The Experts below are selected from a list of 90 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Hassan Mountassir - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
FACS - Incremental Modeling of System Architecture Satisfying SysML Functional Requirements
Formal Aspects of Component Software, 2014Co-Authors: Oscar Carrillo, Samir Chouali, Hassan MountassirAbstract:The aim of this work is to propose a methodological approach to model and verify Component-Based Systems (CBS), directly from SysML requirement Diagrams, and to ensure formally the architecture consistency of the specified systems. The architecture consistency is guaranteed, when the components that interact in CBS are compatible and all component requirements are preserved by the composition. We propose to exploit functional requirements of CBS, specified with SysML Diagrams, and the composition of components to specify incrementally system architecture. Component interfaces are specified with SysML sequence Diagrams to capture their behaviors (protocols). From a requirement Diagram, we associate atomic requirements, represented as LTL properties, to reusable components satisfying them. LTL properties are verified on the components with SPIN model-checker. Then, we specify system architecture incrementally, with SysML Block Definition Diagram (BDD) and Internal Block Diagram (IBD), by treating, one by one the atomic requirements.
-
ECSA - Specifying system architecture from SysML requirements and component interfaces
Software Architecture, 2013Co-Authors: Samir Chouali, Oscar Carrillo, Hassan MountassirAbstract:We propose to map functional system requirements, specified with SysML, directly into system architecture, by exploiting the composition relation between component interfaces. Our research challenge is to guarantee formally that the final system fulfill the set of all requirements. Our approach is based on component-based systems (CBS) specified with SysML models and Interface Automata (IA) to capture their behaviors. From a SysML Requirement Diagram (RD), we build a Block Definition Diagram (BDD) to specify system architecture, by taking, one by one, the lowest level of requirements. At each new added requirement, we add a new component satisfying this requirement, by the composition, in the partial architecture obtained in a precedent step. Then we verify whether the new component is compatible with the components in the partial architecture, and if the requirements are preserved.
-
Assembling Components using SysML with Non-Functional Requirements
2013Co-Authors: Samir Chouali, Ahmed Hammad, Hassan MountassirAbstract:Non-functional requirements of component based systems are important as their functional requirements, therefore they must be considered in components assembly. These properties are beforehand specified with SysML requirement Diagram. We specify component based system architecture with SysML Block Definition Diagram, and component behaviors with sequence Diagrams. We propose to specify formally component interfaces with interface automata, obtained from requirement and sequence Diagrams. In this formalism, transitions are annotated with costs to specify non-functional property. The compatibility between components is performed by synchronizing their interface automata. The approach is explained with the example of the electric car CyCab, where the costs are associated to energy consumption of component actions. Our approach verifies whether, a set of components, when composed according to the system architecture, achieve their tasks by respecting their non-functional requirements.
-
Specifying System Architecture from SysML Requirements and Component Interfaces
2013Co-Authors: Samir Chouali, Oscar Carrillo, Hassan MountassirAbstract:We propose to map functional system requirements, specified with SysML, directly into system architecture, by exploiting the composition relation between component interfaces. Our research challenge is to guarantee formally that the final system fulfill the set of all requirements. Our approach is based on component-based systems (CBS) specified with SysML models and Interface Automata (IA) to capture their behaviors. From a SysML Requirement Diagram (RD), we build a Block Definition Diagram (BDD) to specify system architecture, by taking, one by one, the lowest level of requirements. At each new added requirement, we add a new component satisfying this requirement, by the composition, in the partial architecture obtained in a precedent step. Then we verify whether the new component is compatible with the components in the partial architecture, and if the requirements are preserved.
-
Formalizing and verifying compatibility and consistency of SysML Blocks
ACM Sigsoft Software Engineering Notes, 2012Co-Authors: Oscar Carrillo, Samir Chouali, Hassan MountassirAbstract:The objective of this paper is to define an approach to formalize and verify the SysML Blocks in a refinement process. We propose to specify system architecture with SysML Block Definition Diagram, this Diagram is then analyzed and decomposed into several sub-Blocks in order to verify their compatibility. The structural architecture of an abstract Block is given by the Internal Block Diagram (IBD) which defines the communication links between sub-Blocks. The compatibility verification between sub-Blocks is only made on linked sub-Blocks. The behaviour of each sub-Block is described by an interface automaton which species the invocations exchanged with its environment. The verification between Blocks is translated into consistency verification between the Blocks and compatibility verification between their interface automata. Incompatibilities can be inconsistent at architecture level and at communication level if there are deadlocks during the interaction between sub-Blocks. Once the verification is established between the sub-Blocks, the abstract Block can be then substituted by the sub-Blocks which compose it.
Samir Chouali - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
FACS - Incremental Modeling of System Architecture Satisfying SysML Functional Requirements
Formal Aspects of Component Software, 2014Co-Authors: Oscar Carrillo, Samir Chouali, Hassan MountassirAbstract:The aim of this work is to propose a methodological approach to model and verify Component-Based Systems (CBS), directly from SysML requirement Diagrams, and to ensure formally the architecture consistency of the specified systems. The architecture consistency is guaranteed, when the components that interact in CBS are compatible and all component requirements are preserved by the composition. We propose to exploit functional requirements of CBS, specified with SysML Diagrams, and the composition of components to specify incrementally system architecture. Component interfaces are specified with SysML sequence Diagrams to capture their behaviors (protocols). From a requirement Diagram, we associate atomic requirements, represented as LTL properties, to reusable components satisfying them. LTL properties are verified on the components with SPIN model-checker. Then, we specify system architecture incrementally, with SysML Block Definition Diagram (BDD) and Internal Block Diagram (IBD), by treating, one by one the atomic requirements.
-
ECSA - Specifying system architecture from SysML requirements and component interfaces
Software Architecture, 2013Co-Authors: Samir Chouali, Oscar Carrillo, Hassan MountassirAbstract:We propose to map functional system requirements, specified with SysML, directly into system architecture, by exploiting the composition relation between component interfaces. Our research challenge is to guarantee formally that the final system fulfill the set of all requirements. Our approach is based on component-based systems (CBS) specified with SysML models and Interface Automata (IA) to capture their behaviors. From a SysML Requirement Diagram (RD), we build a Block Definition Diagram (BDD) to specify system architecture, by taking, one by one, the lowest level of requirements. At each new added requirement, we add a new component satisfying this requirement, by the composition, in the partial architecture obtained in a precedent step. Then we verify whether the new component is compatible with the components in the partial architecture, and if the requirements are preserved.
-
Assembling Components using SysML with Non-Functional Requirements
2013Co-Authors: Samir Chouali, Ahmed Hammad, Hassan MountassirAbstract:Non-functional requirements of component based systems are important as their functional requirements, therefore they must be considered in components assembly. These properties are beforehand specified with SysML requirement Diagram. We specify component based system architecture with SysML Block Definition Diagram, and component behaviors with sequence Diagrams. We propose to specify formally component interfaces with interface automata, obtained from requirement and sequence Diagrams. In this formalism, transitions are annotated with costs to specify non-functional property. The compatibility between components is performed by synchronizing their interface automata. The approach is explained with the example of the electric car CyCab, where the costs are associated to energy consumption of component actions. Our approach verifies whether, a set of components, when composed according to the system architecture, achieve their tasks by respecting their non-functional requirements.
-
Specifying System Architecture from SysML Requirements and Component Interfaces
2013Co-Authors: Samir Chouali, Oscar Carrillo, Hassan MountassirAbstract:We propose to map functional system requirements, specified with SysML, directly into system architecture, by exploiting the composition relation between component interfaces. Our research challenge is to guarantee formally that the final system fulfill the set of all requirements. Our approach is based on component-based systems (CBS) specified with SysML models and Interface Automata (IA) to capture their behaviors. From a SysML Requirement Diagram (RD), we build a Block Definition Diagram (BDD) to specify system architecture, by taking, one by one, the lowest level of requirements. At each new added requirement, we add a new component satisfying this requirement, by the composition, in the partial architecture obtained in a precedent step. Then we verify whether the new component is compatible with the components in the partial architecture, and if the requirements are preserved.
-
Formalizing and verifying compatibility and consistency of SysML Blocks
ACM Sigsoft Software Engineering Notes, 2012Co-Authors: Oscar Carrillo, Samir Chouali, Hassan MountassirAbstract:The objective of this paper is to define an approach to formalize and verify the SysML Blocks in a refinement process. We propose to specify system architecture with SysML Block Definition Diagram, this Diagram is then analyzed and decomposed into several sub-Blocks in order to verify their compatibility. The structural architecture of an abstract Block is given by the Internal Block Diagram (IBD) which defines the communication links between sub-Blocks. The compatibility verification between sub-Blocks is only made on linked sub-Blocks. The behaviour of each sub-Block is described by an interface automaton which species the invocations exchanged with its environment. The verification between Blocks is translated into consistency verification between the Blocks and compatibility verification between their interface automata. Incompatibilities can be inconsistent at architecture level and at communication level if there are deadlocks during the interaction between sub-Blocks. Once the verification is established between the sub-Blocks, the abstract Block can be then substituted by the sub-Blocks which compose it.
Alan Grigg - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Model-based systems product line engineering with physical design variability for aircraft systems
2016 11th System of Systems Engineering Conference (SoSE), 2016Co-Authors: Mole Li, Lin Guan, Charles Dickerson, Alan GriggAbstract:Software Product Line Engineering (SPLE) has drawn large amounts of attention during the last two decades as it offers the benefits of reducing cost and time to market by reusing requirements and components. Recently, more and more large scale industries start to implement SPLE in their domains (combining SPLE with model-based modelling methods). However, the problem of how to combine SPLE with Model-Based System Engineering is still a challenge, as systems are much broader than the software domain. Unlike software engineering, system engineering has to consider the physical resources aspect. This paper classifies typical types of physical variability and provides general modelling solutions for each type of physical variation at the system design stage. Specifically, this approach combines a variability model with a SysML Block Definition Diagram and an Internal Block Diagram to model the contextual variability, architectural variability, connector variability, instance number variability, component variability, location variability and evolutional variability of physical designs. Variability is modelled separately to help reduce the complexity of design models. Last but not least, the proposed method is illustrated by an aircraft system case study.
-
SoSE - Model-based systems product line engineering with physical design variability for aircraft systems
2016 11th System of Systems Engineering Conference (SoSE), 2016Co-Authors: Lin Guan, Charles E. Dickerson, Alan GriggAbstract:Software Product Line Engineering (SPLE) has drawn large amounts of attention during the last two decades as it offers the benefits of reducing cost and time to market by reusing requirements and components. Recently, more and more large scale industries start to implement SPLE in their domains (combining SPLE with model-based modelling methods). However, the problem of how to combine SPLE with Model-Based System Engineering is still a challenge, as systems are much broader than the software domain. Unlike software engineering, system engineering has to consider the physical resources aspect. This paper classifies typical types of physical variability and provides general modelling solutions for each type of physical variation at the system design stage. Specifically, this approach combines a variability model with a SysML Block Definition Diagram and an Internal Block Diagram to model the contextual variability, architectural variability, connector variability, instance number variability, component variability, location variability and evolutional variability of physical designs. Variability is modelled separately to help reduce the complexity of design models. Last but not least, the proposed method is illustrated by an aircraft system case study.
Lin Guan - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Model-based systems product line engineering with physical design variability for aircraft systems
2016 11th System of Systems Engineering Conference (SoSE), 2016Co-Authors: Mole Li, Lin Guan, Charles Dickerson, Alan GriggAbstract:Software Product Line Engineering (SPLE) has drawn large amounts of attention during the last two decades as it offers the benefits of reducing cost and time to market by reusing requirements and components. Recently, more and more large scale industries start to implement SPLE in their domains (combining SPLE with model-based modelling methods). However, the problem of how to combine SPLE with Model-Based System Engineering is still a challenge, as systems are much broader than the software domain. Unlike software engineering, system engineering has to consider the physical resources aspect. This paper classifies typical types of physical variability and provides general modelling solutions for each type of physical variation at the system design stage. Specifically, this approach combines a variability model with a SysML Block Definition Diagram and an Internal Block Diagram to model the contextual variability, architectural variability, connector variability, instance number variability, component variability, location variability and evolutional variability of physical designs. Variability is modelled separately to help reduce the complexity of design models. Last but not least, the proposed method is illustrated by an aircraft system case study.
-
SoSE - Model-based systems product line engineering with physical design variability for aircraft systems
2016 11th System of Systems Engineering Conference (SoSE), 2016Co-Authors: Lin Guan, Charles E. Dickerson, Alan GriggAbstract:Software Product Line Engineering (SPLE) has drawn large amounts of attention during the last two decades as it offers the benefits of reducing cost and time to market by reusing requirements and components. Recently, more and more large scale industries start to implement SPLE in their domains (combining SPLE with model-based modelling methods). However, the problem of how to combine SPLE with Model-Based System Engineering is still a challenge, as systems are much broader than the software domain. Unlike software engineering, system engineering has to consider the physical resources aspect. This paper classifies typical types of physical variability and provides general modelling solutions for each type of physical variation at the system design stage. Specifically, this approach combines a variability model with a SysML Block Definition Diagram and an Internal Block Diagram to model the contextual variability, architectural variability, connector variability, instance number variability, component variability, location variability and evolutional variability of physical designs. Variability is modelled separately to help reduce the complexity of design models. Last but not least, the proposed method is illustrated by an aircraft system case study.
Oscar Carrillo - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
FACS - Incremental Modeling of System Architecture Satisfying SysML Functional Requirements
Formal Aspects of Component Software, 2014Co-Authors: Oscar Carrillo, Samir Chouali, Hassan MountassirAbstract:The aim of this work is to propose a methodological approach to model and verify Component-Based Systems (CBS), directly from SysML requirement Diagrams, and to ensure formally the architecture consistency of the specified systems. The architecture consistency is guaranteed, when the components that interact in CBS are compatible and all component requirements are preserved by the composition. We propose to exploit functional requirements of CBS, specified with SysML Diagrams, and the composition of components to specify incrementally system architecture. Component interfaces are specified with SysML sequence Diagrams to capture their behaviors (protocols). From a requirement Diagram, we associate atomic requirements, represented as LTL properties, to reusable components satisfying them. LTL properties are verified on the components with SPIN model-checker. Then, we specify system architecture incrementally, with SysML Block Definition Diagram (BDD) and Internal Block Diagram (IBD), by treating, one by one the atomic requirements.
-
ECSA - Specifying system architecture from SysML requirements and component interfaces
Software Architecture, 2013Co-Authors: Samir Chouali, Oscar Carrillo, Hassan MountassirAbstract:We propose to map functional system requirements, specified with SysML, directly into system architecture, by exploiting the composition relation between component interfaces. Our research challenge is to guarantee formally that the final system fulfill the set of all requirements. Our approach is based on component-based systems (CBS) specified with SysML models and Interface Automata (IA) to capture their behaviors. From a SysML Requirement Diagram (RD), we build a Block Definition Diagram (BDD) to specify system architecture, by taking, one by one, the lowest level of requirements. At each new added requirement, we add a new component satisfying this requirement, by the composition, in the partial architecture obtained in a precedent step. Then we verify whether the new component is compatible with the components in the partial architecture, and if the requirements are preserved.
-
Specifying System Architecture from SysML Requirements and Component Interfaces
2013Co-Authors: Samir Chouali, Oscar Carrillo, Hassan MountassirAbstract:We propose to map functional system requirements, specified with SysML, directly into system architecture, by exploiting the composition relation between component interfaces. Our research challenge is to guarantee formally that the final system fulfill the set of all requirements. Our approach is based on component-based systems (CBS) specified with SysML models and Interface Automata (IA) to capture their behaviors. From a SysML Requirement Diagram (RD), we build a Block Definition Diagram (BDD) to specify system architecture, by taking, one by one, the lowest level of requirements. At each new added requirement, we add a new component satisfying this requirement, by the composition, in the partial architecture obtained in a precedent step. Then we verify whether the new component is compatible with the components in the partial architecture, and if the requirements are preserved.
-
Formalizing and verifying compatibility and consistency of SysML Blocks
ACM Sigsoft Software Engineering Notes, 2012Co-Authors: Oscar Carrillo, Samir Chouali, Hassan MountassirAbstract:The objective of this paper is to define an approach to formalize and verify the SysML Blocks in a refinement process. We propose to specify system architecture with SysML Block Definition Diagram, this Diagram is then analyzed and decomposed into several sub-Blocks in order to verify their compatibility. The structural architecture of an abstract Block is given by the Internal Block Diagram (IBD) which defines the communication links between sub-Blocks. The compatibility verification between sub-Blocks is only made on linked sub-Blocks. The behaviour of each sub-Block is described by an interface automaton which species the invocations exchanged with its environment. The verification between Blocks is translated into consistency verification between the Blocks and compatibility verification between their interface automata. Incompatibilities can be inconsistent at architecture level and at communication level if there are deadlocks during the interaction between sub-Blocks. Once the verification is established between the sub-Blocks, the abstract Block can be then substituted by the sub-Blocks which compose it.
