Consistency of UML Class and Statechart Diagrams with State Invariants

Ali Hanzala Khan, Irum Rauf, Ivan Porres

2013

Abstract

We present an approach and a tool to analyze the consistency of UML class and statechart diagrams containing state invariants automatically. UML class diagrams describe the structure of a system as a collection of classes while UML statechart diagrams describe its behavior. State invariants relate the active state configuration of a statechart with object instances described in a class diagram. We consider a UML statechart inconsistent if it contains unsatisfiable state invariants, that is, there are no object instances that can make a given invariant evaluate to true. To detect such inconsistencies, we translate a UML model containing class and statechart diagrams into the Web Ontology Language (OWL 2), and then use OWL 2 reasoning tools to infer the consistency and satisfiability of the translated diagrams. The approach is supported by an automatic translation tool and existing OWL 2 reasoners. We demonstrate our approach with an example design and evaluate its performance using large UML models.

References

  1. Balaban, M. and Maraee, A. (2008). A UML-based method for deciding finite satisfiability in description logics. In Description Logics.
  2. Berardi, D., Calvanese, D., and Giacomo, G. D. (2005). Reasoning on UML class diagrams. Artif. Intell., 168(1-2):70-118.
  3. Birgit Demuth, C. W. (2009). Model and Object Verification by Using Dresden OCL. In Proceedings of the Russian-German Workshop Innovation Information Technologies: Theory and Practice,, pages 81- 89.
  4. Broy, M., Cengarle, M. V., Grönniger, H., and Rumpe, B. (2009). Considerations and Rationale for a UML System Model. In UML 2 Semantics and Applications, pages 43-60. John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken.
  5. Cabot, J., Clariso, R., and Riera, D. (2008). Verification of UML OCL class diagrams using constraint programming. ICSTW, pages 73-80.
  6. Garcia, M. and Shidqie, A. J. (2007). OCL Compiler for EMF. In Eclipse Modeling Symposium at Eclipse Summit Europe 2007, Stuttgart, Germany.
  7. Hnatkowska, B., Huzar, Z., and Magott, J. (2001). Consistency Checking in UML Models. In ISM'01.
  8. Horrocks, I., Kutz, O., and Sattler, U. (2006). The even more irresistible SROIQ. In KR, pages 57-67.
  9. Lam, V. S. W. and Padget, J. A. (2005). Consistency checking of statechart diagrams of a class hierarchy. In ECOOP, pages 412-427.
  10. Maoz, S., Ringert, J. O., and Rumpe, B. (2011). Semantically configurable consistency analysis for class and object diagrams. In MoDELS, pages 153-167.
  11. OMG (2006). OCL, OMG Available Specification, Version 2.0. http://www.omg.org/spec/OCL/2.0/.
  12. OMG (2011). sion 2.4.1. Superstructure/.
  13. UML, Superstructure Specification, Verhttp://www.omg.org/spec/UML/2.4.1/
  14. Queralt, A., Artale, A., Calvanese, D., and Teniente, E. (2012a). OCL-Lite: A decidable (yet expressive) fragment of OCL. In Proc. of the 25th Int. Workshop on Description Logics (DL 2012), volume 846 of CEUR Electronic Workshop Proceedings, http://ceurws.org/, pages 312-322.
  15. Queralt, A., Artale, A., Calvanese, D., and Teniente, E. (2012b). OCL-Lite: Finite Reasoning on UML/OCL Conceptual Schemas. Data and Knowledge Engineering, 73:1-22.
  16. Rasch, H. and Wehrheim, H. (2003). Checking consistency in uml diagrams: Classes and state machines. In FMOODS 2003, volume 2884 of LNCS, pages 229- 243. Springer Berlin / Heidelberg.
  17. Sekerinski, E. (2008). Verifying statecharts with state invariants. In ICECCS, pages 7-14.
  18. Shearer, R., Motik, B., and Horrocks, I. (2008). HermiT: a highly-efficient OWL reasoner. OWLED.
  19. Sirin, E., Parsia, B., Grau, B. C., Kalyanpur, A., and Katz, Y. (2007). Pellet: A practical OWL-DL reasoner. Journal of Web Semantics, 5:51-53.
  20. Tsarkov, D. and Horrocks, I. (2006). Fact++ description logic reasoner: system description. In Proceedings of the Third international joint conference on Automated Reasoning, IJCAR'06, pages 292-297, Berlin, Heidelberg. Springer-Verlag.
  21. Van Der Straeten, R. (2005). Inconsistency Management in Model-driven Engineering. An Approach using Description Logics. PhD thesis, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels, Belgium.
  22. W3C (2009a). OWL 2 Web Ontology Language Direct Semantics. http://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-directsemantics/.
  23. W3C (2009b). OWL 2 Web Ontology Language Structural Specification and Functional-Style Syntax. http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/REC-owl2-syntax20091027/.
  24. Walter, T., Parreiras, F., and Staab, S. (2012). An ontologybased framework for domain-specific modeling. Software and Systems Modeling, pages 1-26.
  25. Wang, S., Jin, L., and Jin, C. (2006). Ontology definition metamodel based consistency checking of UML models. In CSCWD 2006, pages 1-5.
  26. Yeung, W. L. (2004). Checking Consistency between UML Class and State Models Based on CSP and B. J. UCS, 10(11):1540-1559.
Download


Paper Citation


in Harvard Style

Khan A., Rauf I. and Porres I. (2013). Consistency of UML Class and Statechart Diagrams with State Invariants . In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Model-Driven Engineering and Software Development - Volume 1: MODELSWARD, ISBN 978-989-8565-42-6, pages 14-24. DOI: 10.5220/0004320100140024


in Bibtex Style

@conference{modelsward13,
author={Ali Hanzala Khan and Irum Rauf and Ivan Porres},
title={Consistency of UML Class and Statechart Diagrams with State Invariants},
booktitle={Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Model-Driven Engineering and Software Development - Volume 1: MODELSWARD,},
year={2013},
pages={14-24},
publisher={SciTePress},
organization={INSTICC},
doi={10.5220/0004320100140024},
isbn={978-989-8565-42-6},
}


in EndNote Style

TY - CONF
JO - Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Model-Driven Engineering and Software Development - Volume 1: MODELSWARD,
TI - Consistency of UML Class and Statechart Diagrams with State Invariants
SN - 978-989-8565-42-6
AU - Khan A.
AU - Rauf I.
AU - Porres I.
PY - 2013
SP - 14
EP - 24
DO - 10.5220/0004320100140024