Article

Semantic variations among UML statemachines

Authors:

Joanne M. AtleeAuthors Info & Claims

MoDELS'06: Proceedings of the 9th international conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems

Pages 245 - 259

https://doi.org/10.1007/11880240_18

Published: 01 October 2006 Publication History

Abstract

In this paper, we use template-semantics to express the execution semantics of UML 2.0 StateMachines, resulting in a precise description that not only highlights the semantics decisions that have been documented but also explicates the semantics choices that have been left unspecified. We provide also the template semantics for StateMachines as implemented in three UML CASE tools: Rational Rose RT, Rhapsody, and Bridgepoint. The result succinctly explicates (1) how each of the tools refines the standard's semantics and (2) which tools' semantics deviate from the standard.

References

[1]

Accelerated Technology. Bridgepoint. www.acceleratedtechnology.com/, 2005.

[2]

M. Crane and J. Dingel. UML vs. Classical vs. Rhapsody State machines: Not All Models are Created Equal. In Proc. 8th Int. Conf. on Model Driven Eng. Lang. and Sys. (MoDELS/UML 2005), Montego Bay, Jamaica, Oct. 2005.

Digital Library

[3]

H. Fecher, J. Schönborn, M. Kyas, and W. P. de Roever. 29 New Unclarities in the Semantics of UML 2.0 State Machines. In ICFEM 2005, volume 3785, pages 52-65. Springer-Verlag, 2005.

Digital Library

[4]

D. Harel. Email disucssion. Email, July 2005.

[5]

D. Harel and H. Kugler. The RHAPSODY Semantics of Statecharts (or, On the Executable Core of the UML). In Integration of Software Specification Techniques for Appl. in Eng., volume 3147 of LNCS, pages 325-354. Springer-Verlag, 2004.

[6]

D. Harel, A. Pnueli, J. P. Schmidt, and R. Sherman. On the Formal Semantics of State machines. In Logic in Comp. Sci., pages 54-64. IEEE Press, 1987.

[7]

Z. Hu and S. M. Shatz. Explicit Modeling of Semantics Associated with Composite States in UML State machines. Intl. Jour. of Auto. Soft. Eng., 2005.

Digital Library

[8]

IBM Rational. Rational Rose RealTime. http://www.ibm.com/rational, 2002.

[9]

IBM Rational. Rational Rose RealTime - Modeling Language Guide, Version 2003.06.00. http://www.ibm.com/rational, 2002.

[10]

IBM Rational. Rational Rose RealTime - UML Services Library, Version 2003.06.00. http://www.ibm.com/rational, 2002.

[11]

ilogix, Inc. Rhapsody. http://www.ilogix.com, 2005.

[12]

Y. Jin, R. Esser, and J. W. Janneck. Describing the Syntax and Semantics of UML State machines in a Heterogeneous Modelling Environment. In Proc. 2nd Int. Conf. on Diag. Repr. and Infer. (DIAGRAMS '02), pages 320-334, London, UK, 2002. Springer-Verlag.

Digital Library

[13]

J. Jürjens. A UML State Machines Semantics with Message-passing. In Proc. ACM Symp. on App. Comp.(SAC '02), pages 1009-1013, 2002.

Digital Library

[14]

A. Maggiolo-Schettini, A. Peron, and S. Tini. A comparison of statecharts step semantics. Theor. Comput. Sci., 290:465-498, 2003.

Digital Library

[15]

C. McCausland. Email disucssion. Email, July 2005.

[16]

E. Mikk, Y. Lakhnech, C. Petersohn, and M. Siegel. On Formal Semantics of Statecharts as Supported by STATEMATE. In 2nd BCS-FACS Northern Formal Methods Workshop. Springer-Verlag, 1997.

Digital Library

[17]

J. Niu, J. M. Atlee, and N. Day. Template Semantics for Model-Based Notations. IEEE Trans. on Soft. Eng., 29(10):866-882, October 2003.

Digital Library

[18]

J. Niu, J. M. Atlee, and N. A. Day. Understanding and Comparing Model-Based Specification Notations. In Proc. IEEE Intl. Req. Eng. Conf., pages 188-199, 2003.

Digital Library

[19]

OMG. Unified Modelling Language Specification: Version 2.0, Formal/05-07-04. http://www.omg.org, 2003.

[20]

A. Pnueli and M. Shalev. What is a Step: On the Semantics of Statecharts. In Proc. TACS, volume 526, pages 244-264. Springer-Verlag, 1991.

Digital Library

[21]

B. Selic. Email disucssion. Email, July 2005.

[22]

S. Shankar, S. Asa, V. Sipos, and X. Xu. Reasoning about Real-Time State machines in the Presence of Semantic Variations. In ASE, pages 243-252, 2005.

Digital Library

[23]

S. Shlaer and S. J. Mellor. Object Lifecycles: Modeling the World in States. Yourdon Press, Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA, 1992.

Digital Library

[24]

A. Simons. On the Compositional Properties of UML State machine Diagrams. In Proc. of Rigorous Object-Oriented Methods (ROOM2000), York, UK, 2000.

Digital Library

[25]

M. von der Beeck. A Comparison of State machines Variants. In Formal Techniques in Real Time and Fault-Tolerant Systems, volume 863 of LNCS, pages 128-148. Springer-Verlag, 1994.

Digital Library

Cited By

Hosseini SMinarsch DFavorito M(2021)A Practical Framework for General Dialogue-Based Bilateral InteractionsEngineering Multi-Agent Systems10.1007/978-3-030-97457-2_18(312-331)Online publication date: 3-May-2021
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/978-3-030-97457-2_18
Guerra Ede Lara JChechik MSalay RPearce DMayerhofer TSteimann F(2018)Analysing meta-model product linesProceedings of the 11th ACM SIGPLAN International Conference on Software Language Engineering10.1145/3276604.3276609(160-173)Online publication date: 24-Oct-2018
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3276604.3276609
Luo ZAtlee JStorm TBalland EVarro D(2016)BSML-mbeddr: integrating semantically configurable state-machine models in a C programming environmentProceedings of the 2016 ACM SIGPLAN International Conference on Software Language Engineering10.1145/2997364.2997372(105-117)Online publication date: 20-Oct-2016
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/2997364.2997372
Show More Cited By

Recommendations

UML-B: Formal modeling and design aided by UML

The emergence of the UML as a de facto standard for object-oriented modeling has been mirrored by the success of the B method as a practically useful formal modeling technique. The two notations have much to offer each other. The UML provides an ...
UML with meaning: executable modeling in foundational UML and the Alf action language
HILT '14: Proceedings of the 2014 ACM SIGAda annual conference on High integrity language technology

To most in the software community, "modeling" is drawing pictures, something much different than "coding". While programming languages must be specified precisely enough to be executable, this has not necessarily been the case for modeling languages. ...
Model Checking UML Activity Diagrams in FDR
ICIS '09: Proceedings of the 2009 Eigth IEEE/ACIS International Conference on Computer and Information Science

The Unified Modeling Language (UML) is the de-facto industrial standard for modeling object-oriented software systems. UML Activity diagrams (ADs) can be used for software modeling and they have under gone significant changes with UML 2.0 specification, ...

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences

MoDELS'06: Proceedings of the 9th international conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems

October 2006

795 pages

ISBN:3540457720

Editors:
Oscar Nierstrasz
Software Composition Group, University of Bern, Switzerland
,
Jon Whittle
Computing Department - InfoLab21, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK
,
David Harel
Department of Computer Science and Applied Mathematics, The Weizmann Institute of Science, Rehovot, Israel
,
Gianna Reggio
DISI, Università di Genova, Rehovot, Italy

Sponsors

IEEE-CS\DATC: The IEEE Computer Society
SIGSOFT: ACM Special Interest Group on Software Engineering
DISI - Universita di Genova: Dipartimento di Informatica e Scienze dell'Informazione

Publisher

Springer-Verlag

Berlin, Heidelberg

Publication History

Published: 01 October 2006

Check for updates

Qualifiers

Article

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 144 of 506 submissions, 28%

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

9
Total Citations
View Citations
0
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)0
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0

Reflects downloads up to 15 Feb 2025

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Hosseini SMinarsch DFavorito M(2021)A Practical Framework for General Dialogue-Based Bilateral InteractionsEngineering Multi-Agent Systems10.1007/978-3-030-97457-2_18(312-331)Online publication date: 3-May-2021
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/978-3-030-97457-2_18
Guerra Ede Lara JChechik MSalay RPearce DMayerhofer TSteimann F(2018)Analysing meta-model product linesProceedings of the 11th ACM SIGPLAN International Conference on Software Language Engineering10.1145/3276604.3276609(160-173)Online publication date: 24-Oct-2018
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3276604.3276609
Luo ZAtlee JStorm TBalland EVarro D(2016)BSML-mbeddr: integrating semantically configurable state-machine models in a C programming environmentProceedings of the 2016 ACM SIGPLAN International Conference on Software Language Engineering10.1145/2997364.2997372(105-117)Online publication date: 20-Oct-2016
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/2997364.2997372
Maoz SRingert JRumpe B(2011)Semantically configurable consistency analysis for class and object diagramsProceedings of the 14th international conference on Model driven engineering languages and systems10.5555/2050655.2050672(153-167)Online publication date: 16-Oct-2011
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/2050655.2050672
Grönniger HRumpe B(2010)Modeling language variabilityProceedings of the 16th Monterey conference on Foundations of computer software: modeling, development, and verification of adaptive systems10.5555/2023011.2023013(17-32)Online publication date: 31-Mar-2010
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/2023011.2023013
de Roever WLüttgen GMendler M(2010)What is in a stepTime for verification10.5555/1880443.1880458(370-399)Online publication date: 1-Jan-2010
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/1880443.1880458
Derezińska APilitowski R(2009)Interpretation of history pseudostates in orthogonal states of UML state machinesProceedings of the 7th international conference on Next generation information technologies and systems10.5555/1813323.1813331(26-37)Online publication date: 16-Jun-2009
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/1813323.1813331
Cengarle MGrönniger HRumpe B(2009)Variability within Modeling Language DefinitionsProceedings of the 12th International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems10.1007/978-3-642-04425-0_54(670-684)Online publication date: 1-Oct-2009
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/978-3-642-04425-0_54
Cheng BAtlee J(2007)Research Directions in Requirements Engineering2007 Future of Software Engineering10.1109/FOSE.2007.17(285-303)Online publication date: 23-May-2007
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1109/FOSE.2007.17

View Options

View options

Figures

Tables

Media

View Table of Conten