TOWARDS A FORMAL VERIFICATION OF PROCESS MODEL’S PROPERTIES - SimplePDL and TOCL Case Study

Benôıt Combemale, Pierre-Löıc Garoche, Xavier Crégut, Xavier Thirioux, Francois Vernadat

Abstract

More and more, models, through Domain Specific Languages (DSL), tend to be the solution to define complex systems. Expressing properties specific to these metamodels and checking them appear as an urgent need. Until now, the only complete industrial solutions that are available consider structural properties such as the ones that could be expressed in OCL. There are although some attempts on behavioural properties for DSL. This paper addresses a method to specify and then check temporal properties over models. The case study is SIMPLEPDL, a process metamodel. We propose a way to use a temporal extension of OCL, TOCL, to express properties. We specify a models transformation to Petri Nets and LTL formulae for both the process model and its associated temporal properties. We check these properties using a model checker and enrich the model with the analysis results. This work is a first step towards a generic framework to specify and effectively check temporal properties over arbitrary models.

References

  1. (2003). UML Object Constraint Language (OCL) 2.0 Specification. Object Management Group, Inc. Final Adopted Specification.
  2. (2005). Software Process Engineering Metamodel (SPEM) 1.1 Specification. Object Management Group, Inc. formal/05-01-06.
  3. (2006). Meta Object Facility (MOF) 2.0 Core Specification. Object Management Group, Inc. Final Adopted Specification.
  4. Agrawal, A., Karsai, G., Kalmar, Z., Neema, S., Shi, F., and Vizhanyo, A. (2005). The design of a language for model transformations. Technical report, Institute for Software Integrated Systems, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN 37235, USA.
  5. Berthomieu, B., Ribet, P.-O., and Vernadat, F. (2004). The tool TINA - construction of abstract state spaces for Petri nets and time Petri nets. International Journal of Production Research, 42(14):2741-2756.
  6. Berthomieu, B. and Vernadat, F. (2006). Réseaux de Petri temporels : méthodes d'analyse et vérification avec TINA. Traité IC2.
  7. Bradfield, J. C., Filipe, J. K., and Stevens, P. (2002). Enriching OCL using observational mu-calculus. In Fundamental Approaches to Software Engineering, pages 203-217.
  8. Cengarle, M. V. and Knapp, A. (2002). Towards OCL/RT. In International Symposium of Formal Methods Europe on Formal Methods (FME) - Getting IT Right, pages 390-409, London, UK. Springer-Verlag.
  9. Chaki, S., E, M., Clarke, Ouaknine, J., Sharygina, N., and Sinha, N. (2004). State/event-based software model checking. In 4th International Conference on Integrated Formal Methods (IFM), volume 2999 of LNCS, pages 128-147.
  10. Chen, K., Sztipanovits, J., Abdelwalhed, S., and Jackson, E. (2005). Semantic anchoring with model transformations. In Model Driven Architecture - Foundations and Applications, First European Conference (ECMDAFA), volume 3748 of LNCS, pages 115-129.
  11. Clark, T., Evans, A., Sammut, P., and Willans, J. (2004). Applied metamodelling - a foundation for language driven development. version 0.1.
  12. Combemale, B., Crégut, X., Berthomieu, B., and Vernadat, F. (2007). SimplePDL2Tina : Mise en oeuvre d'une Validation de Modèles de Processus. In 3ieme journées sur l'Ingénierie Dirigée par les Modèles (IDM), Toulouse, France.
  13. Combemale, B., Crégut, X., Ober, I., and Percebois, C. (2006a). Evaluation du standard SPEM de représentation des processus. Génie Logiciel, Modèles et Processus de développement, 77:25-30.
  14. Combemale, B., Rougemaille, S., Crégut, X., Migeon, F., Pantel, M., Maurel, C., and Coulette, B. (2006b). Towards a rigorous metamodeling. In 2nd International Workshop on Model-Driven Enterprise Information Systems (MDEIS), Paphos, Cyprus. INSTICC.
  15. Cousot, P. (1990). Methods and logics for proving programs. In Handbook of Theoretical Computer Science, Volume B: Formal Models and Sematics (B), pages 841-994.
  16. Distefano, D., Katoen, J.-P., and Rensink, A. (2000). Towards model checking OCL. In ECOOP Workshop on Dening a Precise Semantics for UML.
  17. Flake, S. (2003). Temporal OCL extensions for specification of real-time constraints. In Workshop Specification and Validation of UML models for Real Time and Embedded Systems (SVERTS) at UML'03, San Francisco, CA, USA.
  18. Flake, S. and Mueller, W. (2003). Formal semantics of static and temporal state-oriented OCL constraints. Journal on Software and System Modeling (SoSyM), 2(3).
  19. Gurevich, Y. (2001). The abstract state machine paradigm: What is in and what is out. In Ershov Memorial Conference.
  20. Jouault, F. (2005). Loosely Coupled Traceability for ATL. In Proceedings of the European Conference on Model Driven Architecture (ECMDA) workshop on traceability, Nuremberg, Germany.
  21. Jouault, F., Bézivin, J., and Kurtev, I. (2006). TCS: a DSL for the Specification of Textual Concrete Syntaxes in Model Engineering. In Proceedings of the fifth international conference on Generative programming and Component Engineering (GPCE), Portland, Oregon.
  22. Jouault, F. and Kurtev, I. (2005). Transforming models with ATL. In Proceedings of the Model Transformations in Practice Workshop at MoDELS, Montego Bay, Jamaica.
  23. Muller, P.-A., Fleurey, F., Fondement, F., michel Hassenforder, Schneckenburger, R., Gérard, S., and Jézéquel, J.-M. (2006). Model-driven analysis and synthesis of concrete syntax. In 9th International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems (MoDELS), volume 4199 of LNCS, Genova, Italy.
  24. Richters, M. and Gogolla, M. (1999). A metamodel for OCL. In France, R. and Rumpe, B., editors, UML'99 - The Unified Modeling Language. Beyond the Standard. Second International Conference, Fort Collins., volume 1723 of LNCS, pages 156-171, USA.
  25. Richters, M. and Gogolla, M. (2000). Validating UML models and OCL constraints. In UML 2000 - The Unified Modeling Language. Advancing the Standard. Third International Conference, volume 1939 of LNCS, pages 265-277, York, UK.
  26. Warmer, J. and Kleppe, A. (2003). The Object Constraint Language: Getting Your Models Ready for MDA. Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc.
  27. Ziemann, P. and Gogolla, M. (2002). An extension of OCL with temporal logic. In Critical Systems Development with UML - Proceedings of the UML'02 workshop, volume TUM-I0208, pages 53-62.
Download


Paper Citation


in Harvard Style

Combemale B., Garoche P., Crégut X., Thirioux X. and Vernadat F. (2007). TOWARDS A FORMAL VERIFICATION OF PROCESS MODEL’S PROPERTIES - SimplePDL and TOCL Case Study . In Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems - Volume 3: ICEIS, ISBN 978-972-8865-90-0, pages 80-89. DOI: 10.5220/0002399800800089


in Bibtex Style

@conference{iceis07,
author={Benôıt Combemale and Pierre-Löıc Garoche and Xavier Crégut and Xavier Thirioux and Francois Vernadat},
title={TOWARDS A FORMAL VERIFICATION OF PROCESS MODEL’S PROPERTIES - SimplePDL and TOCL Case Study},
booktitle={Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems - Volume 3: ICEIS,},
year={2007},
pages={80-89},
publisher={SciTePress},
organization={INSTICC},
doi={10.5220/0002399800800089},
isbn={978-972-8865-90-0},
}


in EndNote Style

TY - CONF
JO - Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems - Volume 3: ICEIS,
TI - TOWARDS A FORMAL VERIFICATION OF PROCESS MODEL’S PROPERTIES - SimplePDL and TOCL Case Study
SN - 978-972-8865-90-0
AU - Combemale B.
AU - Garoche P.
AU - Crégut X.
AU - Thirioux X.
AU - Vernadat F.
PY - 2007
SP - 80
EP - 89
DO - 10.5220/0002399800800089