skip to main content
10.1145/2491411.2491445acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesfseConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Incrementally synthesizing controllers from scenario-based product line specifications

Published:18 August 2013Publication History

ABSTRACT

Many software-intensive systems consist of components that interact to fulfill complex functionality. Moreover, often many variants of such systems have to be designed at once. This adds complexity to the design task. Recently, we proposed a scenario-based approach to design product lines, which combines feature diagrams and Modal Sequence Diagrams. We proposed a consistency-checking technique based on a dedicated product line model checker. One limitation of this technique is that it is incomplete, i.e., it may fail to show the consistency of some consistent specifications. In this paper we propose a new game-based approach that overcomes this incompleteness and, in addition, automatically synthesizes controllers for the consistent product specifications. We exploit the fact that many variants are similar and efficiently synthesize product controllers incrementally. We provide a prototype tool and evaluate the efficiency of the approach.

References

  1. M. Abadi, L. Lamport, and P. Wolper. Realizable and unrealizable specifications of reactive systems. In Proc. of ICALP ’89, volume 372 of LNCS, pages 1–17. Springer, 1989. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. M. Alférez, R. E. Lopez-Herrejon, A. Moreira, V. Amaral, and A. Egyed. Supporting consistency checking between features and software product line use scenarios. In Proc. of ICSR’11, volume 6727 of LNCS, pages 20–35, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2011. Springer. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. S. Apel, W. Scholz, C. Lengauer, and C. Kastner. Detecting dependences and interactions in feature-oriented design. In Proc. of ISSRE’10, pages 161–170. IEEE Computer Society, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. S. Apel, H. Speidel, P. Wendler, A. von Rhein, and D. Beyer. Feature-interaction detection using feature-aware verification. In Proc. of ASE’11, pages 372–375. IEEE, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. T. Berger, R. Rublack, D. Nair, J. M. Atlee, M. Becker, K. Czarnecki, and A. Wasowski. A survey of variability modeling in industrial practice. In Proc. of VaMoS’13, pages 7:1–7:8. ACM, 2013. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Y. Bontemps and P. Heymans. From live sequence charts to state machines and back: A guided tour. Transactions on Software Engineering, 31(12):999–1014, 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. C. Brenner, J. Greenyer, and V. Panzica La Manna. The ScenarioTools play-out of modal sequence diagram specifications with environment assumptions. In Proc. of GT-VMT’13, 2013. (to appear).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. F. Cassez, A. David, E. Fleury, K. G. Larsen, and D. Lime. Efficient on-the-fly algorithms for the analysis of timed games. In Proc. of CONCUR’05, volume 3653 of LNCS, pages 66–80. Springer, 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. A. Classen, P. Heymans, P.-Y. Schobbens, and A. Legay. Symbolic model checking of software product lines. In Proc. of ICSE’11, pages 321–330. ACM, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. C. Damas, B. Lambeau, and A. van Lamsweerde. Scenarios, goals, and state machines: a win-win partnership for model synthesis. In Proc. of FSE’06, pages 197–207, New York, NY, USA, 2006. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. A. David, G. Behrmann, P. Bulychev, J. Byg, T. Chatain, K. G. Larsen, P. Pettersson, J. I. Rasmussen, J. Srba, W. Yi, K. Y. Joergensen, D. Lime, M. Magnin, O. H. Roux, and L.-. Traonouez. Tools for model-checking timed systems. In Communicating Embedded Systems – Software and Design, pages 165–225. ISTE Publ./John Wiley, 2009.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. C. Ghezzi and A. M. Sharifloo. Model-based verification of quantitative non-functional properties for software product lines. Information and Software Technology, 2012. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. J. Greenyer. Scenario-based Design of Mechatronic Systems. PhD thesis, University of Paderborn, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. J. Greenyer, A. M. Sharifloo, M. Cordy, and P. Heymans. Efficient consistency checking of scenario-based product line specifications. In Proc. of RE’12, pages 161–170, 2012. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. D. Harel and H. Kugler. Synthesizing state-based object systems from LSC specifications. Foundations of Computer Science, 13:1:5–51, 2002.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. D. Harel, H. Kugler, and A. Pnueli. Synthesis revisited: Generating statechart models from scenario-based requirements. In Formal Methods in Software and Systems Modeling, volume 3393, pages 309–324. Springer, 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. D. Harel and S. Maoz. Assert and negate revisited: Modal semantics for UML sequence diagrams. Software and Systems Modeling (SoSyM), 7(2):237–252, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. D. Harel and R. Marelly. Come, Let’s Play: Scenario-Based Programming Using LSCs and the Play-Engine. Springer, 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. A. Harhurin and J. Hartmann. Towards consistent specifications of product families. In FM 2008: Formal Methods, volume 5014 of LNCS, pages 390–405. Springer, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. P. Jayaraman, J. Whittle, A. Elkhodary, and H. Gomaa. Model composition in product lines and feature interaction detection using critical pair analysis. In Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems, volume 4735 of LNCS, pages 151–165. Springer, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. K. C. Kang, S. G. Cohen, J. A. Hess, W. E. Novak, and A. S. Peterson. Feature-oriented domain analysis (FODA) feasibility study. Technical report, Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, 1990.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. C. Lewerentz and T. Lindner. KORSO: Methods, Languages, and Tools for the Construction of Correct Software, volume 1009 of LNCS, chapter Case study “production cell”: A comparative study in formal specification and verification, pages 388–416. Springer, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. S. Maoz and Y. Sa’ar. Assume-guarantee scenarios: semantics and synthesis. In Proc. of MODELS’12, pages 335–351. Springer, 2012. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. J. Marques-Silva, M. Janota, and I. Lynce. On computing backbones of propositional theories. In Proc of ECAI’10, pages 15–20. IOS Press, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. P.-Y. Schobbens, P. Heymans, and J.-C. Trigaux. Feature diagrams: A survey and a formal semantics. In Proc. of RE’06, pages 139–148. IEEE, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. P. Shaker, J. M. Atlee, and S. Wang. A feature-oriented requirements modelling language. In Proc. of RE’12, pages 151–160, 2012. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. M. Vierhauser, P. Grünbacher, A. Egyed, and W. Rabiser, R.and Heider. Flexible and scalable consistency checking on product line variability models. In Proc. of ASE’10, pages 63–72. ACM, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. J. Whittle and J. Schumann. Generating statechart designs from scenarios. In Proc. of ICSE’00, pages 314–323. ACM, 2000. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. P. Zave and M. A. Jackson. Four dark corners of requirements engineering. ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology, 6(1):1–30, 1997. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. T. Ziadi, L. Hélou¨ et, and J.-M. Jézéquel. Behaviors generation from product lines requirements. In Proc. of UML’04 Workshop on Software Architecture Description, 2004.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Incrementally synthesizing controllers from scenario-based product line specifications

              Recommendations

              Comments

              Login options

              Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

              Sign in
              • Published in

                cover image ACM Conferences
                ESEC/FSE 2013: Proceedings of the 2013 9th Joint Meeting on Foundations of Software Engineering
                August 2013
                738 pages
                ISBN:9781450322379
                DOI:10.1145/2491411

                Copyright © 2013 ACM

                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 the author(s) 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].

                Publisher

                Association for Computing Machinery

                New York, NY, United States

                Publication History

                • Published: 18 August 2013

                Permissions

                Request permissions about this article.

                Request Permissions

                Check for updates

                Qualifiers

                • research-article

                Acceptance Rates

                Overall Acceptance Rate112of543submissions,21%

                Upcoming Conference

                FSE '24

              PDF Format

              View or Download as a PDF file.

              PDF

              eReader

              View online with eReader.

              eReader