Modeling railway control systems using graph grammars: A case study

  • A. A. Holzbacher
  • M. Périn
  • M. Südholt
Regular Papers
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1282)


In this paper we develop in three phases a railway control system following the requirements of [2]. We are mainly concerned with the software architecture of the control system and its dynamic evolution; we do not discuss here the implementation details of the components forming the control system. First, we informally discuss our design proposal for the architecture of the control system: a hierarchy of controllers whose leaves are local controllers connected in a network that mimics the underlying railway topology. Second, we formally define by means of particular graph grammars a style of software architectures for the railway control system consisting of two complementary views and ensuring several desirable properties by construction. The dynamic evolution of the architecture is modelled by a set of coordination rules which define graph transformations and are verified with respect to to the graph grammar. Third, using a coordination rule as a formal specification of a dynamic modification of the railway control system, we derive its implementation in ConCoord, a programming environment for concurrent coordinated programming. With regard to software engineering, the two first phases belong to the system design while the third one forms the first implementation step.


Software Architecture Graph Grammar Track Controller Railway Network Architecture Style 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    B. Courcelle. Graph rewriting: an algebraic and logic approach, chapter 5 in: Handbook of Theoretical Computer Science. Elsevier, 1990.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    E. de Jong. Software architecture for large control systems: a case study. In Proc. of COORDINATION '97, LNCS, this volume. Springer Verlag, 1997.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    P. Fradet and D. Le Métayer. Structured gamma. TR 989, IRISA, Rennes, 1996.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    D. Garlan. Research Directions in Software Architecture. ACM Computing Surveys, 27:257–261, June 1995.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    A. A. Holzbacher. A Software Environment for Concurrent Coordinated Programming. In Proc. of the Conference on Coordination Models, Languages and Applications, LNCS 1061, pages 249–266. Springer-Verlag, 1996.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    A. A. Holzbacher, M. Périn, and M. Südholt. Modeling railway control systems using graph grammars: a case study. TR 1100, IRISA, Rennes, 1997.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    P. B. Kruchten. The 4 + 1 view model of architecture. IEEE Software, pages 42–50, November 1995.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    D. Le Métayer. Software architecture styles as graph grammars. In In Proc. of the ACM SIGSOFT Symposium of the foundations of Software Engineering, pages p.15–23, 1996.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    M. Shaw and D. Garlan. Formulations and Formalisms in Software Architecture. In Computer Science Today; Recent Trends and Developments, LNCS 1000, pages 307–323. Springer-Verlag, 1995.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • A. A. Holzbacher
    • 1
  • M. Périn
    • 2
  • M. Südholt
    • 2
  1. 1.Département d'Informatique, Campus de BeaulieuIRISA/INSA RennesRennes CedexFrance
  2. 2.Projet Lande, Campus de BeaulieuIRISA/IRRIA RennesRennes CedexFrance

Personalised recommendations