Software architectures shift the focus of developers from lines-of-code to coarser-grained architectural elements and their overall interconnection structure. Architecture description languages (ADLs) have been proposed as modeling notations to support architecture-based development. There is, however, little consensus in the research community on what is an ADL, what aspects of an architecture should be modeled in an ADL, and which of several possible ADLs is best suited for a particular problem. Furthermore, the distinction is rarely made between ADLs on one hand and formal specification, module interconnection, simulation and programming languages on the other. This paper attempts to provide an answer to these questions. It motivates and presents a definition and a classification framework for ADLs. The utility of the definition is demonstrated by using it to differentiate ADLs from other modeling notations. The framework is used to classify and compare several existing ADLs, enabling us, in the process, to identify key properties of ADLs. The comparison highlights areas where existing ADLs provide extensive support and those in which they are deficient, suggesting a research agenda for the future.

/pdf/a-classification-and-comparison-framework-for-software-3so7xapmcq.pdf

A classification and comparison framework for software architecture description languages

ing WS1S Systems to Verify Parameterized Networks . . . . . . . . . . . . 188 Kai Baukus, Saddek Bensalem, Yassine Lakhnech and Karsten Stahl FMona: A Tool for Expressing Validation Techniques over Infinite State Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 204 J.-P. Bodeveix and M. Filali Transitive Closures of Regular Relations for Verifying Infinite-State Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 220 Bengt Jonsson and Marcus Nilsson Diagnostic and Test Generation Using Static Analysis to Improve Automatic Test Generation . . . . . . . . . . . . . 235 Marius Bozga, Jean-Claude Fernandez and Lucian Ghirvu Efficient Diagnostic Generation for Boolean Equation Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . 251 Radu Mateescu Efficient Model-Checking Compositional State Space Generation with Partial Order Reductions for Asynchronous Communicating Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 266 Jean-Pierre Krimm and Laurent Mounier Checking for CFFD-Preorder with Tester Processes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 283 Juhana Helovuo and Antti Valmari Fair Bisimulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 299 Thomas A. Henzinger and Sriram K. Rajamani Integrating Low Level Symmetries into Reachability Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . 315 Karsten Schmidt Model-Checking Tools Model Checking Support for the ASM High-Level Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 331 Giuseppe Del Castillo and Kirsten Winter Table of

Tools and Algorithms for the Construction and Analysis of Systems. Proc. TACAS 2009

[서평]「The Unified Modeling Language User Guide」

Borealis is a second-generation distributed stream processing engine that is being developed at Brandeis University, Brown University, and MIT. Borealis inherits core stream processing functionality from Aurora [14] and distribution functionality from Medusa [51]. Borealis modifies and extends both systems in non-trivial and critical ways to provide advanced capabilities that are commonly required by newly-emerging stream processing applications. In this paper, we outline the basic design and functionality of Borealis. Through sample real-world applications, we motivate the need for dynamically revising query results and modifying query specifications. We then describe how Borealis addresses these challenges through an innovative set of features, including revision records, time travel, and control lines. Finally, we present a highly flexible and scalable QoS-based optimization model that operates across server and sensor networks and a new fault-tolerance model with flexible consistency-availability trade-offs.

/pdf/the-design-of-the-borealis-stream-processing-engine-r6m0twizby.pdf

The Design of the Borealis Stream Processing Engine

Normal accidents. Living with high-risk technologies

The goal of this roadmap paper is to summarize the state-of-the-art and to identify critical challenges for the systematic software engineering of self-adaptive systems. The paper is partitioned into four parts, one for each of the identified essential views of self-adaptation: modelling dimensions, requirements, engineering, and assurances. For each view, we present the state-of-the-art and the challenges that our community must address. This roadmap paper is a result of the Dagstuhl Seminar 08031 on "Software Engineering for Self-Adaptive Systems," which took place in January 2008.

/pdf/software-engineering-for-self-adaptive-systems-a-research-3vvz0zex5m.pdf

Software Engineering for Self-Adaptive Systems: A Research Roadmap

Self-management is put forward as one of the means by which we could provide systems that are scalable, support dynamic composition and rigorous analysis, and are flexible and robust in the presence of change. In this paper, we focus on architectural approaches to self-management, not because the language-level or network-level approaches are uninteresting or less promising, but because we believe that the architectural level seems to provide the required level of abstraction and generality to deal with the challenges posed. A self-managed software architecture is one in which components automatically configure their interaction in a way that is compatible with an overall architectural specification and achieves the goals of the system. The objective is to minimise the degree of explicit management necessary for construction and subsequent evolution whilst preserving the architectural properties implied by its specification. This paper discusses some of the current promising work and presents an outline three-layer reference model as a context in which to articulate some of the main outstanding research challenges.

/pdf/self-managed-systems-an-architectural-challenge-1wjglivxtm.pdf

Self-Managed Systems: an Architectural Challenge

There is a real need for clear and sound design specifications of distributed systems at the architectural level This is the level of the design which deals with the high-level organisation of computational elements and the interactions between those elements The paper presents the Darwin notation for specifying this high-level organisation Darwin is in essence a declarative binding language which can be used to define hierarchic compositions of interconnected components Distribution is dealt with orthogonally to system structuring The language supports the specification of both static structures and dynamic structures which may evolve during execution The central abstractions managed by Darwin are components and services Services are the means by which components interact

Specifying Distributed Software Architectures

A model for dynamic change management which separates structural concerns from component application concerns is presented. This separation of concerns permits the formulation of general structural rules for change at the configuration level without the need to consider application state, and the specification of application component actions without prior knowledge of the actual structural changes which may be introduced. In addition, the changes can be applied in such a way so as to leave the modified system in a consistent state, and cause no disturbance to the unaffected part of the operational system. The model is applied to an example problem, 'evolving philosophers'. The principles of this model have been implemented and tested in the Conic environment for distributed systems. >

The evolving philosophers problem: dynamic change management

Concurrency provides a thoroughly updatedapproach to the basic concepts and techniques behind concurrent programming. Concurrent programming is complex and demands a much more formal approach than sequential programming. In order to develop a thorough understanding of the topicMagee and Kramer present concepts, techniques and problems through a variety of forms: informal descriptions, illustrative examples, abstract models and concrete Java examples. These combineto provide problem patterns and associated solution techniqueswhich enablestudents torecognise problems and arrive at solutions. New features include: New chapters covering program verification and logical properties. More student exercises. Supporting website contains an updated version of the LTSA tool for modelling concurrency, model animation, and model checking. Website also includes the full set of state models, java examples, and demonstration programs and a comprehensive set of overhead slides for course presentation.

Jeff Magee

Papers

Software Engineering for Self-Adaptive Systems: A Research Roadmap

Self-Managed Systems: an Architectural Challenge

Specifying Distributed Software Architectures

The evolving philosophers problem: dynamic change management

Concurrency: State Models & Java Programs