Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

A Fully General Operational Semantics for UML 2.0 Sequence Diagrams with Potential and Mandatory Choice

  • Conference paper
FM 2006: Formal Methods (FM 2006)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNPSE,volume 4085))

Included in the following conference series:

  • 1216 Accesses

Abstract

UML sequence diagrams is a specification language that has proved itself to be of great value in system development. When put to applications such as simulation, testing and other kinds of automated analysis there is a need for formal semantics. Such methods of automated analysis are by nature operational, and this motivates formalizing an operational semantics. In this paper we present an operational semantics for UML 2.0 sequence diagrams that we believe gives a solid starting point for developing methods for automated analysis. The operational semantics has been proved to be sound and complete with respect to a denotational semantics for the same language. It handles negative behavior as well as potential and mandatory choice. We are not aware of any other operational semantics for sequence diagrams of this strength.

The work of this paper was conducted within and funded by the Basic ICT Research project SARDAS (15295/431) under the Research Council of Norway. We would like to thank Rolv Bræk, Manfred Broy, Kathrin Greiner, Øystein Haugen, Birger Møller-Pedersen, Atle Refsdal, Ragnhild Kobro Runde, Ina Schieferdecker and Thomas Weigert for useful comments on this work.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Object Management Group: Unified Modeling Language: Superstructure, version 2.0, OMG Document: formal/2005-07-04 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  2. International Telecommunication Union: Message Sequence Chart (MSC), ITU-T Recommendation Z.120 (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Haugen, Ø., Husa, K.E., Runde, R.K., Stølen, K.: STAIRS towards formal design with sequence diagrams. Software and Systems Modeling 4, 355–367 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Haugen, Ø., Husa, K.E., Runde, R.K., Stølen, K.: Why timed sequence diagrams require three-event semantics. In: Leue, S., Systä, T.J. (eds.) Scenarios: Models, Transformations and Tools. LNCS, vol. 3466, pp. 1–25. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  5. Haugen, Ø., Husa, K.E., Runde, R.K., Stølen, K.: Why timed sequence diagrams require three-event semantics. Research report 309, Department of Informatics, University of Oslo (2004) (revised June 2005)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Lund, M.S., Stølen, K.: A fully general operational semantics for UML sequence diagrams with potential and mandatory choice. Research report 330, Department of Informatics, University of Oslo (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Jonsson, B., Padilla, G.: An execution semantics for MSC-2000. In: Reed, R., Reed, J. (eds.) SDL 2001. LNCS, vol. 2078, pp. 365–378. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  8. Harel, D., Marelly, R.: Come, let’s play: Scenario-based programming using LSCs and the Play-Engine. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Cavarra, A., Küster-Filipe, J.: Formalizing liveness-enriched sequence diagrams using ASMs. In: Zimmermann, W., Thalheim, B. (eds.) ASM 2004. LNCS, vol. 3052, pp. 67–77. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Harel, D., Maoz, S.: Assert and negate revisited: Modal semantics for UML sequence diagrams. In: 5th International Workshop on Scenarios and State Machines: Models, Algorithms, and Tools (SCESM 2006), pp. 13–19. ACM Press, New York (2006)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  11. Grosu, R., Smolka, S.A.: Safety-liveness semantics for UML 2.0 sequence diagrams. In: 5th International Conference on Application of Concurrency to System Design (ACSD 2005), pp. 6–14. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2005)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  12. Letichevsky, A., Kapitonova, J., Kotlyarov, V., Volkov, V., Letichevsky, A., Weigert, T.: Semantics of Message Sequence Charts. In: Prinz, A., Reed, R., Reed, J. (eds.) SDL 2005. LNCS, vol. 3530, pp. 117–132. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  13. Cengarle, M.V., Knapp, A.: Operational semantics of UML 2.0 interactions. Technical report TUM-I0505, Technische Universität München (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Alur, R., Etessami, K., Yannakakis, M.: Inference of Message Sequence Charts. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 29, 623–633 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Alur, R., Etessami, K., Yannakakis, M.: Realizability and verification of MSC graphs. Theoretical Computer Science 331, 97–114 (2005)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  16. Mauw, S., Reniers, M.A.: Operational semantics for MSC 1996. Computer Networks 31, 1785–1799 (1999)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Mauw, S., Reniers, M.A.: High-level Message Sequence Charts. In: 8th International SDL Forum: Time for Testing, SDL, MSC and Trends (SDL 1997), pp. 291–306. Elsevier, Amsterdam (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  18. International Telecommunication Union: Message Sequence Chart (MSC), ITU-T Recommendation Z.120, Annex B: Formal semantics of Message Sequence Charts (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Uchitel, S., Kramer, J., Magee, J.: Incremental elaboration of scenario-based specification and behavior models using implied scenarios. ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology 13, 37–85 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Kosiuczenko, P., Wirsing, M.: Towards an integration of Message Sequence Charts and Timed Maude. Journal of Integrated Design & Process Science 5, 23–44 (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Clavel, M., Durán, F., Eker, S., Lincoln, P., Martí-Oliet, N., Meseguer, J., Talcott, C.: Maude Manual (Version 2.2). SRI International, Menlo Park (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Lund, M.S., Stølen, K.: Deriving tests from UML 2.0 sequence diagrams with neg and assert. In: 1st International Workshop on Automation of Software Test (AST 2006), pp. 22–28. ACM Press, New York (2006)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Oslo, Norway

    Mass Soldal Lund & Ketil Stølen

  2. SINTEF Information and Communication Technology, Norway

    Mass Soldal Lund & Ketil Stølen

Authors
  1. Mass Soldal Lund
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ketil Stølen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. The University of Texas at Austin,  

    Jayadev Misra

  2. Institut für Informatik, Technische Universität, München,  

    Tobias Nipkow

  3. Department of Computing and Software, McMaster University, 1280 Main Street West, L8S 4K1, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada

    Emil Sekerinski

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2006 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Lund, M.S., Stølen, K. (2006). A Fully General Operational Semantics for UML 2.0 Sequence Diagrams with Potential and Mandatory Choice. In: Misra, J., Nipkow, T., Sekerinski, E. (eds) FM 2006: Formal Methods. FM 2006. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 4085. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/11813040_26

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/11813040_26

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-37215-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-37216-5

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation