Integrated model-driven design-space exploration for embedded systems

Embedded systems and their design trajectories are becoming increasingly complex, and there is a growing demand for performance, reliability, energy efficiency and low cost. To cope with these challenges, decision making early in the development trajectory needs to be supported by appropriate modeling and analysis. To achieve this support, we need to find the modeling abstractions that allow extensive design-space exploration, tune these modeling abstractions towards the users, and integrate support for different types of modeling and analysis.

[1]  Ramon R. H. Schiffelers,et al.  New Concepts in the Abstract Format of the Compositional Interchange Format , 2009, ADHS.

[2]  Johan Eker,et al.  CAL language report: Specification of the CAL actor language , 2003 .

[3]  Daniel Jackson,et al.  Software Abstractions - Logic, Language, and Analysis , 2006 .

[4]  Axel Jantsch,et al.  System modeling and transformational design refinement in ForSyDe [formal system design] , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems.

[5]  Twan Basten,et al.  Model-Driven Design-Space Exploration for Embedded Systems: The Octopus Toolset , 2010, ISoLA.

[6]  Marco Laumanns,et al.  PISA: A Platform and Programming Language Independent Interface for Search Algorithms , 2003, EMO.

[7]  Marc Geilen,et al.  Software/Hardware Engineering with the Parallel Object-Oriented Specification Language , 2007, 2007 5th IEEE/ACM International Conference on Formal Methods and Models for Codesign (MEMOCODE 2007).

[8]  Fuat Keceli,et al.  DIF: An Interchange Format for Dataflow-Based Design Tools , 2004, SAMOS.

[9]  Joseph Sifakis,et al.  Modeling Heterogeneous Real-time Components in BIP , 2006, Fourth IEEE International Conference on Software Engineering and Formal Methods (SEFM'06).

[10]  Christian Haubelt,et al.  SystemCoDesigner—an automatic ESL synthesis approach by design space exploration and behavioral synthesis for streaming applications , 2009, TODE.

[11]  Wang Yi,et al.  UPPAAL 4.0 , 2006, Third International Conference on the Quantitative Evaluation of Systems - (QEST'06).

[12]  A. Sangiovanni-Vincentelli,et al.  A Next-Generation Design Framework for Platform-Based Design , 2007 .

[13]  Gerard J. Holzmann,et al.  The SPIN Model Checker , 2003 .

[14]  Ed F. Deprettere,et al.  An Approach for Quantitative Analysis of Application-Specific Dataflow Architectures , 1997, ASAP.

[15]  Lars Michael Kristensen,et al.  Coloured Petri Nets and CPN Tools for modelling and validation of concurrent systems , 2007, International Journal on Software Tools for Technology Transfer.

[16]  Kenneth L. McMillan,et al.  The SMV System , 1993 .

[17]  Luciano Lavagno,et al.  Hardware-Software Co-Design of Embedded Systems , 1997 .

[18]  Luciano Lavagno,et al.  Hardware-software co-design of embedded systems: the POLIS approach , 1997 .

[19]  Edward A. Lee,et al.  Taming heterogeneity - the Ptolemy approach , 2003, Proc. IEEE.

[20]  Joost-Pieter Katoen,et al.  The Ins and Outs of the Probabilistic Model Checker MRMC , 2009, 2009 Sixth International Conference on the Quantitative Evaluation of Systems.

[21]  Ed F. Deprettere,et al.  Daedalus: Toward composable multimedia MP-SoC design , 2008, 2008 45th ACM/IEEE Design Automation Conference.

[22]  Edward A. Lee,et al.  Simulation and Implementation of the PTIDES Programming Model , 2008, 2008 12th IEEE/ACM International Symposium on Distributed Simulation and Real-Time Applications.

[23]  Sander Stuijk,et al.  SDF^3: SDF For Free , 2006, Sixth International Conference on Application of Concurrency to System Design (ACSD'06).

[24]  Daniel Gajski,et al.  Design exploration and automatic generation of MPSoC platform TLMs from Kahn Process Network applications , 2010, LCTES '10.

[25]  Ethan K. Jackson,et al.  Components, platforms and possibilities: towards generic automation for MDA , 2010, EMSOFT '10.