Design patterns are widely used by object oriented designers and developers for building complex systems in object oriented programming languages such as Java. However, systems evolve over time, increasing the chance that the pattern in its original form will be broken. We attempt to show that many design patterns (implemented in Java) can be verified automatically. Patterns are defined in terms of variants, mini-patterns, and artifacts in a pattern description language called SPINE. These specifications are then processed by Hedgehog, an automated proof tool that attempts to prove that Java source code meets these specifications.
{"title":"Automatic verification of Java design patterns","authors":"A. Blewitt, A. Bundy, I. Stark","doi":"10.1109/ASE.2001.989821","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ASE.2001.989821","url":null,"abstract":"Design patterns are widely used by object oriented designers and developers for building complex systems in object oriented programming languages such as Java. However, systems evolve over time, increasing the chance that the pattern in its original form will be broken. We attempt to show that many design patterns (implemented in Java) can be verified automatically. Patterns are defined in terms of variants, mini-patterns, and artifacts in a pattern description language called SPINE. These specifications are then processed by Hedgehog, an automated proof tool that attempts to prove that Java source code meets these specifications.","PeriodicalId":433615,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings 16th Annual International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASE 2001)","volume":" 27","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2001-11-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114103198","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Good quality models for the analysis of complex enterprise information systems (EIS) are hard to build and require lots of experience and effort, which are not always available. A possible solution to deal with the previous issue is to build automated procedures for quality model generation. Such procedures will encapsulate previous existing knowledge on quality modeling and their use will reduce the cost of developing quality models. The authors concentrate on the performance and reliability of EIS and investigate the automatic generation of quality models from EIS architectural descriptions comprising additional information related to the aspects that affect the quality of the EIS.
{"title":"Automating the performance and reliability analysis of enterprise information systems","authors":"A. Zarras, V. Issarny","doi":"10.1109/ASE.2001.989827","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ASE.2001.989827","url":null,"abstract":"Good quality models for the analysis of complex enterprise information systems (EIS) are hard to build and require lots of experience and effort, which are not always available. A possible solution to deal with the previous issue is to build automated procedures for quality model generation. Such procedures will encapsulate previous existing knowledge on quality modeling and their use will reduce the cost of developing quality models. The authors concentrate on the performance and reliability of EIS and investigate the automatic generation of quality models from EIS architectural descriptions comprising additional information related to the aspects that affect the quality of the EIS.","PeriodicalId":433615,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings 16th Annual International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASE 2001)","volume":"18 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2001-11-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"131883229","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
We propose to view programs as abstract data types and to perform program changes by applying well-defined operations on programs. The ADT view of programs goes beyond the approach of syntax-directed editors and proof-editors since it is possible to combine basic update operations into larger update programs that can be stored and reused. It is crucial for the design of update operations and their composition to know which properties they can preserve when they are applied to a program. The author argues in favor of the abstract data type view of programs, and presents a general framework in which different programming languages, update languages, and properties can be studied.
{"title":"Programs are abstract data types","authors":"Martin Erwig","doi":"10.1109/ASE.2001.989838","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ASE.2001.989838","url":null,"abstract":"We propose to view programs as abstract data types and to perform program changes by applying well-defined operations on programs. The ADT view of programs goes beyond the approach of syntax-directed editors and proof-editors since it is possible to combine basic update operations into larger update programs that can be stored and reused. It is crucial for the design of update operations and their composition to know which properties they can preserve when they are applied to a program. The author argues in favor of the abstract data type view of programs, and presents a general framework in which different programming languages, update languages, and properties can be studied.","PeriodicalId":433615,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings 16th Annual International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASE 2001)","volume":"31 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2001-11-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130199861","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
An appropriate approach for translating UML to B formal specifications allows one to use UML and B jointly in a unified, practical and rigorous software development. We formally analyze UML specifications via their corresponding B formal specifications. This point is significant because B support tools like AtelierB are available. We can also use UML specifications as a tool for building B specifications, so the development of B specifications become easier In this paper we address the problem of automatic derivation from UML behavioral diagrams into B specifications, which has been so far an open issue. A new approach for modeling class operations in B is presented Each class operation is mapped into a B operation. A class operation and its involved data are mapped into the same B abstract machine (BAM). The class operation calling-called dependency is used to arrange derived B operations into BAMs. For each calling-called pair of class operations, the B operation of the called operation participates in the implementation of the B operation of the calling operation.
{"title":"Modeling class operations in B: Application to UML behavioral diagrams","authors":"Hung Ledang, J. Souquières","doi":"10.1109/ASE.2001.989815","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ASE.2001.989815","url":null,"abstract":"An appropriate approach for translating UML to B formal specifications allows one to use UML and B jointly in a unified, practical and rigorous software development. We formally analyze UML specifications via their corresponding B formal specifications. This point is significant because B support tools like AtelierB are available. We can also use UML specifications as a tool for building B specifications, so the development of B specifications become easier In this paper we address the problem of automatic derivation from UML behavioral diagrams into B specifications, which has been so far an open issue. A new approach for modeling class operations in B is presented Each class operation is mapped into a B operation. A class operation and its involved data are mapped into the same B abstract machine (BAM). The class operation calling-called dependency is used to arrange derived B operations into BAMs. For each calling-called pair of class operations, the B operation of the called operation participates in the implementation of the B operation of the calling operation.","PeriodicalId":433615,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings 16th Annual International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASE 2001)","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2001-11-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130303338","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Action Language is a specification language for reactive software systems. We present the Action Language Verifier which consists of: 1) a compiler that converts Action Language specifications to composite symbolic representations, and 2) an infinite-state symbolic model checker which verifies (or falsifies) CTL properties of Action Language specifications. Our symbolic manipulator (Composite Symbolic Library) combines a BDD manipulator (for boolean and enumerated types) and a Presburger arithmetic manipulator (for integers) to handle multiple variable types. Since we allow unbounded integer variables, model checking queries become undecidable. We present several heuristics used by the Action Language Verifier to achieve convergence.
{"title":"Action Language Verifier","authors":"T. Bultan, Tuba Yavuz-Kahveci","doi":"10.1109/ASE.2001.989834","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ASE.2001.989834","url":null,"abstract":"Action Language is a specification language for reactive software systems. We present the Action Language Verifier which consists of: 1) a compiler that converts Action Language specifications to composite symbolic representations, and 2) an infinite-state symbolic model checker which verifies (or falsifies) CTL properties of Action Language specifications. Our symbolic manipulator (Composite Symbolic Library) combines a BDD manipulator (for boolean and enumerated types) and a Presburger arithmetic manipulator (for integers) to handle multiple variable types. Since we allow unbounded integer variables, model checking queries become undecidable. We present several heuristics used by the Action Language Verifier to achieve convergence.","PeriodicalId":433615,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings 16th Annual International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASE 2001)","volume":"42 5","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2001-11-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132285397","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The inspection of early life-cycle artifacts such as requirement documents promises great benefits. However, research demonstrates that the inspection process is complex and expensive and that tool support would be highly desirable. Existing inspection tools focus largely on the inspection of source code. We have therefore devised groupware support for inspecting requirements. Based on our experience with adopting a group support system (GSS) for requirements negotiation, we decided to tailor this commercial GSS to support inspection of requirements. The paper discusses our concept of a Groupware-supported Requirements Inspection Process (GRIP) and shows that tailoring a COTS GSS works well to automate this process.
{"title":"Tailoring a COTS group support system for software requirements inspection","authors":"M. Halling, P. Grünbacher, S. Biffl","doi":"10.1109/ASE.2001.989806","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ASE.2001.989806","url":null,"abstract":"The inspection of early life-cycle artifacts such as requirement documents promises great benefits. However, research demonstrates that the inspection process is complex and expensive and that tool support would be highly desirable. Existing inspection tools focus largely on the inspection of source code. We have therefore devised groupware support for inspecting requirements. Based on our experience with adopting a group support system (GSS) for requirements negotiation, we decided to tailor this commercial GSS to support inspection of requirements. The paper discusses our concept of a Groupware-supported Requirements Inspection Process (GRIP) and shows that tailoring a COTS GSS works well to automate this process.","PeriodicalId":433615,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings 16th Annual International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASE 2001)","volume":"54 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2001-11-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126681975","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Test suites are designed to validate the operation of a system against requirements. One important aspect of a test suite design is to ensure that system operation logic is tested completely. This is a difficult task. Code coverage tools support test suite designers by providing the information about which parts of source code are covered during system execution. Unfortunately, code coverage tools produce only source code coverage information. For a test engineer it is often hard to understand what the noncovered parts of the source code do and how they relate to requirements. We propose a generic approach that provides design coverage of the executed software, simplifying the development of new test suites. We demonstrate our approach on common design abstractions such as statecharts and structure diagrams. We implement the design coverage using tracing and a trace analysis framework. Using design coverage, test suites could be created faster by focussing on untested design elements.
{"title":"Tracing execution of software for design coverage","authors":"Raimondas Lencevicius, Edu Metz, A. Ran","doi":"10.1109/ASE.2001.989822","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ASE.2001.989822","url":null,"abstract":"Test suites are designed to validate the operation of a system against requirements. One important aspect of a test suite design is to ensure that system operation logic is tested completely. This is a difficult task. Code coverage tools support test suite designers by providing the information about which parts of source code are covered during system execution. Unfortunately, code coverage tools produce only source code coverage information. For a test engineer it is often hard to understand what the noncovered parts of the source code do and how they relate to requirements. We propose a generic approach that provides design coverage of the executed software, simplifying the development of new test suites. We demonstrate our approach on common design abstractions such as statecharts and structure diagrams. We implement the design coverage using tracing and a trace analysis framework. Using design coverage, test suites could be created faster by focussing on untested design elements.","PeriodicalId":433615,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings 16th Annual International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASE 2001)","volume":"253 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2001-09-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122153631","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：