More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/

Article

eSPEM – a SPEM extension for enactable behavior modeling

Authors:

Samir Al-Hilank,

Johannes Drexler,

Michael PhilippsenAuthors Info & Claims

ECMFA'10: Proceedings of the 6th European conference on Modelling Foundations and Applications

Pages 116 - 131

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-13595-8_11

Published: 15 June 2010 Publication History

Abstract

OMG’s SPEM – by means of its (semi-)formal notation – allows for a detailed description of development processes and methodologies, but can only be used for a rather coarse description of their behavior. Concepts for a more fine-grained behavior model are considered out of scope of the SPEM standard and have to be provided by other standards like BPDM/BPMN or UML. However, a coarse granularity of the behavior model often impedes a computer-aided enactment of a process model. Therefore, in this paper we present eSPEM, an extension of SPEM, that is based on the UML meta-model and focused on fine-grained behavior and life-cycle modeling and thereby supports automated enactment of development processes.

References

[1]

Object Management Group: Software & Systems Process Engineering Meta-Model Specification Version 2.0 (April 2008)

[2]

Object Management Group: Unified Modeling Language: Superstructure Version 2.2 (February 2009)

[3]

Gruhn, V.: Process Centered Software Engineering Environments - A Brief History and Future Challenges. Annals of Software Engineering 14(1-4), 363-382 (2002)

Digital Library

[4]

Acuña, S.T., Ferré, X.: Software Process Modelling. In: Proc. World Multiconf. on Systemics, Cybernetics and Informatics, Orlando, FL, pp. 237-242 (2001)

Digital Library

[5]

Conradi, R., Jaccheri, M.L.: Process Modelling Languages. In: Derniame, J.-C., Kaba, B.A., Wastell, D. (eds.) Promoter-2 1998. LNCS, vol. 1500, pp. 27-52. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)

Digital Library

[6]

Jaccheri, M.L., Baldi, M., Divitini, M.: Evaluating the requirements for software process modeling languages and systems. In: Process support for Distributed Teambased Software Development (PDTSD 1999), Orlando, FL, pp. 570-578 (1999)

[7]

CMMI Product Team: CMMI for Development Version 1.2. Carnegie Mellon University - Software Engineering Institute, Pittsburgh, PA (August 2006)

[8]

ISO/IEC: ISO/IEC 15504-5:2006 - Information technology - Process Assessment - Part 5: An exemplar Process Assessment Model (March 2006)

[9]

Bendraou, R., Jezequel, J.M., Gervais, M.P., Blanc, X.: A Comparison of Six UMLBased Languages for Software Process Modeling. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 99 (2009) (PrePrint)

Digital Library

[10]

Schwaber, K., Beedle, M.: Agile Software Development with Scrum. Pearson Studium, London (2008)

Digital Library

[11]

Object Management Group: Business Process Modeling Notation Version 1.2 (January 2009)

[12]

Balduino, R.: Open Unified Process (OpenUP). Technical report, Eclipse Process Framework Project (2007)

[13]

V-Modell R - XT Authors: V-Modell R - XT, Version 1.3 (Feburary 2009), http://www.v-modell.iabg.de/

[14]

ISO/IEC: ISO/IEC 24744:2007 - Software Engineering - Metamodel for Development Methodologies (February 2007)

[15]

Steinberg, D., Budinsky, F., Paternostro, M., Merks, E.: EMF: Eclipse Modeling Framework, 2nd edn. Addison-Wesley, Longman (2009)

Digital Library

[16]

Gronback, R.C.: Eclipse Modeling Project: A Domain-Specific Language (DSL) Toolkit. Addison-Wesley, Longman (2009)

Digital Library

[17]

University of Erlangen-Nuremberg, Research Group Applied Software Engineering: Integrated Tool Chain for Meta-model-based Process Modelling and Execution (March 2010), http://pswt.cs.fau.de/EN/research/IWKMMASWEP/

[18]

Eclipse Foundation: Eclipse Process Framework Project (EPF) (March 2010), http://www.eclipse.org/epf/

[19]

Osterweil, L.J.: Software processes are software too. In: Proc. 9th Intl. Conf. on Software Engineering, Monterey, CA, pp. 2-13 (1987)

Digital Library

[20]

OASIS: Web Services Business Process Execution Language Version 2.0. (April 2007)

[21]

Active Endpoints Inc., Adobe Systems Inc., BEA Systems Inc., IBM Corp., Oracle Inc., and SAP AG: WS-BPEL Extension for People (BPEL4People), Version 1.0. (June 2007)

[22]

Bendraou, R., Combemale, B., Crégut, X., Gervais, M.P.: Definition of an Executable SPEM 2.0. In: Proc. 14th Asia-Pacific Software Engineering Conf., Nagoya, Japan, pp. 390-397 (2007)

Digital Library

[23]

Seidita, V., Cossentino, M., Gaglio, S.: Using and Extending the SPEM Specifications to Represent Agent Oriented Methodologies. In: Proc. Agent-Oriented Software Engineering IX, 9th Intl. Workshop, Estoril, Portugal, pp. 46-59 (2008)

[24]

Henderson-Sellers, B., Giorgini, P.: Agent-Oriented Methodologies. Idea Group (2005)

[25]

Odell, J.J.: Power types. J. of Object-Oriented Programming 7(2), 8-12 (1994)

[26]

Henderson-Sellers, B., Gonzalez-Perez, C.: The Rationale of Powertype-based Metamodelling to Underpin Software Development Methodologies. In: Proc. 2nd Asia-Pacific Conf. on Conceptual Modelling, Newcastle, Australia, pp. 7-16 (2005)

Digital Library

[27]

Firesmith, D., Henderson-Sellers, B.: The OPEN Process Framework: An Introduction. Addison-Wesley, Longman (2002)

[28]

Brinkkemper, S.: Method Engineering: engineering for information systems development methods and tools. Information Software Technology 38(4), 275-280 (1996)

[29]

Heimann, P., Joeris, G., Krapp, C.A., Westfechtel, B.: DYNAMITE: Dynamic Task Nets for Software Process Management. In: Proc. 18th Intl. Conf. on Software Engineering, Berlin, Germany, pp. 331-341 (1996)

Digital Library

[30]

Schürr, A.: Rapid Programming with Graph Rewrite Rules. In: Proc. USENIX Symp. on Very High Level Languages, Santa Fee, NM, October 1994, pp. 83-100 (1994)

[31]

Bendraou, R., Gervais, M.P., Blanc, X.: UML4SPM: A UML2.0-Based Metamodel for Software Process Modelling. In: Briand, L.C., Williams, C. (eds.) MoDELS 2005. LNCS, vol. 3713, pp. 17-38. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)

Digital Library

[32]

Di Nitto, E., Lavazza, L., Schiavoni, M., Tracanella, E., Trombetta, M.: Deriving executable process descriptions from UML. In: Proc. 24th Intl. Conf. on Software Engineering, New York, NY, pp. 155-165 (2002)

Digital Library

[33]

Chou, S.C.: A Process Modeling Language Consisting of High Level UML-based Diagrams and Low Level Process Language. J. of Object Technology 1(4), 137-163 (2002)

[34]

Franch, X., Ribó, J.M.: A Structured Approach to Software Process Modelling. In: Proc. 24th EUROMICRO Conf., Washington, DC, vol. 2, pp. 753-762 (1998)

Digital Library

[35]

Bendraou, R., Sadovykh, A., Gervais, M.P., Blanc, X.: Software Process Modeling and Execution: The UML4SPM to WS-BPEL Approach. In: Proc. 33rd EUROMICRO Conf. on Software Engineering and Advanced Applications, Lübeck, Germany, pp. 314-321 (2007)

Digital Library

[36]

Bendraou, R., Jezéquél, J.M., Fleurey, F.: Combining Aspect and Model-Driven Engineering Approaches for Software Process Modeling and Execution. In: Wang, Q., Garousi, V., Madachy, R., Pfahl, D. (eds.) ICSP 2009. LNCS, vol. 5543, pp. 148-160. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)

Digital Library

[37]

Object Management Group: Semantics of a Foundational Subset for Executable UML Models RFP (April 2005)

[38]

Muller, P.A., Fleurey, F., Jezéquél, J.M.: Weaving Executability into Object-Oriented Meta-languages. In: Briand, L.C., Williams, C. (eds.) MoDELS 2005. LNCS, vol. 3713, pp. 264-278. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)

Digital Library

[39]

Engels, G., Förster, A., Heckel, R., Thöne, S.: Process Modeling using UML. In: Dumas, M., van der Aalst, W., ter Hofstede, A. (eds.) Process-Aware Information Systems, pp. 85-117. John Wiley & Sons, Chichester (2005)

[40]

Jäger, D., Schleicher, A., Westfechtel, B.: Using UML for Software Process Modeling. In: Nierstrasz, O., Lemoine, M. (eds.) ESEC 1999 and ESEC-FSE 1999. LNCS, vol. 1687, pp. 91-108. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)

Digital Library

Cited By

Mayr-Dorn CVierhauser MBichler SKeplinger FCleland-Huang JEgyed AMehofer T(2021)Supporting Quality Assurance with Automated Process-Centric Quality Constraints CheckingProceedings of the 43rd International Conference on Software Engineering10.1109/ICSE43902.2021.00118(1298-1310)Online publication date: 22-May-2021
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1109/ICSE43902.2021.00118
Mayr-Dorn CBichler SKeplinger FEgyed AJuristo N(2021)Guiding engineers with the passive process engine environmentProceedings of the 43rd International Conference on Software Engineering: Companion Proceedings10.1109/ICSE-Companion52605.2021.00033(49-52)Online publication date: 25-May-2021
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1109/ICSE-Companion52605.2021.00033
Pazin MGeraldi ROliveira EMalucelli AReinehr S(2018)Comparing SMartySPEM and vSPEM for Modeling Variability in Software ProcessesProceedings of the XVII Brazilian Symposium on Software Quality10.1145/3275245.3275253(71-80)Online publication date: 17-Oct-2018
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3275245.3275253
Show More Cited By

eSPEM – a SPEM extension for enactable behavior modeling
1. Software and its engineering
  1. Software creation and management

Recommendations

Using the SPEM 2.0 kind-based extension mechanism to define the SPEM4MDE metamodel
ICCES '17: Proceedings of the International Conference on Computing for Engineering and Sciences

The objective 1 of the OMG's standard SPEM is to propose shared concepts for describing software and even systems processes. The SPEM 2.0 metamodel proposes concepts that are quite generic to describe model-driven development processes. Indeed, the ...
SPEM on test: the SODA case study
SAC '08: Proceedings of the 2008 ACM symposium on Applied computing

In the Software Engineering (SE) research field, several efforts are underway aimed at developing appropriate meta-models for SE methodologies. Meta-models are meant to check and verify both the software development process and the completeness and ...
Behavior Modeling with Interaction Diagrams in a UML and OCL Tool
BM-FA '14: Proceedings of the 2014 Workshop on Behaviour Modelling-Foundations and Applications

This contribution discusses system modeling with UML behavior diagrams. We consider statecharts and both kinds of interaction diagrams, i.e., sequence and communication diagrams. We present new implementation features in a UML and OCL modeling tool: (1) ...

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image Guide Proceedings

ECMFA'10: Proceedings of the 6th European conference on Modelling Foundations and Applications

June 2010

353 pages

ISBN:3642135943

Editors:
Thomas Kühne
Victoria University, Wellington, New Zealand
,
Bran Selic
Malina Software Corporation, 10 Blueridge Court, Nepean, Ontario, Canada
,
Marie-Pierre Gervais
Laboratoire d'Informatique de Paris 6, 8, rue du Capitaine Scott, Paris, Ontario, France
,
François Terrier
CEA LIST, Gif-sur-Yvette, 8, rue du Capitaine Scott, Paris, Ontario, France

Publisher

Springer-Verlag

Berlin, Heidelberg

Publication History

Published: 15 June 2010

Qualifiers

Article

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

6
Total Citations
View Citations
0
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)0
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0

Reflects downloads up to 23 Dec 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Mayr-Dorn CVierhauser MBichler SKeplinger FCleland-Huang JEgyed AMehofer T(2021)Supporting Quality Assurance with Automated Process-Centric Quality Constraints CheckingProceedings of the 43rd International Conference on Software Engineering10.1109/ICSE43902.2021.00118(1298-1310)Online publication date: 22-May-2021
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1109/ICSE43902.2021.00118
Mayr-Dorn CBichler SKeplinger FEgyed AJuristo N(2021)Guiding engineers with the passive process engine environmentProceedings of the 43rd International Conference on Software Engineering: Companion Proceedings10.1109/ICSE-Companion52605.2021.00033(49-52)Online publication date: 25-May-2021
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1109/ICSE-Companion52605.2021.00033
Pazin MGeraldi ROliveira EMalucelli AReinehr S(2018)Comparing SMartySPEM and vSPEM for Modeling Variability in Software ProcessesProceedings of the XVII Brazilian Symposium on Software Quality10.1145/3275245.3275253(71-80)Online publication date: 17-Oct-2018
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3275245.3275253
Diaw SCisse MBah ALaouar RKajan E(2017)Using the SPEM 2.0 kind-based extension mechanism to define the SPEM4MDE metamodelProceedings of the International Conference on Computing for Engineering and Sciences10.1145/3129186.3129199(63-69)Online publication date: 22-Jul-2017
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3129186.3129199
Bastarrica MPerovich DMarín JRioseco LBendraou RRaffo DLiGuo HMaggi F(2017)Process-based project management and SPIProceedings of the 2017 International Conference on Software and System Process10.1145/3084100.3084115(124-133)Online publication date: 5-Jul-2017
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3084100.3084115
Ellner RAl-Hilank SDrexler JJung MKips DPhilippsen M(2011)A FUML-based distributed execution machine for enacting software process modelsProceedings of the 7th European conference on Modelling foundations and applications10.5555/2023522.2023527(19-34)Online publication date: 6-Jun-2011
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/2023522.2023527

View Options

View options

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Table of Contents