Transformation of sequence diagram to timed Petri net using Atlas Transformation Language metamodel approach
Abstract
Real‐time systems are complex and composed of time‐bounded events that must satisfy the real‐time constraints for their proper functioning. To cope with the complexity of real‐time systems, model‐driven approaches such as model‐driven architecture (MDA) can be followed, which uses the conceptual models for system representation. This paper presents an MDA‐based automated approach for an early stage performance evaluation and verification of a real‐time system using the Unified Modeling Language (UML)/Modeling and Analysis of Real‐Time and Embedded systems (MARTE) sequence diagram. A metamodel‐based model‐to‐model transformation technique is used for mapping the UML/MARTE sequence diagram into the generalized Petri Net Markup Language (PNML) representation of the timed Petri net model using Atlas Transformation Language (ATL). The derived PNML representation has the advantage to support the interoperability between different Petri net tools when compared over the existing methods that produce tool‐specific representation. The proposed approach enables the system designers to create and evaluate alternate system designs and predict their behavior, contributing to improving the system quality. The contribution of the proposed technique for identifying the optimal system design is analyzed using a real‐time embedded sensor application. The proposed transformation approach is also validated using a real‐time system from the manufacturing domain.
Graphical Abstract
This paper presents a metamodel‐based automated transformation technique for mapping the UML/MARTE sequence diagram into the generalized PNML representation of the timed Petri net model using the ATL Transformation Language. The proposed approach supports interoperability between different Petri net tools using the PNML format. The paper also demonstrates how the system models play a key role in the early stage system verification and analyzing the performance of alternate system design to select the optimal option.
References
[1]
Object Management Group . MDA guide version 1.0.1. http://www.omg.org/cgi-bin/doc?omg/03-06-01; 2003.
[2]
Object Management Group . Unified Modeling Language 2.5.1. https://www.omg.org/spec/UML/2.5.1/PDF; 2017.
[3]
Object Management Group . UML specification, 1st ed., 1. https://www.omg.org/spec/UML/About-UML/; 2003.
[4]
A UML profile for MARTE: Modeling and Analysis of Real‐Time and Embedded systems. http://www.omg.org/spec/MARTE/1.1/PDF; 2011.
[5]
Murata T. Petri nets: properties, analysis and applications. Proc IEEE. 1989;77(4):541‐580.
[6]
Biehl M. Literature Study on Model Transformations. Technical Report ISRN/KTH/MMK/R‐10/07‐SE. Stockholm, Sweden: Royal Institute of Technology; 2010.
[7]
Madhavi K. Model transformation languages: state of the‐art. Int J Comput Sci Eng. 2017;9(6):404‐408.
[8]
Erata Ferhat CM, Geylani K. D3.1.1 review of model‐to‐model transformation approaches and technologies. Text and Model‐Synchronized Document Engineering Platform; 2015.
[9]
Marsan MA, Balbo G, Conte G, Donatelli S, Franceschinis G. Modelling with generalized stochastic Petri nets. SIGMETRICS Perform Eval Rev. 1998;26(2):2. https://doi.org/10.1145/288197.581193
[10]
Elkamel M, Nabil M, Dalal B, Allaoua C. Design of ATL rules for transforming UML 2 sequence diagrams into Petri nets. Int J Comput Sci Bus Infor. 2013;8(1):1‐21.
[11]
Shen J, Liu L, Hu X, Zhang G, Xiao J. Evaluate concurrent state machine of SysML model with Petri net. In: 2018 13th IEEE Conference on Industrial Electronics and Applications (ICIEA). IEEE Industrial Electronics Chapter of Singapore; 2018:2106‐2111. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICIEA.2018.8398057
[12]
André E, Benmoussa MM, Choppy C. Formalising concurrent UML state machines using coloured Petri nets. Formal Asp Comput. 2016;28(5):805‐845. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00165-016-0388-9
[13]
Soares JAC, LimaBrunoBruno, Faria JP. Automatic model transformation from UML sequence diagrams to coloured Petri nets. In: Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Model‐Driven Engineering and Software Development. Institute for Systems and Technologies of Information, Control and Communication; 2018:668‐679. https://doi.org/10.5220/0006731806680679
[14]
Van Doc VV, Thang HQ, Bach NT. Development of the rules for transformation of UML sequence diagrams into queueing Petri nets. In: Industrial Networks and Intelligent Systems. Lecture Notes of the Institute for Computer Sciences, Social Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering. ICST Institute for Computer Sciences, Social Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering; 2019.
[15]
Dan L. QVT based model transformation from sequence diagram to CSP. In: 2010 15th IEEE International Conference on Engineering of Complex Computer Systems. IEEE Technical Committee on Complexity in Computing; 2010:349‐354. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICECCS.2010.47
[16]
Hassan R, Amrita C. Mapping AADL to Petri net tool‐sets using PNML framework. J Softw Eng Appl. 2014;7:920‐933.
[17]
Bernardi S, Flammini F, Marrone S, Mazzocca N, Merseguer J, Nardone R, Vittorini V. Enabling the usage of UML in the verification of railway systems: the DAM‐rail approach. Reliab Eng Syst Saf. 2013;120:112‐126.
[18]
Brugali D. Modeling and analysis of safety requirements in robot navigation with an extension of UML MARTE. In: 2018 IEEE International Conference on Real‐Time Computing and Robotics (RCAR). Chinese University of Hong Kong; 2018:439‐444. https://doi.org/10.1109/RCAR.2018.8621699
[19]
Federico C, Ivano M, Bran S. Execution of UML models: a systematic review of research and practice. Softw Syst Model. 2018;18:112‐126.
[20]
López‐Grao JP, Merseguer J, Campos J. From UML activity diagrams to stochastic Petri nets: application to software performance engineering. SIGSOFT Softw Eng Notes. 2004;29(1):25‐36.
[21]
Woodside M, Petriu DC, Merseguer J, Petriu DB, Alhaj M. Transformation challenges: from software models to performance models. Softw Syst Model. 2014;13(4):1529‐1552.
[22]
Bernardi S, Merseguer J. Performance evaluation of UML design with stochastic well‐formed nets. J Syst Softw. 2007;80(11):1843‐1865.
[23]
Louati A, Barkaoui K, Jerad C. Temporal properties verification of real‐time systems using UML/MARTE/OCL‐RT. In: Formalisms for Reuse and Systems Integration. Springer International Publishing Switzerland; 2015:133‐147.
[24]
Louati A, Barkaoui K. Formal verification of UML2 timing diagrams based on time Petri nets. Int J Inf Syst Serv Sect. 2016;8(2):87‐97. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJISSS.2016040107
[25]
Boufenara S, Barkaoui K, Belala F, Boucheneb H. Transactional Petri nets: a semantic framework for UML2 activities. Int J Critical Comput‐Based Syst. 2014;5:241.
[26]
Balbo G. Introduction to generalized stochastic Petri nets. Formal Methods for Performance Evaluation. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer; 2007:83‐131. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-72522-0_3
[27]
Billington J, Christensen S, Van Hee K, Kindler E, Kummer O, Petrucci L, Post R, Stehno C, Weber M. The Petri net markup language: concepts, technology, and tools. In: Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on Applications and Theory of Petri Nets, ICATPN'03. Springer‐Verlag; 2003; Berlin, Heidelberg:483‐505. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1760066.1760101
[28]
Eclipse Foundation . ATL Transformation Language. http://www.eclipse.org/atl/atlTransformations; 2013.
[29]
Steinberg D, Budinsky F, Paternostro M, Merks E. EMF: Eclipse Modeling Framework 2.0. 2nd ed.: Addison‐Wesley Professional; 2009.
[30]
Eclipse Papyrus modelling environment. https://www.eclipse.org/papyrus/
[31]
Dingle N, William K, Tamas S. PIPE2: a tool for the performance evaluation of generalized stochastic Petri nets. ACM Sigmetrics Perform Eval Rev. 2009;36(4):34‐39.
[32]
Viswanadham N, Narahari Y. Performance Modeling of Automated Manufacturing Systems. USA: Prentice‐Hall, Inc.; 1992.
[33]
Shailesh T, Nayak A, Prasad D. An UML based performance evaluation of real‐time systems using timed Petri net. Computers. 2020;9(4):1‐31. https://www.mdpi.com/2073-431X/9/4/94
[34]
Little J, Graves S. Little's law. Building Intuition: Insights from Basic Operations Management Models and Principles. Boston, MA: Springer; 2008:81‐100. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-73699-0_5
[35]
Li Z. Design and analysis of robust kanban system in an uncertain environment. Design Anal Robust Kanban Syst Uncertain Envir. 2013:1‐255.
[36]
Ullah H. A Petri net model for the integration of purchasing, production and packaging using kanban system. Adv Product Eng Manag. 2014;9(4):187‐200. http://apem-journal.org/Archives/2014/Abstract-APEM9-4_187-200.html
[37]
Cunha E, Custodio M, Rocha H, Barreto R. Formal verification of UML sequence diagrams in the embedded systems context. In: 2011 Brazilian Symposium on Computing System Engineering. Brazilian Computer Society; 2011:39‐45. https://doi.org/10.1109/SBESC.2011.18
[38]
Di Natale M, Stankovic JA. Dynamic end‐to‐end guarantees in distributed real time systems. In: IEEE Real‐Time Systems Symposium. IEEE Computer Society; 1994:39‐45.
Index Terms
- Transformation of sequence diagram to timed Petri net using Atlas Transformation Language metamodel approach
Index terms have been assigned to the content through auto-classification.
Recommendations
Transformation techniques in the model-driven development process of UWE
ICWE '06: Workshop proceedings of the sixth international conference on Web engineeringDevelopment of Web software is still an inefficient and error-prone process. We need integrated techniques and tool support for automated generation of Web systems. The goal of model-driven development (MDD) is to tackle these problems introducing a ...
Automatic Model Transformation from UML Sequence Diagrams to Coloured Petri Nets
MODELSWARD 2018: Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Model-Driven Engineering and Software DevelopmentUML Sequence Diagrams are used in different domains for specifying the required behaviour of software-based
systems. However, the created diagrams are often used only as documentation, and not as a basis for
generating subsequent lifecycle artifacts or ...
ATL Transformation of Queueing Networks to Queueing Petri Nets
MODELSWARD 2017: Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Model-Driven Engineering and Software DevelopmentThis paper presents an approach for model transformation from Queueing Network Models (QNMs) into
Queueing Petri Nets (QPNs). This would open up the benefits of QPNs in analyzing the performance of
QNMs. We present metamodels for QNMs and QPNs, and then ...
Comments
Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.Information & Contributors
Information
Published In
© 2021 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Publisher
John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
United States
Publication History
Published: 18 January 2022
Author Tags
Qualifiers
- Research-article
Contributors
Other Metrics
Bibliometrics & Citations
Bibliometrics
Article Metrics
- 0Total Citations
- 0Total Downloads
- Downloads (Last 12 months)0
- Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 15 Jan 2025