The many meanings of UML 2 Sequence Diagrams: a survey
Tóm tắt
Từ khóa
Tài liệu tham khảo
Bowles, J.K.F.: Decomposing interactions. In: 11th International Conference on Algebraic Methodology and Software Technology (AMAST 2006), pp. 189–203. Springer, New York (2006). doi: 10.1007/11784180
Broy, M., Cengarle, M., Grönniger, H., Rumpe, B.: Modular description of a comprehensive semantics model for the UML (Version 2.0). Technical report 2008-06, Carl-Friedrich-Gauß-Fakultät, Technische Universität Braunschweig (2008)
Cavarra, A., Filipe, J.K.: Combining Sequence Diagrams and OCL for liveness. In: Proceedings of Semantic Foundations of Engineering Design Languages (SFEDL), ETAPS 2004. Barcelona, Spain (2004)
Cavarra A., Filipe J.K.: Formalizing liveness-enriched Sequence Diagrams using ASMs. In: Zimmermann, W., Thalheim, B. (eds) Abstract State Machines, pp. 62–77. Springer, New York (2004)
Cengarle, M.: System model for UML–the interactions case. In: Methods for Modelling Software Systems (MMOSS), number 06351 in Dagstuhl Seminar Proceedings, Dagstuhl, Germany, 2007. Internationales Begegnungs- und Forschungszentrum für Informatik (IBFI), Schloss Dagstuhl, Germany
Cengarle, M., Knapp, A.: UML 2.0 Interactions: semantics and refinement. In: 3rd International Workshop on Critical Systems Development with UML (CSDUML’04, Proceedings), pp. 85–99 (2004)
Cengarle, M., Knapp, A.: Operational semantics of UML 2.0 interactions. Technical report TUM-I0505. Institut für Informatik, Technische Universitat München (2005)
Cengarle, M., Knapp, A.: An Institution for UML 2.0 interactions. Technical report TUM-I0808, Institut für Informatik, Technische Universität München (2008)
Cengarle M., Graubmann P., Wagner S.: Semantics of UML 2.0 interactions with variabilities. Electr. Notes Theor. Comput. Sci. 160, 141–155 (2006)
Damm W., Harel D.: LSCs: breathing life into message sequence charts. Form. Methods Syst. Des. 19(1), 45–80 (2001). doi: 10.1023/A:1011227529550
Dan, H., Hierons, R.M., Counsell, S.: A thread-tag based semantics for Sequence Diagrams. In: Software Engineering and Formal Methods (SEFM 2007), pp. 173–182 (2007). IEEE Computer Society
Eichner, C., Fleischhack, H., Meyer, R., Schrimpf, U., Stehno, C.: Compositional semantics for UML 2.0 Sequence Diagrams using Petri Nets. In: SDL2005: Model Driven Systems Design. Springer, New York (2005)
Fernandes, J., Tjell, S., Jorgensen, J.B., Ribeiro, O.: Designing tool support for translating use cases and UML 2.0 Sequence Diagrams into a coloured Petri Net. In: Proceedings of Sixth International Workshop on Scenarios and State Machines (SCESM ‘07), Washington, DC, USA. IEEE Computer Society (2007)
Grosu, R., Smolka, S.: Safety-liveness semantics for UML 2.0 Sequence Diagrams. In: Fifth International Conference on Application of Concurrency to System Design (ACSD ‘05), pp. 6–14, Washington, DC, USA. IEEE (2005)
Hallal H., Boroday S., Petrenko A., Ulrich A.: A formal approach to property testing in causally consistent distributed traces. Form. Asp. Comput. 18(1), 63–83 (2006)
Hammal, Y.: Branching time semantics for UML 2.0 Sequence Diagrams. In: Formal Techniques for Networked and Distributed Systems, pp. 259–274. Springer, New York (2006)
Harel D., Marelly R.: Come, Let’s Play: Scenario-Based Programming Using LSCs and the Play-Engine. Springer-Verlag, New York (2003)
Harel D., Maoz S.: Assert and negate revisited: modal semantics for UML Sequence Diagrams. Softw. Syst. Model. 7(2), 237–253 (2008)
Harel, D., Kleinbort, A., Maoz, S.: S2A: a compiler for multi-modal UML Sequence Diagrams. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Fundamental Approaches to Software Engineering (FASE 2007), pp. 121–124 (2007)
Haugen, Ø., Husa, K., Runde, R., Stølen, K.: Why timed Sequence Diagrams require three-event semantics. Technical report 309, University of Oslo. Revised December 2006
Haugen Ø., Husa K., Runde R., Stølen K.: STAIRS towards formal design with Sequence Diagrams. Softw. Syst. Model. 4(4), 355–357 (2005)
International Telecommunication Union. Recommendation Z.120: Message sequence chart (MSC) (2004)
Kang, K.C., Cohen, S.G., Hess, J.A., Novak, W.E., Peterson, A.S.: Feature-oriented domain analysis (FODA) feasibility study. Technical report CMU/SEI-90-TR-021, Carnegie Mellon University (1990)
Klose, J.: Live sequence charts: a graphical formalism for the specification of communication behavior. PhD thesis, C. v.O. Universitat Oldenburg (2003)
Knapp, A., Wuttke, J.: Model checking of UML 2.0 interactions. In: Kühne, T. (ed.) Models in Software Engineering, Workshops and Symposia at MoDELS 2006, pp. 42–51. Springer, New York (2006)
Lund, M.S., Stølen, K.: A fully general operational semantics for UML 2.0 Sequence Diagrams with potential and mandatory choice. In: 14th International Symposium on Formal Methods (FM 2006), pp. 380–395 (2006)
Lund, M.S.: Operational analysis of sequence diagram specifications. PhD thesis, University of Oslo (2008)
Micskei, Z., Waeselynck, H.: UML 2.0 Sequence Diagrams’ semantics. LAAS technical report no. 08389, 37 pp (August 2008)
Mooij, A.J., Goga, N., Romijn, J.M.: Non-local choice and beyond: intricacies of MSC choice nodes. In: Proceedings of Fundamental Approaches to Software Engineering, pp. 273–288. Springer, New York (2005)
Muscholl, A., Peled, D.: Deciding properties of message sequence charts. In: Proceedings of Dagstuhl Seminar on Scenarios: Models, Transformations and Tools, LNCS 3466, pp. 43–65. Springer, New York (2005)
Object Management Group: UML Specification, ad/97-08-11 (1997)
Object Management Group: UML 2.2 Superstructure Specification, formal/09-02-02. http://www.omg.org/docs/formal/09-02-02.pdf (2009)
Object Management Group: UML 2.0 Testing Profile, V1.0, formal/05-07-07, July 2005
Pickin, S., Jézéquel, J.M.: Using UML Sequence Diagrams as the basis for a formal test description language. In: 4th International Conference on Integrated Formal Methods (IFM 2004), pp. 481–500. Springer, New York (2004)
Pickin, S.: Test des composants logiciels pour les télécommunications. PhD thesis, Université de Rennes, France (2003)
Runde, R.: STAIRS—understanding and developing specifications expressed as UML interaction diagrams. PhD thesis, University of Oslo (January 2007)
Runde, R., Haugen, Ø., Stølen, K.: How to transform UML neg into a useful construct. In: Norsk Informatikkonferanse (NIK’05), pp. 55–66. Tapir (2005)
Selic, B.: On the semantic foundations of standard UML 2.0. In: SFM-RT 2004, Bertinoro, Italy, September 13–18, 2004, Revised Lectures, pp. 181–199. Springer, New York (2004)
Sengupta B., Cleaveland R.: Triggered message sequence charts. Trans. Soft. Eng. 32(8), 587–607 (2006). doi: 10.1109/TSE.2006.82
Shen, H., Virani, A., Niu, J.: Formalize UML 2 Sequence Diagrams, High Assurance Systems Engineering Symposium, 2008. HASE 2008. 11th IEEE, pp. 437–440, 3–5 Dec 2008
Shen, H., Virani, A., Niu, J.: Formalize UML 2 Sequence Diagrams. Technical report CS-TR-2008-13, University of Texas at San Antonio (2008)
Störrle, H.: Semantics of interactions in UML 2.0. In: IEEE Symposium on Human Centric Computing Languages and Environments (HCC 2003), pp. 129–136. IEEE Computer Society (2003)
Störrle, H.: Assert, Negate and Refinement in UML-2 Interactions, Workshop on Critical Systems Development with UML (CSDUML’03). Technical report TUM-I0317, pp. 79–94. Institut für Informatik, Technische Universität München (2003)
Störrle, H.: Trace semantics of interactions in UML 2.0. Technical report, Institut für Informatik, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München (2004)
Waeselynck, H., et al.: Refined design and testing framework, methodology and application results, Hidenets D5.3. http://www.hidenets.aau.dk/Public+Deliverables (2008)