skip to main content
10.1145/1120725.1120773acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesaspdacConference Proceedingsconference-collections
Article

Comparing high-level modeling approaches for embedded system design

Published: 18 January 2005 Publication History

Abstract

This paper present a comparison between three different high-level modeling approaches for embedded systems design, focusing on systems that require dataflow models. The proposed evaluation investigates the facilities provided by these approaches for expressing systems requirements, functional specification, and timing constraints. Properties like model readability, testability, and implementability are also considered. Moreover, the support to different Models of Computation is also evaluated. A Crane Control System is used as case study to apply the proposed comparison criteria.

References

[1]
G. Booch, I. Jacobson, and J. Rumbaugh. "The Unified Modeling Language User Guide," Addison-Wesley, 1999.
[2]
L. Lavagno, G. Martin, and B. Selic. "UML for Real: Design of Embedded Real-Time Systems," Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2003.
[3]
L. Bichler, A. Radermacher, and A. Schürr. "Integrating Data Flow Equations with UML/Realtime". Real-Time Systems, n. 26, 2004, pp. 107--125.
[4]
E. Moser and W. Nebel. "Case Study: System Model of Crane and Embedded Control". In: Proceedings of DATE'1999 -- Design, Automation and Test in Europe, Munich, Germany, March 1999.
[5]
S. Edwards, L. Lavagno, E. A. Lee, and A. Sangiovanni-Vincentelli. "Design of Embedded Systems: Formal Models, Validation, and Synthesis". Proc. of IEEE, March 1997, pp. 366--390.
[6]
H. Gomaa. "Designing Concurrent Distributed, and Real-Time Applications with UML," Addison-Wesley, 2000.
[7]
Object Management Group (OMG). "UML Profile for Schedulability, Performance, and Time", 2002. OMG document n. ptc/02-03-02.
[8]
M. Ardis et al. "A Framework for Evaluating Specification Methods for Reactive Systems: Experience Report". IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering. vol. 22, no. 6, 1996. pp. 378--389.
[9]
J. Axelsson. Real-World Modeling in UML. In Proc. 13th International Conference on Software and Systems Engineering and their Applications, Paris, December 2000.
[10]
K. Berkenkötter, S. Bisanz, U. Hannemann, and J. Peleska. "Hybrid UML Profile for UML 2.0," In Proc of UML 2003 Workshop on Specification and Validation of UML Models for Real Time and Embedded Systems (SVERTS), San Francisco, USA, October 2003.
[11]
P.N. Green and S. Essa, "Integrating the Synchronous Dataflow Model with UML", Proceedings of DATE'2004 -- Design, Automation and Test in Europe, Paris, France, February 2004.

Cited By

View all
  1. Comparing high-level modeling approaches for embedded system design

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Information & Contributors

    Information

    Published In

    cover image ACM Conferences
    ASP-DAC '05: Proceedings of the 2005 Asia and South Pacific Design Automation Conference
    January 2005
    1495 pages
    ISBN:0780387376
    DOI:10.1145/1120725
    • General Chair:
    • Ting-Ao Tang
    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]

    Sponsors

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    Published: 18 January 2005

    Permissions

    Request permissions for this article.

    Check for updates

    Author Tags

    1. FB
    2. UML
    3. embedded systems design
    4. high-level modeling

    Qualifiers

    • Article

    Conference

    ASPDAC05
    Sponsor:

    Acceptance Rates

    Overall Acceptance Rate 466 of 1,454 submissions, 32%

    Contributors

    Other Metrics

    Bibliometrics & Citations

    Bibliometrics

    Article Metrics

    • Downloads (Last 12 months)0
    • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
    Reflects downloads up to 13 Feb 2025

    Other Metrics

    Citations

    Cited By

    View all

    View Options

    Login options

    View options

    PDF

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    Figures

    Tables

    Media

    Share

    Share

    Share this Publication link

    Share on social media