The Sufficient Criteria For Consistent Modelling Of The Use Case Realization Diagrams With A New Functional-Structure- Behaviour UML Diagram

• Autorzy: Niepostyn S.

Warianty tytułu

PL

Warunki wystarczające do spójnego modelowania diagramów realizacji przypadku użycia z wykorzystaniem ulepszonego diagramu aktywności FSB UML

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

UML activity diagrams are primarily used to visualise scenarios. The verification of activity diagrams consistency is subsequently needed to identify errors in requirements at the early stage of the development process. The consistency verification is difficult due to a semi-formal nature of activity diagrams. We propose to extend the activity diagram to the new Functional-Structure-Behaviour (FSB) UML diagram to enable automatic verification of consistency of scenarios of the visualized use cases. Moreover the FSB UML diagram enables simultaneous modelling of the functionality, of the structure and of the behaviour of the target system model. Thus the proposed Functional-Structure-Behaviour UML activity diagram enables consistent and complete models to be developed from scenarios. Furthermore the FSB UML activity diagram can be used for automatic generation of complete workflow applications without any manual programming.

PL

Diagramy aktywności UML używane są przede wszystkim do wizualizacji scenariuszy. W celu wyeliminowania błędów w przyszłym systemie niezbędny okazuje się proces weryfikacji tych diagramów UML. Weryfikacja spójności jest jednakże dość złożonym zagadnieniem, gdyż diagramy aktywności nie są formalnym sposobem zapisu wymagań. Proponujemy rozszerzenie diagramów aktywności UML do diagramów nazwanych przez nas diagramami Funkcjonalność-Struktura-Behawioryzm (FSB) UML które umożliwiają automatyzację weryfikacji spójności scenariuszy wizualizowanych przypadków użycia. Co więcej diagram FSB UML umożliwia równoczesne modelowanie funkcjonalności, struktury i zachowania docelowego modelu systemu. Dlatego też zaproponowany diagram aktywności FSB UML umożliwia również opracowywanie kolejnych spójnych i kompletnych modeli na jego podstawie. Ponadto diagram aktywności FSB UML może być wykorzystany do automatyzacji generowania aplikacji typu workflow bez potrzeby ręcznego programowania.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

UML; consistency; sufficient consistency; completeness

PL

UML; spójność; kompletność; diagram aktywności UML

• Wydawca: Wydawnictwo SIGMA-NOT
• Czasopismo: Przegląd Elektrotechniczny
• Rocznik: 2015
• Tom: R. 91, nr 2
• Strony: 31--35
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 25 poz., rys., tab.

Twórcy

autor

Niepostyn S.

• Instytut Informatyki Politechniki Warszawskiej, ul. Nowowiejska 15/19, 00-665 Warszawa

Bibliografia

• [1] Unified Modeling Language: Superstructure, version 2.4.1, formal/2011-08-05, http://www.omg.org/spec/UML/2.4.1/Infrastructure
• [2] Choi, H., Yeom, K.: An Approach to Software Architecture Evaluation with the 4+1 View Model of Architecture. In: Ninth Asia-Pacific Software Engineering Conference, pp. 286—293. IEEE Computer Society, 2002.
• [3] Kennaley, M.: The 3+1 Views of Architecture (in 3D): An Amplification of the 4+1 Viewpoint Framework. In Seventh Working IEEE/IFIP Conference, pp. 299—302. IEEE Computer Society, 2008.
• [4] Issa, A., Abu Rub, F.A.: Performing Early Feasibility Studies of Software Development Projects Using Business Process Models, Proceedings of the World Congress on Engineering 2007 Vol I WCE 2007, July 2 - 4, 2007, London, U.K.
• [5] Dijkman, R.M., Joosten, S.M.: An Algorithm to Derive Use Case Diagrams from Business Process Models, 6th International Conference on Software Engineering and Applications (SEA), Anaheim, CA, USA, Acta Press, pp. 679-684, 2002.
• [6] Bluemke, I., Niepostyn, S.J., From Three Dimensional Document Circulation Diagram into UML Diagrams, w: Emerging Trends in Computing, Informatics, Systems Sciences, and Engineering / Sobh Tarek, Elleithy Khaled (red.), Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering, vol. 151, 2013, Springer, ISBN 978-1-4614-3557-0, ss. 319-329.
• [7] Niepostyn, S.J., Bluemke I., The Function-Behaviour-Structure Diagram for Modelling Workflow of Information Systems, w: Advanced Information Systems Engineering Workshops / Bajec Marko, Eder Johann ( red. ), Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol. 112, 2012, Springer, ISBN 978-3-642-31068-3, ss. 425-439
• [8] Spanoudakis, G., Zisman, A.: Inconsistency management in software engineering: Survey and open research issues. In S. K. Chang (Ed.), Handbook of software engineering and knowledge engineering, 1, 329-380. London: World Scientific Publishing Co, 1999.
• [9] Ha, I., Kang, B.: Cross Checking Rules to Improve Consistency between UML Static Diagram and Dynamic Diagram. In: Fyfe, C., Kim, D., Lee, S.Y., Yin, H. (eds.) IDEAL 2008. LNCS, vol. 5326, pp. 436–443. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)
• [10] Paige, R.F., Brooke, P.J.: Metamodel-Based Model Conformance and Multi-View Consistency Checking, ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology, Volume 16 Issue 3, July 2007
• [11] Shuzhen, Y., Shatz, S.M.: Consistency Checking of UML Dynamic Models Based on Petri Net Techniques. In: Gelbukh, A., Guerra, S.S. (eds.) Proc. of the 15th International Conference on Computing (CIC 2006), pp. 289–297. IEEE Computer Society, Washington (2006)
• [12] Wang, Z., He, H., Chen, L., Zhang, Y.: Ontology based semantics checking for UML activity model. Information Technology Journal. 11, 3, 301-306
• [13] Egyed, A.F.: Heterogeneous View Integration and its Automation, PhD diss., University of Southern California, 2000
• [14] Jurack, S., Lambers, L., Mehner, K., Taentzer, G.: Sufficient Criteria for Consistent Behavior Modeling with Refined Activity Diagrams, Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems, Lecture Notes in Computer Science Volume 5301, 2008, pp 341-355
• [15] Shinkawa, Y.: Inter-Model Consistency in UML Based on CPN Formalism, in: 13th Asia Pacific Software Engineering Conference (APSEC '06) 2006, pp. 414-418
• [16] Ibrahim, N., Ibrahim, R., Saringat, M. Z., Mansor, D., Herawan, T.: Definition of Consistency Rules between UML Use Case and Activity Diagram, in T.h. Kim, H. Adeli, R. J. Robles & M. Balitanas (Eds.), Ubiquitous Computing and Multimedia Applications, ed., Communication of Computer and Information Sciences vol. 151, Springer Berlin / Heidelberg, Daejeon, Korea, 2011
• [17] Goel, A., Rugaber, S., Vattam, S.: Structure, behavior & function of complex systems: The SBF modeling language. International Journal of AI in Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing, 23, 23–35 (2009)
• [18] Gero, J.S., Kannengiesser, N.: The Situated Function-Behavior-Structure Framework, Design Studies, vol. 25, no. 4, 2004, pp. 373–391.
• [19] Truyen, F.: The Fast Guide to Model Driven Architecture, The Basics of Model Driven Architecture, Cephas Consulting Corp, January 2006.
• [20] Finkelstein, A.C.W., Gabbay, D., Hunter, A., Kramer, J., Nuseibeh, B.: Inconsistency Handling in Multi-Perspective Specifications. Transactions on Software Engineering, 20(8): 569-578, August 1994; IEEE Computer Society Press.
• [21] Sapna, P.G., Mohanty, H., Ensuring Consistency in Relational Repository of UML Models, in: 10th International Conference on Information Technology (ICIT 2007), 2007, pp. 217-222.
• [22] Chanda, J., Kanjilal, A., Sengupta, S., Bhattacharya, S., Traceability of Requirements and Consistency Verification of UML UseCase, Activity and Class diagram: A Formal Approach, in: International Conference on Methods and Models in Computer Science 2009 (ICM2CS), 2009, pp. 1-4.
• [23] Hausmann, J., Heckel, R., Taentzer, G., Detection of Conflicting Functional Requirements in a Use Case-Driven Approach. In: Proc. of Int. Conference on Software Engineering 2002, Orlando, USA (2002).
• [24] Kruchten, P. ,The Rational Unified Process: An Introduction, 3 ed., Boston: Addison-Wesley, 2003
• [25] Usman, M., Nadeem, A., Taihoon, Kim, Eunsuk, Cho, A Survey of Consistency Checking Techniques for UML Models, in Advanced Software Engineering & Its Applications, 2008, IEEE