skip to main content
10.1145/3382025.3414963acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagessplcConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Towards facilities for modeling and synthesis of architectures for resource allocation problem in systems engineering

Published:19 October 2020Publication History

ABSTRACT

Exploring architectural design space is often beyond human capacity and makes architectural design a difficult task. Model-based systems engineering must include assistance to the system designer in identifying candidate architectures to subsequently analyze tradeoffs. Unfortunately, existing languages and approaches do not incorporate this concern, generally favoring solution analysis over exploring a set of candidate architectures.

In this paper, we explore the advantages of designing and configuring the variability problem to solve one of the problems of exploring (synthesizing) candidate architectures in systems engineering: the resource allocation problem. More specifically, this work reports on the use of the Clafer modeling language and its gateway to the CSP Choco Solver, on an industrial case study of heterogeneous hardware resource allocation (GPP-GPGPU-FPGA).

Based on experiments on the modeling in Clafer, and the impact of its translation into the constraint programming paradigm (performance studies), discussions highlight some issues concerning facilities for modeling and synthesis of architectures and recommendations are proposed towards the use of this variability approach.

References

  1. Process Integration and Design Optimization for Model-Based Systems Engineering With SysML, volume Volume 2: 31st Computers and Information in Engineering Conference, Parts A and B of International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference, 08 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. A. Aleti, B. Buhnova, L. Grunske, A. Koziolek, and I. Meedeniya. Software architecture optimization methods: A systematic literature review. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 39(5):658--683, 2013.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Michał Antkiewicz, Kacper Bąk, Alexandr Murashkin, Rafael Olaechea, Jia Hui (Jimmy) Liang, and Krzysztof Czarnecki. Clafer tools for product line engineering. In 17th SPLC Co-Located Workshops, SPLC '13 Workshops, page 130--135, New York, NY, USA, 2013. Association for Computing Machinery.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Eugene Asarin, Thao Dang, Oded Maler, and Romain Testylier. Using redundant constraints for refinement. In Ahmed Bouajjani and Wei-Ngan Chin, editors, Automated Technology for Verification and Analysis, pages 37--51, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2010. Springer Berlin Heidelberg.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Kacper Bąk, Zinovy Diskin, Michał Antkiewicz, Krzysztof Czarnecki, and Andrzej Wąsowski. Clafer: Unifying class and feature modeling. SoSyM, 2014.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Jaclyn M. Branscomb, Christiaan J.J. Paredis, Judy Che, and Mark J. Jennings. Supporting multidisciplinary vehicle analysis using a vehicle reference architecture model in sysml. Procedia Computer Science, 16:79 -- 88, 2013. 2013 Conference on Systems Engineering Research.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. G. Campeanu, J. Carlson, and S. Sentilles. Component allocation optimization for heterogeneous cpu-gpu embedded systems. In 2014 40th EUROMICRO Conference on Software Engineering and Advanced Applications, pages 229--236, 2014.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Xavier Lorca Charles Prud'homme, Jean-Guillaume Fages. Choco3 Documentation. TASC, INRIA Rennes, LINA CNRS UMR 6241, COSLING S.A.S., 2014.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. R. H. Dinger. Engineering design optimization with genetic algorithms. In Northcon/98. Conference Proceedings (Cat. No.98CH36264), pages 114--119, 1998.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. J. Feljan and J. Carlson. Task allocation optimization for multicore embedded systems. In 2014 40th EUROMICRO Conference on Software Engineering and Advanced Applications, pages 237--244, 2014.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Sanford Friedenthal, Alan Moore, and Rick Steiner, editors. A Practical Guide to SysML. The MK/OMG Press. Morgan Kaufmann, Boston, third edition, 2015.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Lars Grunske, Peter Lindsay, Egor Bondarev, Yiannis Papadopoulos, and David Parker. An Outline of an Architecture-Based Method for Optimizing Dependability Attributes of Software-Intensive Systems, pages 188--209. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2007.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. GSD Lab, University of Waterloo. The Language clafer. BNF-converter (https://github.com/gsdlab/clafer/raw/master/doc/clafer.pdf), 2015.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Fernando Herrera, Héctor Posadas, Pablo Peñil, Eugenio Villar, Francisco Ferrero, Raúl Valencia, and Gianluca Palermo. The complex methodology for uml/marte modeling and design space exploration of embedded systems. Journal of Systems Architecture, 60(1):55 -- 78, 2014.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Technical Committee ISO/IECJTC1/SC7. Software, systems and enterprise --- architecture processes. ISO/IEC/IEEE 42020:2019, page 110, 07 2019.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Eunsuk Kang, Ethan Jackson, and Wolfram Schulte. An approach for effective design space exploration. In Radu Calinescu and Ethan Jackson, editors, Foundations of Computer Software. Modeling, Development, and Verification of Adaptive Systems, pages 33--54, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2011. Springer Berlin Heidelberg.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Kyo Kang, Sholom Cohen, James Hess, William Novak, and A. Peterson. Feature-oriented domain analysis (foda) feasibility study. 01 1990.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Eldar Khalilov, Jordan Ross, Michał Antkiewicz, Markus Völter, and Krzysztof Czarnecki. Modeling and optimizing automotive electric/electronic (e/e) architectures: Towards making clafer accessible to practitioners. In Tiziana Margaria and Bernhard Steffen, editors, Leveraging Applications of Formal Methods, Verification and Validation: Discussion, Dissemination, Applications, pages 447--464, Cham, 2016. Springer International Publishing.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. S. Lazreg, M. Cordy, P. Collet, P. Heymans, and S. Mosser. Multifaceted automated analyses for variability-intensive embedded systems. In 2019 IEEE/ACM 41st International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE), pages 854--865, 2019.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Sami Lazreg, Philippe Collet, and Sébastien Mosser. Assessing the functional feasibility of variability-intensive data flow-oriented systems. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Symposium on Applied Computing, SAC '18, page 2066--2075, New York, NY, USA, 2018. Association for Computing Machinery.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Patrick Leserf, Pierre de Saqui-Sannes, and Jérôme Hugues. Trade-off analysis for sysml models using decision points and csps. Software and Systems Modeling, 18(6):3265--3281, Dec 2019.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. Murashkin, Alexandr. Automotive electronic/electric architecture modeling, design exploration and optimization using clafer, 2014.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Rafael Olaechea, Steven Stewart, Krzysztof Czarnecki, and Derek Rayside. Modelling and multi-objective optimization of quality attributes in variability-rich software. In Proceedings of the Fourth International Workshop on Nonfunctional System Properties in Domain Specific Modeling Languages, NFPinDSML '12, New York, NY, USA, 2012. Association for Computing Machinery.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. A. Pretschner, M. Broy, I. H. Kruger, and T. Stauner. Software engineering for automotive systems: A roadmap. In FOSE '07, pages 55--71, 2007.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Jordan A. Ross, Michał Antkiewicz, and Krzysztof Czarnecki. Case studies on e/e architectures for power window and central door locks systems, 2016.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Jordan A. Ross, Alexandr Murashkin, Jia Hui Liang, Michał Antkiewicz, and Krzysztof Czarnecki. Synthesis and exploration of multi-level, multi-perspective architectures of automotive embedded systems. Software & Systems Modeling, 18(1):739--767, Feb 2019.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Norbert Siegmund, Marko Rosenmüller, Martin Kuhlemann, Christian Kästner, Sven Apel, and Gunter Saake. Spl conqueror: Toward optimization of non-functional properties in software product lines. Software Quality Journal, 20(3):487--517, Sep 2012.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. Pierre-Alain Yvars and Laurent Zimmer. [deps: A language for the specification of system design problems] deps : Un langage pour le spécicification de problèmes de conception de systèmes. In 10ème Conférence Francophone de Modélisation, Optimisation et Simulation- MOSIM'14, 11 2014.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. I. Švogor, I. Crnković, and N. Vrček. Multi-criteria software component allocation on a heterogeneous platform. In Proceedings of the ITI 2013 35th International Conference on Information Technology Interfaces, pages 341--346, 2013.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Towards facilities for modeling and synthesis of architectures for resource allocation problem in systems engineering

        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
        • Published in

          cover image ACM Conferences
          SPLC '20: Proceedings of the 24th ACM Conference on Systems and Software Product Line: Volume A - Volume A
          October 2020
          323 pages
          ISBN:9781450375696
          DOI:10.1145/3382025

          Copyright © 2020 ACM

          Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 19 October 2020

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • research-article

          Acceptance Rates

          SPLC '20 Paper Acceptance Rate17of49submissions,35%Overall Acceptance Rate167of463submissions,36%

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader