Simplification and Verification of Software and Data Structure Models in the Engineering Domain

During the past decade, much effort has been invested in developing standards to overcome data and software interoperability barriers in the oil and gas industry. Whereas syntactical integration is no longer problem, semantic integration still remains an open challenge. To overcome this problem, standards provide more and more complex structures to capture the semantics of different domains. As standards become more expressive, they may become too complex so that their adaptation is inherently difficult, which may even lead to inconsistencies in specifications. This paper addresses these issues by simplification and verification of correctness properties on an interoperability standard. While the simplification has been achieved by means of multi-level modeling, the accuracy of an industry model has been addressed by verifying the correctness properties using the object-oriented rule-based system Flora-2. Transformation and verification rules were evaluated and their performance has been enhanced by applying algorithmic improvements. The outcomes show that the approach reduces complexity of specifications and supports the verification from a software engineering point of view to simplify the adoption of standards.

[1]  Michael Kifer,et al.  FLORA-2: User's Manual , 2001 .

[2]  Alexander Egyed,et al.  Towards flexible, incremental, and paradigm-agnostic consistency checking in multi-level modeling environments , 2014, MULTI@MoDELS.

[3]  Christoph G. Schütz,et al.  Dual Deep Instantiation and Its ConceptBase Implementation , 2014, CAiSE.

[4]  Jordi Cabot,et al.  Verification of UML/OCL Class Diagrams using Constraint Programming , 1899, 2008 IEEE International Conference on Software Testing Verification and Validation Workshop.

[5]  Juan de Lara,et al.  A formalisation of deep metamodelling , 2014, Formal Aspects of Computing.

[6]  Jordi Cabot,et al.  Formal verification of static software models in MDE: A systematic review , 2014, Inf. Softw. Technol..

[7]  John L. Dettbarn,et al.  Cost Analysis of Inadequate Interoperability in the U.S. Capital Facilities Industry. , 2004 .

[8]  Colin Atkinson,et al.  Rearchitecting the UML infrastructure , 2002, TOMC.

[9]  Georg Grossmann,et al.  On the application of software modelling principles on ISO 15926 , 2012, MOTPW '12.

[10]  Alexander Egyed,et al.  Automatically Detecting and Tracking Inconsistencies in Software Design Models , 2011, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering.

[11]  Juan de Lara,et al.  Deep Meta-modelling with MetaDepth , 2010, TOOLS.

[12]  Martin Gogolla,et al.  Verifying UML/OCL models using Boolean satisfiability , 2010, 2010 Design, Automation & Test in Europe Conference & Exhibition (DATE 2010).

[13]  Michael Kifer,et al.  Logic-based model-level software development with F-OML , 2011, MODELS'11.

[14]  Colin Atkinson,et al.  Towards Multi-level Aware Model Transformations , 2012, ICMT@TOOLS.

[15]  Jordi Cabot,et al.  UMLtoCSP: a tool for the formal verification of UML/OCL models using constraint programming , 2007, ASE.

[16]  Tomi Männistö,et al.  Nivel: a metamodelling language with a formal semantics , 2009, Software & Systems Modeling.

[17]  Colin Atkinson,et al.  The Level-Agnostic Modeling Language , 2010, SLE.

[18]  Manuel Wimmer,et al.  CARE - A Constraint-Based Approach for Re-Establishing Conformance-Relationships , 2014, APCCM.

[19]  Diego Calvanese,et al.  Information integration: conceptual modeling and reasoning support , 1998, Proceedings. 3rd IFCIS International Conference on Cooperative Information Systems (Cat. No.98EX122).

[20]  Juan de Lara,et al.  When and How to Use Multilevel Modelling , 2014, ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol..

[21]  Colin Atkinson,et al.  Model-Driven Development: A Metamodeling Foundation , 2003, IEEE Softw..

[22]  Juan de Lara,et al.  Towards automating the analysis of integrity constraints in multi-level models , 2014, MULTI@MoDELS.