Integrated Modeling Method of Complex Embedded System with SAVI Framework

doi:10.23940/ijpe.20.02.p7.223237

Abstract

Abstract:

SAVI is well known for addressing cost and schedule overruns due to the growing growth complexity of embedded systems. There are a number of SAVI frameworks for model-based system integration, each with different characteristics and capabilities. In order to choose an appropriate framework for complex embedded system design, modeling methods should be carefully considered. This paper presents an integrated modeling method for complex embedded systems based on the SAVI framework. In order to solve the high abstraction and complex interoperability of models, the method adopts view-based model representation, multi-model transformation based on binary transformation combinations, and service-oriented model bus implementation, providing a feasible way to promote the consistency and integrity of heterogeneous models. In addition, a supporting tool, ESMEAT, is implemented and applied. The results of the proposed method are of great significance to the development and automation of complex embedded systems.

Key words: SAVI framework, complex embedded system, integrated modeling method, ESMEAT

Ning Zhang, Yunwei Dong, and Feng Xue. Integrated Modeling Method of Complex Embedded System with SAVI Framework [J]. Int J Performability Eng, 2020, 16(2): 223-237.

Add to citation manager EndNote|Reference Manager|ProCite|BibTeX|RefWorks

References 44.

1.	N.G Leveson,“A systems-theoretic approach to safety in software-intensive systems,” Journal of IEEE Transactions on Dependable and Secure Computing, Vol.1, No.1, pp. 66-86,January 2004.
2.	Feiler H.Peteret al, System Architecture Virtual Integration: an industrial case study (.
3.	Cicchetti, Antonioet al, “Multi-view approaches for software and system modelling: a systematic literature review,” Journal of Software and Systems Modeling, Vol. 18, No. 6, pp. 3207-3233, December 2019.
4.	Y.Huafeng, M. Yue et al. “System-level co-simulation of integrated avionics using Polychrony,” in Proceedings of SAC’11 26th ACM Symposium on Applied Computing, pp. 354-359,Taiwan, Province of China, March 2011.
5.	W. Wang, A. Duffy, R. Whitefield et al, “Virtual integration for marine systems design,” in Proceedings of International Marine Design Conference, June 2012.
6.	D.T.Ward, SAVI Proof-of-Concept Program AFE58 (https://savi.avsi.aero.html, accessed August2009).
7.	J.J.Chilenski and D.T.Ward,SAVIAFE59 Report (https://savi.avsi.aero, accessed May2015).
8.	J.J.Chilenski and D.T.Ward, SAVI AFE61Report (https://savi.avsi.aero, accessed May2015).
9.	N. Kahani, M. Bagherzadeh, J.R.Cordy et al, “Survey and classification of model transformation tools,” Journal of Software and Systems Modeling, Vol. 18, No. 4, pp.2361-2397, August2018.
10.	M. A. O.Mukhtar, A. Azween and G.D. Alan, “Preliminary overview about relations QVT: Query/View/Transformation model transformation language,” in Proceedings of National Postgraduate Conference, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, September2011.
11.	Jouault, Frédéricet al, “ATL: a QVT-like transformation language,” in Proceedings of the Conference on Object-Oriented Programming Systems, Languages, and Applications, pp.719-720, Portland, Oregon, USA, January 2006.
12.	Joel Greenyer, Ekkart Kindler, “Reconciling TGGs with QVT Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems,” in Proceedings of 10th International Conference of Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems, Nashville, USA,2007.
13.	Bergmann, Gáboret al, “Viatra 3: A Reactive Model Transformation Platform,” in Proceedings of Theory and Practice of Model Transformations: 8th International Conference, pp. 101-110, L'Aquila, Italy, July 2015.
14.	Stevens and Perdita, “Bidirectional Transformations in the Large,” in Proceedings of 2017 ACM/IEEE 20th International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems, pp.1-11, September2017.
15.	Ivan Kurtev, “State of the Art of QVT: A Model Transformation Language Standard,” in P, Kassel, Germany, 2007.
16.	Macedo, Nuno and Alcino Cunha. “Implementing QVT-R Bidirectional Model Transformations Using Alloy,” in Proceedings of the 16th international conference on Fundamental Approaches to Software Engineering, 2013.
17.	Kramer, Max E.et al.“Change-driven consistency for component code, architectural models, and contracts.” In Proceedings of the 18th International ACM SIGSOFT Symposium on Component-Based Software Engineering, pp. 21-26, Montréal, QC, Canada, May2015.
18.	Macedo, Nunoet al. “Towards a framework for multi-directional model transformations.” In Proceedings of the Workshops of the EDBT/ICDT 2014 Joint Conference, 2014.
19.	Malavolta, Ivanoet al. “Providing Architectural Languages and Tools Interoperability through Model Transformation Technologies,” Journal of IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, Vol. 36, No.10, pp. 119-140, January 2010.
20.	Kappel, Gertiet al, “ModelCVS A Semantic Infrastructure for Model-based Tool Integration,” in Proceedings of the 2006 international workshop on Global integrated model management, Shanghai, China, 2005.
21.	Dong Y.W., Wei X.M. and X. M.R. “Overview: System Architecture Virtual Integration based on an AADL Model”, Lecture Notes in Computer Science,2018.
22.	Malavolta, Ivano et al. “Integrating AADL within a Multi-domain Modeling Framework.” in Proceedings of2009 14th IEEE International Conference on Engineering of Complex Computer Systems, pp. 341-346, June2009.
23.	Glaß, Michael et al. “A co-simulation approach for system-level analysis of embedded control systems.” Journalof2012 International Conference on Embedded Computer Systems, pp. 355-362, 2012.
24.	Yu, Huafenget al. “The challenge of interoperability: Model-based integration for automotive control software,” in Proceedings of 2015 52nd ACM/EDAC/IEEE Design Automation Conference, Vol. 15, No. 58, pp. 1-6, New York, NY, USA, 2015.
25.	Fabro, Marcos Didonet Del and Patrick Valduriez. “Towards the efficient development of model transformations using model weaving and matching transformations.” Journal of Software and Systems Modeling, Vol. 8, No.3, pp. 305-324, 2008.
26.	Müller, Wolfganget al. “Dynamic tool integration in heterogeneous computer networks.” in Proceedings of 2003 Design, Automation and Test in Europe Conference and Exhibition, Vol. 1, No. 3, pp. 946-951, Washington, DC, USA, 2003.
27.	Karsai, Gaboret al. “Design patterns for open tool integration.” Journal of Software and Systems Modeling, Vol. 4, No. 2, pp.157-170, May 2005.
28.	Bork, Dominik and Dimitris Karagiannis. “Model-driven Development of Multi-View Modelling Tools - The MUVIEMOT Approach.” Software Paradigm Trends, 2014.
29.	Togni, João Danielet al. “Tool integration using the web-services approach.” GLSVLSI, 5th Edition, 2005.
30.	Kramler, Gerhardet al. “Towards a semantic infrastructure supporting model-based tool integration,” in Proceedings of GaMMa, Vol. 6, No.4, pp. 43-46, Shanghai, China,2006.
31.	Damm, Christian Heide et al. “Tool integration: experiences and issues in using XMI and component technology,” in Proceedings of 33rd International Conference on Technology of Object-Oriented Languages and Systems, Vol.33, pp. 94-107, 2000.
32.	Kapsammer, Elisabethet al. “Model-Based Tool Integration-State of the Art and Future Perspectives.” 2006.
33.	S. MELLOR, model driven development integration MDDi Eclipse creation review (.
34.	Reichmann, Clemenset al, “GeneralStore - a CASE-tool integration platform enabling model level coupling of heterogeneous designs for embedded electronic systems,” in Proceedings of the 11th IEEE International Conference and Workshop on the Engineering of Computer-Based Systems, pp. 225-232, June 2004.
35.	WOTIF, web-based open tool integration framework(.
36.	Simi, Stephen M.et al. “TES-SAVi AWESUM™ model-based systems engineering (MBSE) for FACETM applications.” in Proceedings of 2014 IEEE Aerospace Conference, pp. 1-17, 2014.
37.	Steve Vanderleest, “Designing A Future Airborne Capability Environment (FACE) Hypervisor for Safety and Security,” in Proceedings of Digital Avionics Systems Conference, 2017.
38.	Rahman, Rezwanuret al. “Model Based Engineering using AVL Model.CONNECT.” 2017.
39.	S. Burmester, H. Giese, J. Niere et al, “Tool integration at the meta-model level: the Fujaba approach,” Journal of International Journal on Software Tools for Technology Transfer, Vol. 6, No. 3, pp. 203-218, 2003.
40.	Himanshu Neema, Janos Sztipanovits, Martin Burns et al, “C2WT-TE: A model-based open platform for integrated simulations of transactive smart grids” in Proceedings of 2016 Workshop on Modeling and Simulation of Cyber-Physical Energy Systems, 2016.
41.	Blanc, Xavieret al. “Model Bus: Towards the Interoperability of Modelling Tools.” in Proceedings of European Conference on Model Driven Architecture: Foundations and Applications, 2003.
42.	Hein, Christianet al. “Model-Driven Tool Integration with ModelBus.” 2016.
43.	J. Eskeli, J. Maurolagoitia,C.Polcaro, “PSW: A Framework-based Tool Integration Solution for Global Collaborative Software Development,” in Proceedings of The Sixth International Conference on Software Engineering Advances,2011.
44.	Sztipanovits, Janoset al, “OpenMETA: A Model- and Component-Based Design Tool Chain for Cyber-Physical Systems.” in Proceedings of Systems Perspective in Computing, 2014.