Abstract
Formal description techniques, such as Lotos and Sdl, have been proven as a successful means for developing communication protocols and distributed systems. Meanwhile the Unified Modeling Language (UML) has achieved wide acceptance. It is, however, less applied in the field of protocol design due to the lack of an appropriate formal semantics. In this paper we propose a formalization technique for UML activity diagrams using the compositional Temporal Logic of Actions (cTLA). We use cTLA because it can express correctness properties in temporal logic and can also be verified formally using several model checking mechanisms. The approach consists of two steps. First, we predefine the formal semantics of the most commonly used UML activity nodes using simple cTLA. In the second step we derive the functional semantics of the activity diagram by mapping it to a compositional cTLA process. We illustrate our approach for a connection set up as an example. Finally we present with the Activity to cTLA generator a tool to automate this process.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
ITU-T Recommendation Z.100: Specification and Description Language (2000)
ISO LOTOS: A Formal Description Technique Based on the Temporal Ordering of Observational Behaviour, IS 8807 (1988)
Babich, F., Deotto, L.: Formal Methods for Specification and Development of Communication Protocols. IEEE Comm. Surveys and Tutorials 4, 2–20 (2002)
Object Management Group: Catalog of UML Profile Specifications (2011)
Object Management Group: UML Superstructure Specification Document (2009)
Kaliappan, P.S., König, H., Schmerl, S.: Model-Driven Protocol Design Based on Component Oriented Modeling. In: Dong, J.S., Zhu, H. (eds.) ICFEM 2010. LNCS, vol. 6447, pp. 613–629. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)
Kaliappan, P.S., König, H.: An Approach to Synchronize UML-Based Design Components for Model-Driven Protocol Development. In: 34th Annual IEEE Software Engineering Workshop. IEEE, Limerick (2011)
Herrmann, P., Krumm, H.: A Framework for Modeling Transfer Protocols. Computer Networks 34(2), 317–337 (2000)
Kraemer, F.A.: Arctis and Ramses: Tool Suites for Rapid Service Engineering. In: Proc. of the Norwegian Informatics Conference, Oslo, Norway (2007)
Lamport, L.: Specifying Systems. Addison Wesley (2002)
Graw, G., Herrmann, P., Krumm, H.: Verification of UML-Based Real-Time System Designs by Means of cTLA. In: Proc. of the 3rd IEEE Int. Symposium on Object-Oriented Real-Time Distributed Computing. IEEE (2000)
Kaliappan, P.S.: cTLA-based Semantics Specification for UML Activity Diagram. Technical Report, Computer Science Department, Brandenburg University of Technology Cottbus (2010), http://www-rnks.informatik.tu-cottbus.de/de/node/334
Eshuis, H., Wieringa, R.J.: A Formal Semantics for UML Activity Diagrams - Formalizing Workflow Models. CTIT technical reports series (2001)
Araújo, J., Moreira, A.: Integrating UML Activity Diagrams with Temporal Logic Expressions. In: Proceedings of the 10th International Workshop on Exploring Modelling Methods for Systems Analysis and Design, Portugal (2005)
Störrle, H., Hausmann, J.H.: Towards a Formal Semantics of UML 2.0 Activities. In: Proc. of the German Software Engineering Conference, vol. P-64 (2005)
Börger, E., Cavarra, A., Riccobene, E.: An ASM Semantics for UML Activity Diagrams. In: Rus, T. (ed.) AMAST 2000. LNCS, vol. 1816, pp. 293–308. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)
Sarstedt, S., Guttmann, W.: An ASM Semantics of Token Flow in UML 2 Activity Diagrams. In: Virbitskaite, I., Voronkov, A. (eds.) PSI 2006. LNCS, vol. 4378, pp. 349–362. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)
Jürgens, J.: Formal Semantics for Interacting UML Subsystems. In: Proc. of the IFIP 5th Intl. Conf. on Formal Methods for OODS, vol. 209, pp. 29–43. Kluwer B.V (2002)
Object Constraint Language: Object Management Group (2011)
Information Technology — Z Formal Specification Notation — Syntax, Type System and Semantics (ISO/IEC 13568:2002 ed.), p. 196 (2002)
Holzmann, G.J.: The Spin Model Checker. Addison-Wesley (2006)
Kaliappan, P.S., König, H.: Model Transformation from cTLA onto Promela for Model Checking the Protocol Designs. Technical Report, Computer Science Department, Brandenburg University of Technology Cottbus (2011), http://www-rnks.informatik.tu-cottbus.de/de/node/334
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2012 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Kaliappan, P.S., König, H. (2012). On the Formalization of UML Activities for Component-Based Protocol Design Specifications. In: Bieliková, M., Friedrich, G., Gottlob, G., Katzenbeisser, S., Turán, G. (eds) SOFSEM 2012: Theory and Practice of Computer Science. SOFSEM 2012. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 7147. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-27660-6_39
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-27660-6_39
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-27659-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-27660-6
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)