skip to main content
10.1145/1383559.1383569acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesicpeConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Automatic extraction of PEPA performance models from UML activity diagrams annotated with the MARTE profile

Published: 23 June 2008 Publication History

Abstract

Recent trends in software engineering lean towards modelcentric development methodologies, a context in which the UML plays a crucial role. To provide modellers with quantitative insights into their artifacts, the UML benefits from a framework for software performance evaluation provided by MARTE, the UML profile for model-driven development of Real Time and Embedded Systems. MARTE offers a rich semantics which is general enough to allow different quantitative analysis techniques to act as underlying performance engines. In the present paper we explore the use of the stochastic process algebra PEPA as one such engine, providing a procedure to systematically map activity diagrams onto PEPA models. Independent activity flows are translated into sequential automata which co-ordinate at the synchronisation points expressed by fork and join nodes of the activity. The PEPA performance model is interpreted against a Markovian semantics which allows the calculation of performance indices such as throughput and utilisation. We also discuss the implementation of a new software tool powered by the popular Eclipse platform which implements the fully automatic translation from MARTE-annotated UML activity diagrams to PEPA models.

References

[1]
Proceedings of the Fifth International Workshop on Software and Performance, WOSP 2005, Palma, Illes Balears, Spain, July 12-14, 2005. ACM, 2005.
[2]
S. Balsamo, A. D. Marco, P. Inverardi, and M. Simeoni. Model-based performance prediction in software development: A survey. IEEE Trans. Software Eng., 30(5):295--310, 2004.
[3]
S. Balsamo and M. Marzolla. Performance evaluation of UML software architectures with multiclass queueing network models. In WOSP {1}, pages 37--42.
[4]
S. Bernardi, S. Donatelli, and J. Merseguer. From UML Sequence Diagrams and Statecharts to analysable Petri Net models. In P. Inverardi, S. Balsamo, and B. Selic, editors, Proceedings of the Third International Workshop on Software and Performance, pages 35--45, Rome, Italy, July 2002. ACM.
[5]
J. T. Bradley and S. T. Gilmore. Stochastic simulation methods applied to a secure electronic voting model. Electr. Notes Theor. Comput. Sci., 151(3):5--25, 2006.
[6]
C. Canevet, S. Gilmore, J. Hillston, L. Kloul, and P. Stevens. Analysing UML 2.0 Activity Diagrams in the Software Performance Engineering Process. In Dujmovic et al. {9}, pages 74--78.
[7]
C. Canevet, S. Gilmore, J. Hillston, M. Prowse, and P. Stevens. Performance Modelling with UML and Stochastic Process Algebras. IEE Proceedings: Computers and Digital Techniques, 150(2):107--120, Mar. 2003.
[8]
A. D?Ambrogio and P. Bocciarelli. A model-driven approach to describe and predict the performance of composite services. In V. Cortellessa, S. Uchitel, and D. Yankelevich, editors, WOSP, pages 78--89. ACM, 2007.
[9]
J. J. Dujmovic, V. A. F. Almeida, and D. Lea, editors. Proceedings of the Fourth International Workshop on Software and Performance, WOSP 2004, Redwood Shores, California, USA, January 14-16, 2004. ACM, 2004.
[10]
Eclipse Foundation. Eclipse UML2 Project Home Page. http://www.eclipse.org/uml2/.
[11]
S. Gilmore, J. Hillston, L. Kloul, and M. Ribaudo. Software Performance Modelling Using PEPA Nets. In Dujmovic et al. {9}, pages 13--23.
[12]
S. Gilmore, J. Hillston, and M. Ribaudo. An efficient algorithm for aggregating PEPA models. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 27(5):449--464, May 2001.
[13]
S. Gilmore and L. Kloul. A unified tool for performance modelling and predicition. In Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on Computer Safety, Reliability and Security (SAFECOMP?03), number 2788 in LNCS, pages 179--192, Edinburgh, Scotland, Sept. 2003. Springer-Verlag.
[14]
J. Hillston. A Compositional Approach to Performance Modelling. Cambridge University Press, 1996.
[15]
J. Hillston. Fluid flow approximation of PEPA models. In Proceedings of the Second International Conference on the Quantitative Evaluation of Systems, pages 33--43, Torino, Italy, Sept. 2005. IEEE Computer Society Press.
[16]
J. Hillston and Y. Wang. Performance evaluation of UML models via automatically generated simulation models. In S. A. Jarvis, editor, Proceedings of the 19th Annual UK Performance Engineering Workshop, pages 64--78, Warwick, UK, 2003.
[17]
IBM Corporation. Rational Software Architect. http://www-306.ibm.com/software/awdtools/architect/swarchitect/.
[18]
C. Lindemann, A. Thümmler, A. Klemm, M. Lohmann, and O. P. Waldhorst. Performance analysis of time-enhanced UML diagrams based on stochastic processes. In Workshop on Software and Performance, pages 25--34, 2002.
[19]
J. P. López-Grao, J. Merseguer, and J. Campos. From UML activity diagrams to Stochastic Petri nets: application to software performance engineering. In Dujmovic et al. {9}, pages 25--36.
[20]
J. Merseguer, S. Bernardi, J. Campos, and S. Donatelli. A Compositional Semantics for UML State Machines Aimed at Performance Evaluation. In M. Silva, A. Giua, and J. Colom, editors, Proceedings of the 6th International Workshop on Discrete Event Systems, pages 295--302, Zaragoza, Spain, October 2002. IEEE Computer Society Press.
[21]
J. Merseguer and J. Campos. Exploring Roles for the UML Diagrams in Software Performance Engineering. In Proceedings of the 2003 International Conference on Software Engineering Research and Practice SERP03, pages 43--47, Las Vegas, Nevada, USA, June 2003. CSREA Press.
[22]
Object Management Group. OMG MARTE Tools. http://www.omgmarte.org/Tools.htm.
[23]
Object Management Group. UML Profile for Schedulability, Performance, and Time Specification. Version 1.1. OMG, 2005. OMG document number formal/05-07-04.
[24]
Object Management Group. UML 2.2.1 Superstructure Specification. OMG, 2007. OMG document number formal/05-07-04.
[25]
Object Management Group. UML Profile for Modeling and Analysis of Real-Time and Embedded Systems (MARTE). Beta 1. OMG, 2007. OMG document number ptc/07-08-04.
[26]
D. C. Petriu and H. Shen. Applying the UML performance profile: Graph grammar-based derivation of LQN models from UML specifications. In T. Field, P. G. Harrison, J. T. Bradley, and U. Harder, editors, Computer Performance Evaluation / TOOLS, volume 2324 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 159--177. Springer, 2002.
[27]
J. Rumbaugh, I. Jacobson, and G. Booch. The Unified Modeling Language Reference Manual. Addison-Wesley.
[28]
J. Rumbaugh, I. Jacobson, and G. Booch. The Unified Modeling Language User Guide. Addison-Wesley.
[29]
M. Tribastone. The PEPA Plug-in Project. In Fourth International Conference on the Quantitative Evaluation of Systems, pages 53--54, United Kingdom, September 2007. IEEE Computer Society.
[30]
C. M. Woodside, D. C. Petriu, D. B. Petriu, H. Shen, T. Israr, and J. Merseguer. Performance by unified model analysis (PUMA). In WOSP {1}, pages 1--12.

Cited By

View all
  • (2022)Uncertainty-Aware Behavior Modeling and Quantitative Safety Evaluation for Automatic Flight Control Systems2022 IEEE 22nd International Conference on Software Quality, Reliability and Security (QRS)10.1109/QRS57517.2022.00062(549-560)Online publication date: Dec-2022
  • (2020)Inferring Performance from Code: A ReviewLeveraging Applications of Formal Methods, Verification and Validation: Verification Principles10.1007/978-3-030-61362-4_17(307-322)Online publication date: 29-Oct-2020
  • (2019)Cost and Performance Modeling for Earth System Data Management and BeyondHigh Performance Computing10.1007/978-3-030-02465-9_2(23-35)Online publication date: 25-Jan-2019
  • Show More Cited By

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences
WOSP '08: Proceedings of the 7th international workshop on Software and performance
June 2008
218 pages
ISBN:9781595938732
DOI:10.1145/1383559
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: 23 June 2008

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. marte
  2. pepa
  3. uml

Qualifiers

  • Research-article

Conference

WOSP '08
WOSP '08: Workshop on Software and Performance
June 23 - 26, 2008
NJ, Princeton, USA

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 149 of 241 submissions, 62%

Upcoming Conference

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)2
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 06 Jan 2025

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2022)Uncertainty-Aware Behavior Modeling and Quantitative Safety Evaluation for Automatic Flight Control Systems2022 IEEE 22nd International Conference on Software Quality, Reliability and Security (QRS)10.1109/QRS57517.2022.00062(549-560)Online publication date: Dec-2022
  • (2020)Inferring Performance from Code: A ReviewLeveraging Applications of Formal Methods, Verification and Validation: Verification Principles10.1007/978-3-030-61362-4_17(307-322)Online publication date: 29-Oct-2020
  • (2019)Cost and Performance Modeling for Earth System Data Management and BeyondHigh Performance Computing10.1007/978-3-030-02465-9_2(23-35)Online publication date: 25-Jan-2019
  • (2018)Towards Modeling Cyber-Physical Systems with SysML/MARTE/pCCSL2018 IEEE 42nd Annual Computer Software and Applications Conference (COMPSAC)10.1109/COMPSAC.2018.00042(264-269)Online publication date: Jul-2018
  • (2018)Towards Software Performance by ConstructionLeveraging Applications of Formal Methods, Verification and Validation. Modeling10.1007/978-3-030-03418-4_27(466-470)Online publication date: 29-Oct-2018
  • (2016)DiffLQNCompanion Publication for ACM/SPEC on International Conference on Performance Engineering10.1145/2859889.2859896(63-68)Online publication date: 12-Mar-2016
  • (2015)Quantitative Evaluation of Model-Driven Performance Analysis and Simulation of Component-Based ArchitecturesIEEE Transactions on Software Engineering10.1109/TSE.2014.236275541:2(157-175)Online publication date: 1-Feb-2015
  • (2015)Scaling size and parameter spaces in variability-aware software performance modelsProceedings of the 30th IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering10.1109/ASE.2015.16(407-417)Online publication date: 9-Nov-2015
  • (2015)Evolution of software in automated production systemsJournal of Systems and Software10.1016/j.jss.2015.08.026110:C(54-84)Online publication date: 1-Dec-2015
  • (2015)Abstract Interpretation of PEPA ModelsEssays Dedicated to Hanne Riis Nielson and Flemming Nielson on the Occasion of Their 60th Birthdays on Semantics, Logics, and Calculi - Volume 956010.1007/978-3-319-27810-0_7(140-158)Online publication date: 1-Oct-2015
  • Show More Cited By

View Options

Login options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media