Consistency, Independence and Consequences in UML and OCL Models
TAP '09 Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Tests and Proofs
UML Automatic Verification Tool with Formal Methods
Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science (ENTCS)
Model checking of extended OCL constraints on UML models in SOCLe
FMOODS'07 Proceedings of the 9th IFIP WG 6.1 international conference on Formal methods for open object-based distributed systems
An UML-based approach for validation of software architecture descriptions
TEAA'06 Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on Trends in enterprise application architecture
Proving and visualizing OCL invariant independence by automatically generated test cases
TAP'10 Proceedings of the 4th international conference on Tests and proofs
Comprehensive verification framework for dependability of self-optimizing systems
ATVA'05 Proceedings of the Third international conference on Automated Technology for Verification and Analysis
Workflow system modeling in the mobile healthcare b2b using semantic information
ICCSA'05 Proceedings of the 2005 international conference on Computational Science and Its Applications - Volume Part II
Workflow modeling based on extended activity diagram using ASM semantics
ICCSA'05 Proceedings of the 2005 international conference on Computational Science and Its Applications - Volume Part III
USMMC: a self-contained model checker for UML state machines
Proceedings of the 2013 9th Joint Meeting on Foundations of Software Engineering
| Hi-index | 0.00 |
The Unified Modeling Language has become widely accepted as a standard in software development. Several tools have been produced to support UML model validation. However, most of them support either static or dynamic model checking; and no tools support to check both static and dynamic aspects of a UML model . But a UML model should include the static and dynamic aspects of a software system. Furthermore, these UML tools translate a UML model into a validation language such as PROMELA. But they have some shortcomings: there is no proof of correctness (with respect to the UML semantics) for these tools. In order to overcome these shortcomings, we present a toolset which can validate both static and dynamic aspects of a model; and this toolset is based on the semantic model using Abstract State Machines. Since the toolset is derived from the semantic model, the toolset is correct with respect to the semantic model.