Modelling Behaviour Requirements for Automatic Interpretation, Simulation and Deployment

In this paper we propose a high level approach to capture the behaviour of an autonomous robotic or embedded system. Using requirements engineering, we construct models of the behaviour where system activities are captured mainly by collaborating state machines while the domain knowledge is captured by a non-monotonic logic. We explain our infrastructure that enables interpretation, simulation, automatic deployment, and testing of the models, minimising the need for developers to code. The approach also minimises faults introduced in the software development cycle and ensures a large part of the software is independent of the particular robotic platform.

[1]  Robert Colvin,et al.  "Integrare", a Collaborative Environment for Behavior-Oriented Design , 2007, CDVE.

[2]  Lian Wen,et al.  From requirements change to design change: a formal path , 2004, Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Software Engineering and Formal Methods, 2004. SEFM 2004..

[3]  Grzegorz Rozenberg,et al.  Synchronizations in Team Automata for Groupware Systems , 2003, Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW).

[4]  David Billington,et al.  The Proof Algorithms of Plausible Logic Form a Hierarchy , 2005, Australian Conference on Artificial Intelligence.

[5]  Grigoris Antoniou The Role of Nonmonotonic Representations in Requirements Engineering , 1998, Int. J. Softw. Eng. Knowl. Eng..

[6]  R. Geoff Dromey,et al.  From Requirements to Embedded Software - Formalising the Key Steps , 2009, 2009 Australian Software Engineering Conference.

[7]  Miro Samek,et al.  Practical UML Statecharts in C/C++, Second Edition: Event-Driven Programming for Embedded Systems , 2008 .

[8]  James E. Rumbaugh,et al.  Object-Oriented Modelling and Design , 1991 .

[9]  Lian Wen,et al.  A tool to visualize behavior and design evolution , 2007, IWPSE '07.

[10]  Stephen J Mellor Embedded Systems in UML , 2007 .

[11]  Gregor von Bochmann,et al.  Formal Methods in Communication Protocol Design , 1980, IEEE Trans. Commun..

[12]  Ferdinand Wagner,et al.  Modeling Software with Finite State Machines : A Practical Approach , 2006 .

[13]  Miro Samek,et al.  Practical UML Statecharts in C/C++: Event-Driven Programming for Embedded Systems , 2002 .

[14]  Ferdinand Wagner,et al.  Modeling Software with Finite State Machines , 2006 .

[15]  Geoff Dromey,et al.  Early Requirements Defect Detection(INVITED PUBLICATION) , 2005 .

[16]  David Harel,et al.  Modeling Reactive Systems With Statecharts : The Statemate Approach , 1998 .

[17]  Vladimir Estivill-Castro,et al.  Architecture for Hybrid Robotic Behavior , 2009, HAIS.

[18]  Joscha Bach,et al.  Designing Agent Behavior with the Extensible Agent Behavior Specification Language XABSL , 2003, RoboCup.

[19]  Rene Hexel,et al.  Plausible Logic Facilitates Engineering the Behaviour of Autonomous Robots , 2010 .

[20]  David Billington,et al.  An implementation of propositional plausible logic , 2000, Proceedings 23rd Australasian Computer Science Conference. ACSC 2000 (Cat. No.PR00518).

[21]  Rodney A. Brooks,et al.  Intelligence Without Reason , 1991, IJCAI.

[22]  Clarence A. Ellis Team automata for groupware systems , 1997, GROUP '97.

[23]  Stephen J. Mellor,et al.  Object lifecycles: modeling the world in states , 1992 .

[24]  David Billington,et al.  Propositional Plausible Logic: Introduction and Implementation , 2001, Stud Logica.