期刊文献+

Validation of static properties in unified modeling language models for cyber physical systems 被引量:2

Validation of static properties in unified modeling language models for cyber physical systems
原文传递
导出
摘要 Cyber physical systems (CPSs) can be found nowadays in various fields of activity. The increased interest for these systems as evidenced by the large number of applications led to complex research regarding the most suitable methods for design and development. A promising solution for specification, visualization, and documentation of CPSs uses the Object Management Group (OMG) unified modeling language (UML). UML models allow an intuitive approach for embedded systems design, helping end-users to specify the requirements. However, the UML models are represented in an informal language. Therefore, it is difficult to verify the correctness and completeness of a system design. The object constraint language (OCL) was defined to add constraints to UML, but it is deficient in strict notations of mathematics and logic that permits rigorous analysis and reasoning about the specifications. In this paper, we investigated how CPS applications modeled using UML deployment diagrams could be formally expressed and verified. We used Z language constructs and prototype verification system (PVS) as formal verification tools. Considering some relevant case studies presented in the literature, we investigated the opportunity of using this approach for validation of static properties in CPS UML models. Cybcr physical systems (CPSs) can be found nowadays in various fields of activity. The increased interest for these systems as evidenced by the large number of applications led to complex research regarding the most suitable methods for design and development. A promising solution for specification, visualization, and documentation of CPSs uses the Object Management Group (OMG) unified modeling language (UML). UML models allow an intuitive approach for embedded systems design, helping end-users to specify the requirements. However, the UML models are represented in an informal language. Therefore, it is difficult to verify the correctness and completeness of a system design. The object constraint language (OCL) was defined to add constraints to UML, but it is deficient in strict notations of mathematics and logic that permits rigorous analysis and reasoning about the specifications. In this paper, we investigated how CPS applications modeled using UML deployment diagrams could be formally expressed and verified. We used Z language constructs and prototype verification system (PVS) as formal verification tools. Considering some relevant case studies presented in the literature, we investigated the opportunity of using this approach for validation of static properties in CPS UML models.
出处 《Journal of Zhejiang University-Science C(Computers and Electronics)》 SCIE EI 2013年第5期332-346,共15页 浙江大学学报C辑(计算机与电子(英文版)
基金 Project partially supported by the Strategic Grants POSDRU/88/1.5/S/50783 Project (No.50783,2009),POSDRU/107/1.5/S/77265 Project (No.77265,2010),Romania the European Social Fund for Investing in People, within the Sectoral Operational Programme Human Resources Development 2007-2013
关键词 Cyber physical system (CPS) Unified modeling language (UML) design Formal verification Prototype verification system (PVS) Z language Cyber physical system (CPS), Unified modeling language (UML) design, Formal verification, Prototype verificationsystem (PVS), Z language
  • 相关文献

参考文献33

  • 1Andersson, P., Host, M., 2008. UML and SystemC a com- parison and mapping rules for automatic code generation. LNEE, 10:199-209. [doi: 10.10071978-1-4020-8297-9_14].
  • 2Andre, C., Cuccuru, S., Dekeyser, J.L., de Simone, R., Du- moulin, C., Forget, J., Gautier, T., G6rard, S., Mallet, F., Radermacher, A., et al., 2005. MARTE: a New OMG Profile RFP for the Modeling and Analysis of Real-time Embedded Systems. DAC Workshop UML for SoC De- sign, p.16-21.
  • 3Aredo, D.B., 2002. A framework for semantics of UML se- quence diagrams in PVS. J. Univers. Comput. Sci., 8(7): 674-698. [doi: 10.3217/jucs-008-07].
  • 4Aredo, D.B., 2003. Formal Semantics of UML Statecharts in PVS. Proc. 7th World Multiconf. on Systemics, Cyber- netics, and Informatics, Orlando, Florida, USA.
  • 5Aredo, D.B., Traore, I., Stolen, K., 1999. Towards Formaliza- tion of UML Class Structure in PVS. Research Report No 272, Department of Informatics, University of Oslo, Norway.
  • 6Baar, T., 2005. Non-deterministic constructs in OCL what does any() mean. LNCS, 3530:32-46. [doi:10.10071 11506843_3].
  • 7Bhutto, A., Hussain, D.M.A., 2011. Formal verification of UML profile. A ust. J. Basic Appl. Sci., 5(6): 1594-1598.
  • 8Bondavalli, A., Majzik, I., Mura, I., 1999. Automated De- pendability Analysis of UML Designs. Proc. 2nd IEEE Int. Syrup. on Object-Oriented Real-Time Distributed Computing, p.139-144. [doi:l 0.1109/ISORC.1999.776 367].
  • 9Buratti, C., Conti, A., Dardari, D., Verdone, R., 2009. An overview on wireless sensor networks technology and evolution. Sensors, 9(9):6869-6896. [doi:10.3390/s90906 869].
  • 10Clavel, M., Egea, M., 2006. ITP/OCL: a rewriting-based va- lidation tool for UML+OCL static class diagrams. LNCS, 4019:368-373. [doi:10.1007/11784180 28].

同被引文献10

引证文献2

二级引证文献11

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部