Employing Classifying Terms for Testing Model Transformations

This contribution proposes a new technique for developing test cases for UML and OCL models. The technique is based on an approach that automatically constructs object models for class models enriched by OCL constraints. By guiding the construction process through so-called classifying terms, the built test cases in form of object models are classified into equivalence classes. A classifying term can be an arbitrary OCL term on the class model that calculates for an object model a characteristic value. From each equivalence class of object models with identical characteristic values one representative is chosen. The constructed test cases behave significantly different with regard to the selected classifying term. By building few diverse object models, properties of the UML and OCL model can be explored effectively. The technique is applied for automatically constructing relevant source model test cases for model transformations between a source and target metamodel.Universidad de Málaga. Campus de Excelencia Internacional Andalucía Tech

Model Based Development of Quality-Aware Software Services

Modelling languages and development frameworks give support for functional and structural description of software architectures. But quality-aware applications require languages which allow expressing QoS as a first-class concept during architecture design and service composition, and to extend existing tools and infrastructures adding support for modelling, evaluating, managing and monitoring QoS aspects. In addition to its functional behaviour and internal structure, the developer of each service must consider the fulfilment of its quality requirements. If the service is flexible, the output quality depends both on input quality and available resources (e.g., amounts of CPU execution time and memory). From the software engineering point of view, modelling of quality-aware requirements and architectures require modelling support for the description of quality concepts, support for the analysis of quality properties (e.g. model checking and consistencies of quality constraints, assembly of quality), tool support for the transition from quality requirements to quality-aware architectures, and from quality-aware architecture to service run-time infrastructures. Quality management in run-time service infrastructures must give support for handling quality concepts dynamically. QoS-aware modeling frameworks and QoS-aware runtime management infrastructures require a common evolution to get their integration

A Web-Based Tool for Analysing Normative Documents in English

Our goal is to use formal methods to analyse normative documents written in English, such as privacy policies and service-level agreements. This requires the combination of a number of different elements, including information extraction from natural language, formal languages for model representation, and an interface for property specification and verification. We have worked on a collection of components for this task: a natural language extraction tool, a suitable formalism for representing such documents, an interface for building models in this formalism, and methods for answering queries asked of a given model. In this work, each of these concerns is brought together in a web-based tool, providing a single interface for analysing normative texts in English. Through the use of a running example, we describe each component and demonstrate the workflow established by our tool

Metamodel-based model conformance and multiview consistency checking

Model-driven development, using languages such as UML and BON, often makes use of multiple diagrams (e.g., class and sequence diagrams) when modeling systems. These diagrams, presenting different views of a system of interest, may be inconsistent. A metamodel provides a unifying framework in which to ensure and check consistency, while at the same time providing the means to distinguish between valid and invalid models, that is, conformance. Two formal specifications of the metamodel for an object-oriented modeling language are presented, and it is shown how to use these specifications for model conformance and multiview consistency checking. Comparisons are made in terms of completeness and the level of automation each provide for checking multiview consistency and model conformance. The lessons learned from applying formal techniques to the problems of metamodeling, model conformance, and multiview consistency checking are summarized

Formalizing the software development process

Object-oriented software development process, such as the Unified Process [Jacobson 99], Catalysis [D´Souza 98] and Fusion [Coleman 94] among others, is a set of activities needed to transform user’s requirements into a software system. A software development process typically consists of a set of software development artifacts together with a graph of tasks and activities. Software artifacts are the products resulting from software development, for example, a use case model, a class model or source code. Tasks are small behavioral units that usually results in a software artifact. Examples of tasks are construction of a use case model, construction of a class model and writing code. Activities (or workflows) are units that are larger than a task. Activities generally include several tasks and software artifacts. Examples of activities are requirements, analysis, design and implementation.\nModern software development processes are iterative and incremental, they repeat over a series of iterations making up the life cycle of a system. Each iteration takes place over time and it consists of one pass through the requirements, analysis, design, implementation and test activities, building a number of different artifacts. All these artifacts are not independent. They are related to each other, they are semantically overlapping and together represent the system as a whole. Elements in one artifact have trace dependencies to other artifacts.\nFor instance, a use case (in the use-case model) can be traced to a collaboration (in the design model) representing its realization.Eje: Ingeniería del Softwar

Extracting Formal Models from Normative Texts

We are concerned with the analysis of normative texts - documents based on the deontic notions of obligation, permission, and prohibition. Our goal is to make queries about these notions and verify that a text satisfies certain properties concerning causality of actions and timing constraints. This requires taking the original text and building a representation (model) of it in a formal language, in our case the C-O Diagram formalism. We present an experimental, semi-automatic aid that helps to bridge the gap between a normative text in natural language and its C-O Diagram representation. Our approach consists of using dependency structures obtained from the state-of-the-art Stanford Parser, and applying our own rules and heuristics in order to extract the relevant components. The result is a tabular data structure where each sentence is split into suitable fields, which can then be converted into a C-O Diagram. The process is not fully automatic however, and some post-editing is generally required of the user. We apply our tool and perform experiments on documents from different domains, and report an initial evaluation of the accuracy and feasibility of our approach.Comment: Extended version of conference paper at the 21st International Conference on Applications of Natural Language to Information Systems (NLDB 2016). arXiv admin note: substantial text overlap with arXiv:1607.0148

Towards a design-by-contract based approach for realizable connector-centric software architectures

Despite being a widely-used language for specifying software systems, UML remains less than ideal for software architectures. Architecture description languages (ADLs) were developed to provide more comprehensive support. However, so far the application of ADLs in practice has been impeded by at least one of the following problems: (i) advanced formal notations, (ii) lack of support for complex connectors, and (iii) potentially unrealizable designs. In this paper we propose a new ADL that is based on Design-by-Contract (DbC) for specifying software architectures. While DbC promotes a formal and precise way of specifying system behaviours, it is more familiar to practising developers, thus allowing for a more comfortable way of specifying architectures than using process algebras. Furthermore, by granting connectors a first-class status, our ADL allows designers to specify not only simple interaction mechanisms as connectors but also complex interaction protocols. Finally, in order to ensure that architectural designs are always realizable we eliminate potentially unrealizable constructs in connector specifications (the connector “glue”)

Formalizing the software development process

Object-oriented software development process, such as the Unified Process [Jacobson 99], Catalysis [D´Souza 98] and Fusion [Coleman 94] among others, is a set of activities needed to transform user’s requirements into a software system. A software development process typically consists of a set of software development artifacts together with a graph of tasks and activities. Software artifacts are the products resulting from software development, for example, a use case model, a class model or source code. Tasks are small behavioral units that usually results in a software artifact. Examples of tasks are construction of a use case model, construction of a class model and writing code. Activities (or workflows) are units that are larger than a task. Activities generally include several tasks and software artifacts. Examples of activities are requirements, analysis, design and implementation. Modern software development processes are iterative and incremental, they repeat over a series of iterations making up the life cycle of a system. Each iteration takes place over time and it consists of one pass through the requirements, analysis, design, implementation and test activities, building a number of different artifacts. All these artifacts are not independent. They are related to each other, they are semantically overlapping and together represent the system as a whole. Elements in one artifact have trace dependencies to other artifacts. For instance, a use case (in the use-case model) can be traced to a collaboration (in the design model) representing its realization.Eje: Ingeniería del SoftwareRed de Universidades con Carreras en Informática (RedUNCI

A design recording framework to facilitate knowledge sharing in collaborative software engineering

This paper describes an environment that allows a development team to share knowledge about software artefacts by recording decisions and rationales as well as supporting the team in formulating and maintaining design constraints. It explores the use of multi-dimensional design spaces for capturing various issues arising during development and presenting this meta-information using a network of views. It describes a framework to underlie the collaborative environment and shows the supporting architecture and its implementation. It addresses how the artefacts and their meta-information are captured in a non-invasive way and shows how an artefact repository is embedded to store and manage the artefacts

Proceedings of International Workshop "Global Computing: Programming Environments, Languages, Security and Analysis of Systems"

According to the IST/ FET proactive initiative on GLOBAL COMPUTING, the goal is to obtain techniques (models, frameworks, methods, algorithms) for constructing systems that are flexible, dependable, secure, robust and efficient. The dominant concerns are not those of representing and manipulating data efficiently but rather those of handling the co-ordination and interaction, security, reliability, robustness, failure modes, and control of risk of the entities in the system and the overall design, description and performance of the system itself. Completely different paradigms of computer science may have to be developed to tackle these issues effectively. The research should concentrate on systems having the following characteristics: • The systems are composed of autonomous computational entities where activity is not centrally controlled, either because global control is impossible or impractical, or because the entities are created or controlled by different owners. • The computational entities are mobile, due to the movement of the physical platforms or by movement of the entity from one platform to another. • The configuration varies over time. For instance, the system is open to the introduction of new computational entities and likewise their deletion. The behaviour of the entities may vary over time. • The systems operate with incomplete information about the environment. For instance, information becomes rapidly out of date and mobility requires information about the environment to be discovered. The ultimate goal of the research action is to provide a solid scientific foundation for the design of such systems, and to lay the groundwork for achieving effective principles for building and analysing such systems. This workshop covers the aspects related to languages and programming environments as well as analysis of systems and resources involving 9 projects (AGILE , DART, DEGAS , MIKADO, MRG, MYTHS, PEPITO, PROFUNDIS, SECURE) out of the 13 founded under the initiative. After an year from the start of the projects, the goal of the workshop is to fix the state of the art on the topics covered by the two clusters related to programming environments and analysis of systems as well as to devise strategies and new ideas to profitably continue the research effort towards the overall objective of the initiative. We acknowledge the Dipartimento di Informatica and Tlc of the University of Trento, the Comune di Rovereto, the project DEGAS for partially funding the event and the Events and Meetings Office of the University of Trento for the valuable collaboration