Synoptic: A Domain-Specific Modeling Language for Space On-board Application Software



The ANR project SPaCIFYhas designed and partially implemented a domain-specific environment, called Synoptic, for real-time embedded on-board space application, and especially control and command software. Synopticis an Eclipse-based modeling workbench which supports many aspects of aerospace software design. As such, it is a domain-specific framework which provides the engineer with a unified modeling environment to handle all heterogeneous analysis, design, implementation and verification tasks, as defined in collaboration with the industrial end users of the project. Relying on the standard modeling languages used in the domain such as Simulink /Stateflow and AADL, SynopticDSML covers the design of on-board applications, control and command modules using imperative synchronous programs, data-flow diagrams, mode automata, and also the partitioning, timing and mapping of these modules onto satellite architectures. An application is modeled as a set of synchronous parts called islands, communicating through asynchronous shared variables managed by the middleware. Synopticthus provides GALS capacities for space applications.


Hardware Architecture External Variable Parent Block Reset Signal Flight Software 
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. 1.
  2. 2.
    Eclipse Modeling Framework project (EMF).
  3. 3.
    RT-Builder. Solutions for Real-Time design, modeling and analysis of complex, multi-processors and multi-bus systems and software.
  4. 4.
    Simulink. Simulation and model-based design.
  5. 5.
    ASSERT Project. Automated proof-based system and software engineering for real-time systems., 2007.
  6. 6.
    As-2 Embedded Computing Systems Committee SAE. Architecture Analysis & Design Language (AADL). SAE Standards no AS5506, November 2004.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Albert Benveniste, Patricia Bournai, Thierry Gautier, Michel Le Borgne, Paul Le Guernic, and Herv Marchand. The Signal declarative synchronous language: controller synthesis and systems/architecture design. In 40th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, December 2001.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    U. Brinkschulte, A. Bechina, F. Picioroagă, and E. Schneider. Open System Architecture for embedded control applications. In International Conference on Industrial Technology, volume 2, pages 1247–1251, Slovenia, December 2003.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Christian Brunette, Jean-Pierre Talpin, Abdoulaye Gamatié, and Thierry Gautier. A metamodel for the design of polychronous systems. Journal of Logic and Algebraic Programming, 78(4):233–259, 2009.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Jérémy Buisson, Cecilia Carro, and Fabien Dagnat. Issues in applying a model driven approach to reconfigurations of satellite software. In HotSWUp ’08: Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Hot Topics in Software Upgrades, pages 1–5, New York, NY, USA, 2008. ACM.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Jérémy Buisson and Fabien Dagnat. Experiments with fractal on modular reflection. In SERA ’08: Proceedings of the 2008 Sixth International Conference on Software Engineering Research, Management and Applications, pages 179–186, Washington, DC, USA, 2008. IEEE Computer Society.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    J. Buisson and F. Dagnat, “ReCaml: Execution State as the Cornerstone of Reconfigurations”. In The 15th ACM SIGPLAN International Conference on Functional Programming, pages 27–29, Baltimore, Maryland, USA, September 2010.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Alan Burns. The Ravenscar profile. ACM Ada Letters, 4:49–52, 1999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Alan Burns, Brian Dobbing, and Tullio Vardanega. Guide for the use of the Ada Ravenscar Profile in high integrity systems. Ada Letters, XXIV(2):1–74, 2004.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    F. Buschmann, R. Meunier, H. Rohnert, P. Sommerlad, and M. Stal. Pattern-oriented software architecture: a system of patterns. Wiley, New York, 1996.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    F.-X. Dormoy. Scade 6: a model based solution for safety critical software development. In Proceedings of the 4th European Congress on Embedded Real Time Software (ERTS ’08), pages 1–9, Toulouse, France, January–February 2008.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    ESA. European space agency. ground systems and operations – telemetry and telecommand packet utilization (ECSS-E-70), January 2003.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Sanford Friedenthal, Alan Moore, and Rick Steiner. A practical guide to SysML: the systems modeling language. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco, CA, 2008.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    James Gosling, Bill Joy, Guy Steele, and Gilad Bracha. Java(TM) language specification, 3rd edition. Addison-Wesley, New York, 2005.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Object Management Group. CORBA Component Model 4.0 Specification. Specification Version 4.0, Object Management Group, April 2006.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Paul Le Guernic, Jean-Pierre Talpin, Jean-Christophe Le Lann, and Projet Espresso. Polychrony for system design. Journal for Circuits, Systems and Computers, 12:261–304, 2002.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    N. Halbwachs, P. Caspi, P. Raymond, and D. Pilaud. The synchronous dataflow programming language LUSTRE. In Proceedings of the IEEE, pages 1305–1320, 1991.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    David Harel. Statecharts: a visual formalism for complex systems. Science of Computer Programming, 8(3):231–274, 1987.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Jerome Hugues, Bechir Zalila, and Laurent Pautet. Combining model processing and middleware configuration for building distributed high-integrity systems. In ISORC ’07: 10th IEEE International Symposium on Object and Component-Oriented Real-Time Distributed Computing, pages 307–312, Washington, DC, USA, 2007. IEEE Computer Society.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Damir Isovic and Gerhard Fohler. Efficient scheduling of sporadic, aperiodic, and periodic tasks with complex constraints. In 21st IEEE Real-Time Systems Symposium (RTSS’2000), pages 207–216, Orlando, USA, November 2000.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Frédéric Jouault, Jean Bézivin, and Ivan Kurtev. Tcs:: a DSL for the specification of textual concrete syntaxes in model engineering. In GPCE ’06: Proceedings of the 5th international conference on Generative programming and component engineering, pages 249–254, New York, NY, USA, 2006. ACM.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    J. Kramer and J. Magee. The evolving philosophers problem: dynamic change management. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 16(11):1293–1306, November 1990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Object Management Group Management Group. A UML profile for MARTE, beta 2. Technical report, June 2008.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Peter J. Robinson. Hierarchical object-oriented design. Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ, 1992.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Jean-Franois Rolland, Jean-Paul Bodeveix, Mamoun Filali, David Chemouil, and Thomas Dave. AADL modes for space software. In Data Systems In Aerospace (DASIA), Palma de Majorca, Spain, 27 May 08 – 30 May 08, page (electronic medium),, May 2008. European Space Agency (ESA Publications).
  31. 31.
    E. Schneider. A middleware approach for dynamic real-time software reconfiguration on distributed embedded systems. PhD thesis, INSA Strasbourg, 2004.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Brinkley Sprunt, John P. Lehoczky, and Lui Sha. Exploiting unused periodic time for aperiodic service using the extended priority exchange algorithm. In IEEE Real-Time Systems Symposium, pages 251–258, Huntsville, AL, USA, December 1988.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Andres Toom, Tonu Naks, Marc Pantel, Marcel Gandriau, and Indra Wati. GeneAuto: an automatic code generator for a safe subset of SimuLink/StateFlow. In European Congress on Embedded Real-Time Software (ERTS), Toulouse, France, 29 January 08 – 01 February 08, page (electronic medium),, 2008. Socit des Ingnieurs de l’Automobile.
  34. 34.
    Carl von Platen and Johan Eker. Feedback linking: optimizing object code layout for updates. SIGPLAN Notices, 41(7):2–11, 2006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer US 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.IRIT-ACADIEUniversité de Toulouse, site Paul SabatierToulouse Cedex 9France
  2. 2.IRISA-ESPRESSORennes CedexFrance
  3. 3.VALORIA, Écoles de St-Cyr CotquidanUniversité Européenne de BretagneGuer CedexFrance
  4. 4.Institut Télécom – Télécom BretagneUniversité Européenne de BretagneBrest Cedex 3France
  5. 5.Thales Alenia SpaceCannesFrance
  6. 6.EADS AstriumToulouse Cedex 4France

Personalised recommendations