Abstract
While object diagrams (ODs) are widely used as a means to document object-oriented systems, they are expressively weak, as they are limited to describe specific possible snapshots of the system at hand. In this paper we introduce modal object diagrams (MODs), which extend the classical OD language with positive/negative and example/invariant modalities. The extended language allows the designer to specify not only positive example models but also negative examples, ones that the system should not allow, positive invariants, ones that all system’s snapshots should include, and negative invariants, ones that no system snapshot is allowed to include. Moreover, as a primary application of the extended language we provide a formal verification technique that decides whether a given class diagram satisfies (i.e., models) a multi-modal object diagrams specification. In case of a negative answer, the technique outputs relevant counterexample object models, as applicable. The verification is based on a reduction to Alloy. The ideas are implemented in a prototype Eclipse plug-in. Examples show the usefulness of the extended language in specifying structural requirements of object-oriented systems in an intuitive yet expressive way.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Anastasakis, K., Bordbar, B., Georg, G., Ray, I.: On challenges of model transformation from UML to Alloy. Software and Systems Modeling 9(1), 69–86 (2010)
Berardi, D., Calvanese, D., Giacomo, G.D.: Reasoning on UML class diagrams. Artif. Intell. 168(1-2), 70–118 (2005)
Broy, M., Cengarle, M.V., Grönniger, H., Rumpe, B.: Definition of the System Model. In: Lano, K. (ed.) UML 2 Semantics and Applications. Wiley, Chichester (2009)
Cengarle, M.V., Grönniger, H., Rumpe, B.: System Model Semantics of Class Diagrams. Informatik-Bericht 2008-05, Technische Universität Braunschweig (2008)
Damm, W., Harel, D.: LSCs: Breathing life into Message Sequence Charts. Formal Methods in System Design 19(1), 45–80 (2001)
Dresden OCL, http://www.reuseware.org/index.php/DresdenOCL (accessed April 2011)
Eclipse UML2 project, http://www.eclipse.org/modeling/mdt/?project=uml2 (accessed April 2011)
Evans, A., France, R.B., Peng, S.-L.: The UML as a Formal Modeling Notation. In: Bézivin, J., Muller, P.-A. (eds.) UML 1998. LNCS, vol. 1618, pp. 336–348. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)
FreeMarker, http://freemarker.org/ (accessed April 2011)
Gogolla, M., Kuhlmann, M., Hamann, L.: Consistency, independence and consequences in UML and OCL models. In: Dubois, C. (ed.) TAP 2009. LNCS, vol. 5668, pp. 90–104. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)
Harel, D., Kugler, H.: Synthesizing state-based object systems from LSC specifications. Int. J. Found. Comput. Sci. 13(1), 5–51 (2002)
Harel, D., Maoz, S.: Assert and negate revisited: Modal semantics for UML sequence diagrams. Software and Systems Modeling (SoSyM) 7(2), 237–252 (2008)
Harel, D., Maoz, S., Segall, I.: Some Results on the Expressive Power and Complexity of LSCs. In: Avron, A., Dershowitz, N., Rabinovich, A. (eds.) Pillars of Computer Science. LNCS, vol. 4800, pp. 351–366. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)
IBM Rational Software Architect (RSA), http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/rational/products/rsa/ (accessed April 2011)
Jackson, D.: Software Abstractions: Logic, Language, and Analysis. MIT Press, Cambridge (2006)
Jouault, F., Allilaire, F., Bézivin, J., Kurtev, I.: ATL: A model transformation tool. Sci. Comput. Program. 72(1-2), 31–39 (2008)
Kent, S.: Constraint diagrams: Visualizing assertions in object-oriented models. In: OOPSLA, pp. 327–341 (1997)
Krahn, H., Rumpe, B., Völkel, S.: MontiCore: a framework for compositional development of domain specific languages. International Journal on Software Tools for Technology Transfer (STTT) 12(5), 353–372 (2010)
Kuss, E.: Using Alloy Analyzer for automated consistency checks between UML/P class and object diagrams. Master’s thesis, Software Engineering, RWTH Aachen, Germany (2010) (in German)
Maoz, S., Ringert, J.O., Rumpe, B.: CDDiff: Semantic differencing for class diagrams. In: Mezini, M. (ed.) ECOOP 2011. LNCS, vol. 6813, pp. 230–254. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)
Maraee, A., Balaban, M.: Efficient reasoning about finite satisfiability of UML class diagrams with constrained generalization sets. In: Akehurst, D.H., Vogel, R., Paige, R.F. (eds.) ECMDA-FA. LNCS, vol. 4530, pp. 17–31. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)
MOD project materials, http://www.se-rwth.de/materials/mod/
MontiCore project, http://www.monticore.org/
Nierstrasz, O.: Ten things I hate about object-oriented programming. ECOOP 2010 9(5) (September 2010) (editorial [Banquet speech given at ECOOP 2010, Maribor, June 24 2010])
OMG (Object Management Group). Object Constraint Language (OCL), http://www.omg.org/spec/OCL/2.2/ (accessed May 2011)
Poseidon for UML, http://www.gentleware.com/ (accessed May 2011)
Rumpe, B.: Modellierung mit UML. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)
SAT4J project, http://www.sat4j.org/ (accessed May 2011)
Sen, S., Baudry, B., Vangheluwe, H.: Towards domain-specific model editors with automatic model completion. Simulation 86(2), 109–126 (2010)
Shah, S.M.A., Anastasakis, K., Bordbar, B.: From UML to alloy and back again. In: Ghosh, S. (ed.) MODELS 2009. LNCS, vol. 6002, pp. 158–171. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)
Soeken, M., Wille, R., Kuhlmann, M., Gogolla, M., Drechsler, R.: Verifying UML/OCL models using Boolean satisfiability. In: DATE, pp. 1341–1344. IEEE, Los Alamitos (2010)
Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect, http://www.sparxsystems.com/ (accessed May 2011)
Van Der Straeten, R., Mens, T., Simmonds, J., Jonckers, V.: Using description logic to maintain consistency between UML models. In: Stevens, P., Whittle, J., Booch, G. (eds.) UML 2003. LNCS, vol. 2863, pp. 326–340. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)
Uchitel, S., Kramer, J., Magee, J.: Negative scenarios for implied scenario elicitation. In: SIGSOFT FSE, pp. 109–118. ACM, New York (2002)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2011 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Maoz, S., Ringert, J.O., Rumpe, B. (2011). Modal Object Diagrams. In: Mezini, M. (eds) ECOOP 2011 – Object-Oriented Programming. ECOOP 2011. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 6813. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-22655-7_14
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-22655-7_14
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-22654-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-22655-7
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)