Automotive ADLS: a study on enforcing consistency through multiple architectural levels

Over the last decade, Architecture Description Languages (ADLs) are attracting considerable attention by automotive companies because they consider them as one of the key solutions to improve the quality of automotive electronic and software systems. Automotive ADLs like EAST-ADL, AADL, TADL, and AML are being defined to address not only the architectural description or the representation issues but also as a method to enable requirements traceability and early analysis of a system. Besides the automotive specific ADLs, SysML and MARTE are emerging as viable modeling approaches for automotive systems engineering domain as well. However, all these modeling approaches lack the capability of ensuring the architectural quality. This paper identifies an architectural inconsistency between the different architectural levels as one of the key issues regarding architectural quality of automotive systems and proposes a rule-based method to enforce consistency between these levels. Since there is no standard ADL for automotive systems, we first evaluated a set of modeling approaches based on the automotive specific modeling requirements and selected SysML mainly due to its flexibility, and mature and accessible tool support. We modeled a Cruise Control system to demonstrate modeling of an automotive system in SysML and to evaluate the method for the architectural consistency checking using SysML.

[1]  Shin’ichi SHIRAISHI,et al.  Automotive System Development Based on Collaborative Modeling Using Multiple ADLs , 2011 .

[2]  C.J.H. Mann,et al.  A Practical Guide to SysML: The Systems Modeling Language , 2009 .

[3]  Erhard Plödereder,et al.  Bauhaus - A Tool Suite for Program Analysis and Reverse Engineering , 2006, Ada-Europe.

[4]  E. Andrianarison,et al.  SysML for embedded automotive Systems : a practical approach , 2010 .

[5]  Nicolas Anquetil,et al.  Comparative study of clustering algorithms and abstract representations for software remodularisation , 2003 .

[6]  R. Peter Jones,et al.  Systems modelling of a driver information system - automotive industry case study , 2006, 2006 IEEE/SMC International Conference on System of Systems Engineering.

[7]  Richard N. Taylor,et al.  A Classification and Comparison Framework for Software Architecture Description Languages , 2000, IEEE Trans. Software Eng..

[8]  Ella E. Roubtsova,et al.  I2SD: Reverse Engineering Sequence Diagrams from Enterprise Java Beans with Interceptors , 2011, 2011 IEEE 11th International Working Conference on Source Code Analysis and Manipulation.

[9]  David Notkin,et al.  Software reflexion models: bridging the gap between source and high-level models , 1995, SIGSOFT FSE.

[10]  S. Vestal,et al.  MetaH support for real-time multi-processor avionics , 1997, Proceedings of 5th International Workshop on Parallel and Distributed Real-Time Systems and 3rd Workshop on Object-Oriented Real-Time Systems.

[11]  Riccardo Sisto,et al.  An approach to refinement checking of SysML requirements , 2011, ETFA2011.

[12]  Forrest Shull,et al.  Using the ISO/IEC 9126 product quality model to classify defects: A controlled experiment , 2012, EASE.

[13]  Rolf Johansson,et al.  The EAST-ADL Architecture Description Language for Automotive Embedded Software , 2007, Model-Based Engineering of Embedded Real-Time Systems.

[14]  Mohammad Reza Mousavi,et al.  CPP2XMI: Reverse Engineering of UML Class, Sequence, and Activity Diagrams from C++ Source Code , 2006, 2006 13th Working Conference on Reverse Engineering.

[15]  Peter Braun,et al.  A Model-Based Approach for Automotive Software Development , 2001, OMER.

[16]  Bernhard Rumpe,et al.  View-Centric Modeling of Automotive Logical Architectures , 2008, MBEES.

[17]  Alexander Serebrenik,et al.  I2SD: Reverse Engineering Sequence Diagrams from Enterprise Java Beans with Interceptors , 2011, SCAM.

[18]  Ludovic Apvrille,et al.  Prototyping an Embedded Automotive System from its UML/SysML Models , 2012 .

[19]  Arie van Deursen,et al.  Software architecture reconstruction , 2004, Proceedings. 26th International Conference on Software Engineering.

[20]  Mark van den Brand,et al.  A Generic Solution for Syntax-Driven Model Co-evolution , 2011, TOOLS.

[21]  Rainer Koschke,et al.  Hierarchical reflexion models , 2003, 10th Working Conference on Reverse Engineering, 2003. WCRE 2003. Proceedings..

[22]  Barry W. Boehm,et al.  Software Engineering Economics , 1993, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering.

[23]  Welf Löwe,et al.  Automated Architecture Consistency Checking for Model Driven Software Development , 2009, QoSA.

[24]  Herbert Hanselmann,et al.  Challenges in automotive software engineering , 2008, ICSE Companion '08.

[25]  Yanjindulam Dajsuren,et al.  Modernizing legacy software using a System Grokking technology , 2010, 2010 IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance.

[26]  ISO / IEC 25010 : 2011 Systems and software engineering — Systems and software Quality Requirements and Evaluation ( SQuaRE ) — System and software quality models , 2013 .

[27]  Muhammad Ali Babar,et al.  Design Requirements for an Architecture Consistency Tool , 2009, PPIG.

[28]  Peter H. Feiler,et al.  The Architecture Analysis & Design Language (AADL): An Introduction , 2006 .

[29]  Peter Braun,et al.  Architecture Centric Modeling of Automotive Control Software , 2003 .

[30]  van den Mgj Mark Brand,et al.  Evolution mechanisms of automotive architecture description languages , 2011 .