Download presentation
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
Published byHaden Hess Modified over 10 years ago
1
MDI 2010, Oslo, Norway Behavioural Interoperability to Support Model-Driven Systems Integration Alek Radjenovic, Richard Paige The University of York, UK
2
Context Project: Model Driven Integration Industry partners use a mixture of software components from the supply chain o new code, third-party (COTS), legacy Increased uncertainty during system integration Models described using different: o platforms: UML, SysML, MODAF, Matlab Simulink,... o tools: Rose RT, IBM RSA, Artisan Studio,... o versions: UML 1.x vs. UML 2.x Problem: lack of support for model driven integration MDI 2010, Oslo, Norway
3
Importance Detection of system integration problems very early on o during system design phase when models are created o before any new code is written o before a buy-in from a supply chain s/w manufacturer Combining of system components that were not created: o at the same source o using the same (modelling or programming) platform MDI 2010, Oslo, Norway
4
Technical requirements Ability to bring together system components at the model level in order to be able to reason about: o structural compatibility (mainly evident at the syntax level) o behavioural compatibility (mainly evident at the semantic level) Provide a tool framework (for the above) that is compatible for all relevant modelling technologies o as well as being extensible and scalable MDI 2010, Oslo, Norway
5
Solution A multi-paradigm modelling framework (SMILE) comprising: o a tool, a family of supporting languages, extension mechanism SMILE capability: o compatibility checking of two or more input models checking for potential structural (SMILE-S) and behavioural (SMILE-X) problems during integration o integration at model level (SMILE-I) o semi-automatic detection of incompatibilities guidance manual user intervention MDI 2010, Oslo, Norway
6
SMILE-S: in a nutshell An interchange format o describes the structure of heterogeneous models in a uniform fashion in terms of trees vertices = structural elements, edges = containment relationship typically, a collection of properties to further describe characteristics of the structural elements is attached to vertices Transformation of input models into SMILE trees o external to the core tool o i.e. the knowledge of the underlying meta-models and parsing is delegated to plug-in components MDI 2010, Oslo, Norway
7
SMILE-S trees MDI 2010, Oslo, Norway
8
SMILE-S patterns MDI 2010, Oslo, Norway By applying patterns to trees, we are able to extract (isolate) information of interest, and use transformations to define inputs to SMILE-X
9
SMILE-X: approach Focuses solely on the behaviours in models Explores compatibility and interoperability issues via simulation Uses templates to map artefacts from SMILE-S trees to the specified behavioural model o enables us to associate semantics with structural model elements o describes a particular behavioural paradigm (or, a related family of behaviours) that we are interested in analysing e.g. state machines Facilitates a mechanism through which we can integrate behaviours of input models o based on the chosen perspective, and o consequently perform simulations on the integrated system MDI 2010, Oslo, Norway
10
SMILE-S/X: conceptual approach MDI 2010, Oslo, Norway
11
SMILE-X architecture MDI 2010, Oslo, Norway
12
SMILE-X: mapping, configuration & instantiation MDI 2010, Oslo, Norway configuration instantiation - Initialisation - Temporal config. - Connections
13
SMILE-X: Scheduling, Triggers, Traces Scheduling o options such as: simple activation, double buffer, or event based Triggers o Compound Boolean expressions o Flags to halt execution Simulation trace o Sequential o Provides information on: Input and output messages Failed conditions Executed actions Triggered conditions MDI 2010, Oslo, Norway
14
Results Through our initial exploration on small in-house case studies, we have been able to detect issues such as: o invalid state combinations o unused events o unreachable states o disconnected subsystems o out of sequence messages o deadlocks o properties that do not hold MDI 2010, Oslo, Norway
15
Value Potential to predict system integration problems early on in the development lifecycle that may: o influence decisions on software acquisition o save money o reduce development lifecycle timescales o reduce risks MDI 2010, Oslo, Norway
16
Future directions Immediate future o proof of scalability and extensibility o a real world case study from the avionics domain in the order of 100s of UML packages effort: 4 man-months Beyond that... o potential for exploitation through tool vendors MDI 2010, Oslo, Norway
17
Software Systems Engineering Initiative www.ssei.org.uk
Similar presentations
© 2025 SlidePlayer.com. Inc.
All rights reserved.