Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
!
#"
!
$%" " &'
$%" " &'
#"
"
#"
#"
!
"
$%" " &'
!
!
"
!
Fig. 5.
Alarm System - Labeled Transition System
6Con lu on
We have presented our mapping of a UML-subset to object-oriented action sys-
tems. It turns out that the mapping is relatively straight forward. In particu-
lar, we map concurrency to standard conformant non-deterministic choice, treat
event processing as in-order and loss-less, and support time triggered transitions
via timer queues. Having said that, some of our design decisions give our models
a behavior that deviates from the UML standard: In case of time triggered tran-
sitions, we have proposed a way around this limitation, while in the case of the
non-input-enabledness of the model we argue with the support of partial test-
models. It is important to say that none of these choices constitute a principal
limitation of our approach.
Other contributions of this paper are the extension of object-oriented action
systems with prioritized composition and a system assembling block, the presen-
tation of a tool chain that maps UML diagrams to labeled transition systems,
and the discussion of a case study taken from industry. We have also demon-
strated our ability to check that a refined model preserves the behavior of the
more abstract one and we have given hints on how we validate our tools.
It is out of the scope of this paper to review all UML semantics, however,
closest to our work on mapping UML to action systems is work on defining a
UML profile for action systems (cf. [17]). This work is exactly the opposite of
ours, as it aims to add a special UML profile that maps one-to-one to action
systems. There has also been work on defining a mapping of UML to B which,
