|
|
|
|
|
Key
These lines were removed. This word was removed.
These lines were added. This word was added.
|
View page history
|
There are 1 changes. View first change.
| | *Title* "Executable Systems Design with UML 2.0" |
| | |
| | *Authors* Scott Niemann |
| | |
| | *Reference* Ilogix whitepapers |
| | |
| | *Year* N/A |
| | |
| | *URL* [Please see attachment instead|Executable Systems Design with UML 2.0^Executable_System_Design_UML.pdf|Presentation] |
| | |
| | *My Summary* |
| | The paper takes a look at how we can use executable UML models, using the Model-Driven Development (MDD) technology, to achieve a high quality system that conforms to the initial requirements specification. Using this methodology, you basically validate the requirements more quickly, because at every stage of the modeling of the requirements, you can check the formal models by simulating the system. Such early validation of the requirements through executable models hinders the high cost of finding and repairing flaws at the end of the development stage. |
| | |
| | *Methods* |
| | The paper relates to specifying requirements, validating requirements through executable models, applying MDD technology, working with UML 2.0, and Rhapsody. |
| | |
| | | *OPP Relevance* |
| | | *Systems Integration Relevance* |
| | The case study on executable models presented in this paper shows the advantage of an iterative approach to capturing requirements, by using formal executable models, over a traditional waterfall type document approach. Part of the OPP focus is to introduce the iterative development process as a valid and viable alternative to the waterfall process being currently used at Motorola. |
| | |
| | *Keywords* |
| | Requirements, Executable Models, MDD, System Design, Embedded Systems, UML, Rhapsody |
|
|
|
|
|
