Integrating and Rapid-Prototyping UML Structural and Behavioural Diagrams Using Rewriting Logic

  • Nasreddine Aoumeur
  • Gunter Saake
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2348)


Although the diversity of UML diagrams provides users with different views of any complex software under development, in most cases system designers face challenging problems to keeping such diagrams coherently related. In this paper we propose to contribute to the tremendous efforts being undertaken towards rigorous and coherent views of UML-based modelling techniques. In this sense, we propose to integrate most of UML diagrams in a very smooth yet sound way. Moreover, by equipping such integration with an intrinsically concurrent and operational semantics, namely rewriting logic, we also provide validation by rapid-prototyping using Maude implementations.

More precisely, the diagrams we propose to smoothly integrate include: object- and class-diagrams with their related object constraints (using OCL), statecharts and life-cycle diagrams. The integration of such diagrams is based on very appealing Petri-net-like semi-graphical notations. As further advantages of the proposed integration we cite: (1) an explicit distinction between local features and observed ones in (the enriched) class-diagrams which offers a clean separation between intra- and inter-class-diagram reasoning; and (2) a full exploitation of rewriting logic reflection capabilities for expressing different object-life cycles in a runtime way.


Internal Behaviour Distribute Information System Local Message Complex Information System Account Owner 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. [ACR00]
    E. Astesiano, M. Cerioli, and G. Reggio. Plugging data constructs into paradigm-specific languages: Towards an application to UML. In T. Rus, editor, Proceedings Algebraic Methodology and Software Technology, 8th International Conference, AMAST 2000, Iowa City, Iowa, USA, May 2000, volume 1816 of LNCS, pages 273–292. Springer, 2000.Google Scholar
  2. [Aou00]
    N. Aoumeur. Specifying Distributed and Dynamically Evolving Information Systems Using an Extended Co-NETs Approach. In G. Saake, K. Schwarz, and C Tärker, editors, Transactions and Database Dynamics, volume 1773 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Berlin, pages 91–111. Springer-Verlag, 2000. Selected papers from the 8th International Workshop an Foundations of Models and Languages for Data and Objects, Sep. 1999, Germany.Google Scholar
  3. [AS99a]
    N. Aoumeur and G. Saake. On the Specification and Validation of Cooperative Information Systems Using an Extended MAUDE. In K. Futatsugi, J. Goguen, and J. Meseguer, editors, Proc. of 1 st Int. OBJ/CafeOBJ/Maude Workshop, at FM’99 Conference, Toulouse, France, pages 197–211. The Theta Foundation Bucharest, Romania, 1999.Google Scholar
  4. [AS99b]
    N. Aoumeur and G. Saake. Operational Interpretation of the Requirements Specification Language ALBERT Using Timed Rewriting Logic. In Proc. of 5th Int. Workshop an Requirements Engineering: Foundation for Software Quality (REFSQ’99), Heidelberg, Germany. Presses Universitaires de Namur, 1999.Google Scholar
  5. [AS99c]
    N. Aoumeur and G. Saake. Towards an Object Petri Nets Model for Specifying and Validating Distributed Information Systems. In M. Jarke and A. Oberweis, editors, Proc. of the llth Int. Conf. an Advanced Information Systems Engineering, CAiSE’99, volume 1626 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 381–395. Springer-Verlag, 1999.Google Scholar
  6. [AS02]
    N. Aoumeur and G. Saake. Integrating and Rapid-prototyping UML Structural and Behavioural Diagrams Using Rewriting Logic. Preprint, Fakultät für Informatik, Universität Magdeburg, March 2002.Google Scholar
  7. [Ast99]
    E. Astesiano. Algebraic Specification of Concurrent Systems. In E. Astesiano, A. Kreowski, and B. Krieg-Brückner, editors, IFIP 14.3 Volume an Foundations of System Specification, Chapter 1. To appear in Springer LNCS, 1999.Google Scholar
  8. [BJR98]
    G. Booch, I. Jacobson, and J. Rumbaugh, editors. The Unified Modeling Language Reference Manual. Addison-Wesley, 1997.Google Scholar
  9. [BJR97]
    G. Booch, I. Jacobson, and J. Rumbaugh, editors. Unified Modeling Language, Notation Guide, Version 1.0. Addison-Wesley, 1998.Google Scholar
  10. [CDE+99]
    M. Clavel, F. Duran, S. Eker, J. Meseguer, and M. Stehr. Maude. Specification and Programming in Rewriting Logic. Technical report, SRI, Computer Science Laboratory, March 1999. URL:
  11. [CRSS98]
    S. Conrad, J. Ramos, G. Saake, and C. Sernadas. Evolving Logical Specification in Information Systems. In J. Chomicki and G. Saake, editors, Logics for Databases and Information Systems, chapter 7, pages 199–228. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, 1998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. [EK00]
    A. Evans and S. Kent. Proc. 3rd Int. Conf. Unified Modeling Language (UML’2000). LNCS. Springer, 2000.Google Scholar
  13. [FR99]
    R. France and B. Rumpe. Modeling dynamic software components with UML. In UML’99-The Unified Modeling Language. Beyond the Standard. Second International Conference, Fort Collins, CO, USA, October 28-30. 1999, Proceedings, volume 1723 of LNCS. Springer, 1999.Google Scholar
  14. [JSHS96]
    R. Jungclaus, G. Saake, T. Hartmann, and C. Sernadas. TROLL-A Language for Object-Oriented Specification of Information Systems. ACM Transactions an Information Systems, 14(2):175–211, April 1996.Google Scholar
  15. [Mes92]
    J. Meseguer. Conditional rewriting logic as a unified model for concurrency. Theoretical Computer Science, 96:73–155, 1992.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. [Mes98]
    J. Meseguer. Research Directions in Rewriting Logic. In U. Berger and H. Schwichtenberg, editors, Computational Logic, NATO Advanced Study Institute, Marktoberdorf, Germany. Springer-Verlag, 1998.Google Scholar
  17. [Mos97]
    P. Mosses. Cofi: The common framework initiative for algebraic Specification and development. In Proc. Intl. Symp. an Theory and Practice of Software Development (TAPSOFT), volume 1214 of LNCS, pages 115–137. Springer, 1997. COFi Homepage:
  18. [RCA01]
    G. Reggio, M. Cerioli, and E. Astesiano. Towards a rigorous semantics of UML supporting its multiview approach. In H. Hussmann, editor, Fundamental Approaches to Software Engineering. 4th International Conference, FASE 2001 Held as Part of the Joint European Conferences an Theory and Practice of Software, ETAPS 2001 Genova, Italy, April 2-6. 2001 Proceedings, volume 2029 of LNCS, pages 171–186. Springer, 2001.Google Scholar
  19. [Rei85]
    W. Reisig. Petri Nets. EATCS Monographs an Theoretical Computer Science, 4, 1985.Google Scholar
  20. [WMB99]
    A. Wienberg, F. Matthes, and M. Boger. Modeling dynaanic software components with uml. In Robert France and Bernhard Rumpe, editors, UML’ 99-The Unified Modeling Language. Beyond the Standard. Second International Conference, Fort Collins, CO, USA, October 28–30. 1999, Proceedings, volume 1723 of LNCS, pages 204–219. Springer, 1999.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nasreddine Aoumeur
    • 1
  • Gunter Saake
    • 1
  1. 1.Institut für Technische und Betriebliche InformationssystemOtto-von-Guericke-Universität MagdeburgMagdeburg

Personalised recommendations