Giving a formal semantic to an UML Activity diagram (UML AD) is a hard task. The reason of this difficulty is the ambiguity and the absence of a precise formal semantic of such semi-formal formalism. A variety of semantics exist in the literature having tackled the aspects covered by this language. We can give as example denotational, functional and compositional semantics. To cope with the recent tendency which gave a heterogeneous semantic to UML diagrams, we aim to define an algebraic presentation of the semantic of UML AD. In this work, we define a formal semantic of UML 2.0 AD based on institution theory. For UML AD formalism, which is a graphical language, no precise formal semantic is given to it. We use the institution theory to define the intended semantic. Thus, the UML AD formalism will be defined in its own natural semantic.
The second category of works focus on the use of institution theory in the specification of graphical formalism such as UML diagrams. In this category, we mention the work present in @cite_16 @cite_3 @cite_11 @cite_12 . The approach defined by aims to define a semantic for UML class diagram, UML interactions diagram and OCL. Each diagram is described in its natural semantic because of the use of the algebraic formalization of each formalism. In addition, relations between diagrams are expressed via institution morphism and comorphism. We note here that this approach is inspired by Mossakowski works in the heterogeneous institution setting.
@cite_16 @cite_12 @cite_3 @cite_11
1871900403 1533562965 2758015226 2011584781
UML models consist of several diagrams of different types describing different views of a software system ranging from specifications of the static system structure to descriptions of system snapshots and dynamic behaviour. In this paper a heterogeneous approach to the semantics of UML is proposed where each diagram type can be described in its "natural" semantics, and the relations between diagram types are expressed by appropriate translations. More formally, the UML family of diagram types is represented as a "heterogeneous institution environment": each diagram type is described as an appropriate institution where typically the data structures occurring in a diagram are represented by signature elements whereas the relationships between data and the dynamic behaviour of objects are captured by sentences; in several cases, the diagrams are themselves the sentences. The relationship between two diagram types is described by a socalled institution comorphism, and in case no institution comorphism exists, by a co-span of such comorphisms. Consistency conditions between different diagrams are derived from the comorphism translations. This heterogeneous semantic approach to UML is illustrated by several example diagram types including class diagrams, OCL, and interaction diagrams. Seven years of COMPASS.- Inductively defined relations: A brief tutorial extended abstract.- On the role of category theory in the area of algebraic specifications.- Unification of theories: A challenge for computing science.- The larch shared language: Some open problems.- The lambda calculus as an abstract data type.- Unifying theories in different institutions.- Interchange format for inter-operability of tools and translation.- Experiments with partial evaluation domains for rewrite specifications.- Class-sort polymorphism in GLIDER.- Deontic concepts in the algebraic specification of dynamic systems: The permission case.- Reification - Changing viewpoint but preserving truth.- A category-based equational logic semantics to constraint programming.- Concurrent state transformations on abstract data types.- A view on implementing processes: Categories of circuits.- Combining algebraic and set-theoretic specifications.- Minimal term rewriting systems.- InterACT: An interactive theorem and completeness prover for algebraic specifications with conditional equations.- Rewriting and reasoning with set-relations II: The non-ground case completeness.- Termination of curryfied rewrite systems.- Formal specifications and test: Correctness and oracle.- Behavioural equivalence, bisimulation, and minimal realisation.- Using limits of parchments to systematically construct institutions of partial algebras.- Behavioural specifications in type theory.- Swinging data types.- Context institutions.- Object-oriented functional programming and type reconstruction.- Moving between logical systems.- Modular algebraic specifications and the orientation of equations into rewrite rules.- A model for I O in equational languages with don't care non-determinism.- Tool design for structuring mechanisms for algebraic specification languages with initial semantics. This work presents the theory of UML 2.0 static structures (or class diagrams), that is proven to define an institution. The paper presents and assesses a layout scheme for UML class diagrams that takes into account the architectural importance of a class in terms of its stereotype (e.g., boundary, control, entity). The design and running of a user study is described. The results of the study supports the hypothesis that layout based on architectural importance is more helpful in class diagram comprehension compared to layouts focusing primarily on aesthetics and or abstract graph guidelines