UPnP™ Forum, Universal Plug and Play Device Architecture, http://www.upnp.org/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Microsoft Developer Network Library, UPnP Architecture, http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa382303(VS.85).aspxGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Miller, B., et al. (December 2001): Home Networking with Universal Plug and Play. IEEE Communications Magazine, Volume 39, Issue 12. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Jeronimo, M., J. Weast (2003) : UPnP Design by Example: A Software Developer's Guide to Universal Plug and Play, Intel Press, USA. ISBN-13: 978-0971786110. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Object Management Group (OMG). UML Specification, http://www.omg.org/technology/documents/formal/uml.htm.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Object Management Group (OMG). UML Resource Page. http://www.uml.orgGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Kandé, M., et al. (Oct. 2000): Towards a UML Profile for Software Architecture Descriptions. Proceedings of UML'2000 -- The Unified Modeling Language: Advancing the Standard, Third International Conference, York, UK. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Hilliard, R. (1999): Using the UML for Architectural Description. Proceedings of UML'99 , Second International Conference, volume 1723 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Lassing, N., et al. (March 2000): Using UML in Architecture-Level Modifiability Analysis. Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam. Proceedings of ICSE 2001 Workshop on Describing Software Architecture with UML.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Kobryn, C., (October 2000): Modeling Components and Frameworks with UML. Communications of the ACM, Vol. 43, No. 10. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Medvidovic, N., et al. (January 2002): Modeling Software Architectures in the Unified Modeling Language. ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology, Vol. 11, No. 1. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Duddy, K. (November 2002): UML2 Must Enable a Family of Languages. Communications of the ACM, Vol. 45, No. 11. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Baresi, L., et al. (2001): Extending UML for Modeling Web Applications. Proceedings of the 34th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Atkinson, C., Kuhne, T. (Oct. 2002): Rearchitecting the UML Infrastructure. ACM Transactions on Modeling and Computer Simulation, Vol. 12, No. 4. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Richard, G. (2002): Service and Device Discovery : Protocols and Programming. McGraw-Hill Professional, New York. ISBN-13: 978-0071379595. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Friday, A. et al. (2004): Supporting Service Discovery, Querying and Interaction in Ubiquitous Computing Environments. Wireless Networks, Volume 10, Issue 6. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Glässer, U., Y. Gurevich, M. Veanes (2002): High-Level Executable Specification of the Universal Plug and Play Architecture. HICSS'02: Proceedings of the 35th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Volume 9. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Kangasn, M. (Autumn 2002): Authentication and Authorization in Universal Plug and Play Home Networks. Ad Hoc Mobile Wireless Networks *** Research Seminar on Telecommunications Software, Helsinki University of Technology.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Brito de Freitas, G. (2009): Ubiquitous Services in Home Networks offered through Digital TV. Proceedings of the 2009 ACM symposium on Applied Computing, Honolulu, Hawaii. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Glässer, U., M. Veanes (2002): Universal Plug and Play Machine Models. Microsoft Research Technical Report, http://research.microsoft.com/pubs/77828/GlaesserVeanesDIPES02.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. World Wide Web Consortium: Simple Object Access Protocol (SOAP). http://www.w3.org/TR/soapGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Rumbaugh, J.; I. Jacobson, G. Booch (1999): The Unified Modeling Language Reference Manual. Addison-Wesley Longman, Reading, Mass. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Booch, G., J. Rumbaugh, I. Jacobson (1999): The Unified Modeling Language User Guide. Addison-Wesley Longman, Boston. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. Boggs, W., M. Boggs (1999): Mastering UML with Rational Rose. Sybex, San Francisco. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Silva, L., V. De Paula (2002): Comparative Analysis of Architectural Views Based on UML. Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science 65 No. 4.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Fontoura, M., et al. (2001): Extending UML to Improve the Representation of Design Patterns. JOOP, Vol. 13, No. 11.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Bouassida, N., H. Ben-Abdallah (March 2006): Extending UML to Guide Design Pattern Reuse. AICCSA '06: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Computer Systems and Applications. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. Schulz-Key, C., et al. (Jan. 2004): Object-Oriented Modeling and Synthesis of SystemC Specifications. Proceedings of the ASP-DAC 2004, Asia and South Pacific Design Automation Conference. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. Fernandes, J.M., R.J. Machado, H.D. Santos (2000): Modeling Industrial Embedded Systems with UML. CODES 2000: Proceedings of the Eighth International Workshop on Hardware/Software Codesign. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. Martin, G., L. Lavagno, J. Louis-Guerin, (2001): Embedded UML: A Merger of Real-Time UML and Co-Design. CODES 2001: Proceedings of the Ninth International Symposium on Hardware/Software Codesign. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. Object Management Group (OMG): Meta-Object Facility (MOF) Specification. http://www.omg.org/mof.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. Object Management Group (OMG): UML Superstructure Specification. www.omg.org.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. Krogstie, J. (2003): Evaluating UML using a Generic Quality Framework, in UML and the Unified Process. IGI Publishing Hershey, PA, USA. ISBN:1-931777-44-6. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. Bastani, B., D. Greaves (July 2009): Complex Open-System Design by Quasi-Agents: Process-Oriented Modeling in Agent-Based Systems. ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes, Volume 34, Issue 4. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. Bastani, B. (July 2009): A Process-Oriented Requirements Analysis Framework for Open Systems Requirements Engineering. In 1st International Workshop on Requirements Analysis. Proceedings of IWRA 2008. Pearson Custom Publishing, London. ISBN 978-1-84776-663-2.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Low-level dynamic system formation with high-level automation: extending UML in support of UPnP

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in

    Full Access

    • Article Metrics

      • Downloads (Last 12 months)0
      • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0

      Other Metrics

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader