The precise UML group


These publications only go up until 2000. Since then, members of the puml group have been successful in launching the Journal of Software and System Modeling (SOSYM), which is now devoted to work in this field (see:!

    [1] K. Lano, J. Bicarregui, S. Goldsack
    Formalising design patterns
    In: 1st BCS-FACS Northern Formal Methods Workshop, Electronic Workshops in Computer Science, Springer-Verlag, 1996.
    This paper describes how design patterns can be formalised and used as a formal design tool in the development of object-oriented systems.

    [2] Ruth Breu, Ursula Hinkel, Christoph Hofmann, Cornel Klein, Barbara Paech, Bernhard Rumpe, Veronika Thurner
    Towards a Formalization of the Unified Modeling Language
    In: Proceedings of ECOOP'97 - Object-Oriented Programming, 11th European Conference, Mehmet Aksit, Satoshi Matsuoka (ed.), Jyväskylä, Finland, June 1997, Springer Verlag, LNCS 1241. 
    This paper outlines a proposal for the formal foundation of UML that is
    based on a mathematical system model.

    [3] S. Kent
    Constraint diagrams: visualising invariants in OO models
    In: OOPSLA' 97. ACM Press, 1997.
    Constraint diagrams are an extension to UML class diagrams, which permit the visual representation of non-trivial constraints on objects.

    [4] R. Breu, R. Grosu, C. Hofmann, F. Huber, I. Krüger, B. Rumpe, M. Schmidt, W. Schwerin
    Exemplary and Complete Object Interaction Descriptions
    In: Computer Standards & Interfaces. 19 (1998), p. 335-345.
    Sequence diagrams and their ability to describe behavior are discussed. It is shown how to enhance them to not only describe behavior on an exemplaric, but a complete level.

    [5] A. S. Evans and A.N.Clark
    Foundations of the unified modeling language
    In: 2nd Northern Formal Methods Workshop, Ilkley, electronic Workshops in Computing. Springer-Verlag, 1998.
    An early paper on the semantics of UML. It attempts to give a formal semantics to UML class diagrams in Z. 

    [6] Ruth Breu, Radu Grosu, Franz Huber, Bernhard Rumpe, Wolfgang Schwerin
    Systems, Views and Models of UML
    In: The Unified Modeling Language, Technical Aspects and Applications. Martin Schader, Axel Korthaus (eds.) Physica Verlag, Heidelberg, 1998. 
    Examines in detail how the semantic domain, the models describing it and the view concept fit together.

    [7] R.B.France, A.S.Evans, K.C.Lano, B.Rumpe
    Developing the UML as a formal modeling notation
    In: Computer Standards and Interfaces: Special Issues on Formal Development Techniques, 1998.
    An extended version of a paper presented at OOPSLA'98, which aims to motivate the need to formalise UML. It proposes the use of diagrammatical transformations as a proof method for UML models.

    [8] A.S.Evans, R.B.France, K.C.Lano, B.Rumpe
    The UML as a formal modelling notation
    In: UML'98 - Beyond the notation, LNCS. Springer, 1998.
    A paper presented at UML'99, again motivating the need for a formal semantics for UML.

    [9] Max Fuchs, Dieter Nazareth, Dirk Daniel, Bernhard Rumpe
    BMW-ROOM: An Object-Oriented Method for ASCET
    In: SAE'98, Cobo Center (Detroit, Michigan, USA), February 23 - 26, 1998. Society of Automotive Engineers.
    Discusses how to apply the object-oriented concepts of the ROOM Method (Selic 94) to the (non-quite-oo) tool ASCET.

    [10] J-M. Bruel and R.B.France
    Transforming UML models to formal specifications
    In: UML'98 - Beyond the notation, LNCS. Springer, 1998.
    This paper outlines and gives references to work on formalizing UML by translating it into Z specifications.

    [11] Franz Huber, Andreas Rausch, Bernhard Rumpe
    Modeling Dynamic Component Interfaces
    In: TOOLS 26, Technology of Object-Oriented Languages and Systems. Madhu Singh, Bertrand Meyer, Joseph Gil, Richard Mitchell (eds.). IEEE Computer Society.
    Shows how to adapt UML class diagrams to describe interfaces between components. Such an interface typically consists of sceral classes that vary over time and are accessed through a kind of navigation between these interface classes

    [12] A.S.Evans
    Reasoning with UML class diagrams
    In: Workshop on Industrial Strength Formal Methods, WIFT'98, Florida. IEEE Press, 1998.
    An improved version of earlier work, which aims to define a set of deductive transformations on UML class diagrams.

    [13] Bernhard Rumpe
    A Note on Semantics (with an Emphasis on UML)
    In: Second ECOOP Workshop on Precise Behavioral Semantics. Haim Kilov, Bernhard Rumpe (eds.). Technische Universität München, TUM-I9813 
    Discusses different variants of defining semantics to a language, may it be textual or diagrammatic, and their advantages and drawbacks.It clarifies the terms "formal", "precise", "detailed", and "abstract" and shows on Statecharts how to give them a precise meaning

    [14] S. Kent and Y. Gil
    Visualising action contracts in OO modelling
    In: IEE Software Engineering Journal, 1999.
    A paper describing how constraint diagrams can be used to visualise action contracts in UML diagrams.

    [15] K.C.Lano and A.S.Evans
    Rigorous Development in UML
    In: ETAPS'99, FASE workshop. LNCS, 1999.
    A proposed rigorous development method for UML, which is illustrated using a small traffic lights problem.

    [16] B. Rumpe, M. Schoenmakers, A. Radermacher, A. Schürr
    UML + ROOM as a Standard ADL?
    In: Engineering of Complex Computer Systems, ICECCS'99 Proceedings. F. Titsworth (eds.) IEEE Computer Society.
    Discusses in detail how the ROOM structure diagrams should be syntactically and semantically integrated to UML to enhance UML's ability for describing Software Architectures.This paper offers an alternative to Selic/Rumbaugh: Using UML for modelling Complex Real-Time Systems.

    [17] A.S.Evans, R.B.France, K.C.Lano, B.Rumpe
    Meta-modelling semantics of UML
    In: Behavioural Specifications for Businesses and Systems, Kluwer, Editor: Haim Kilov, Chapter  4, 1999.
    The pUML approach to introducing denotational semantics into the UML meta-model, which places emphasis on building a precise core semantics for the UML.

    [18] A.S.Evans and S.Kent
    Meta-modelling semantics of UML: the pUML approach
    In: 2nd International Conference on the Unified Modeling Language. Editors: B.Rumpe and R.B.France, Colorado, LNCS 1723, 1999.
    Further details on the pUML approach to the semantics of UML.

    [19] S.Kent, S.Gaito, N.Ross
    A meta-model semantics for structural constraints in UML
    In: Behavioural Specifications for Businesses and Systems. Editor: Haim Kilov. Kluwer, 1999.
    Proposes a meta-model semantics for the semantics of OCL.

    [20] Haim Kilov, Bernhard Rumpe, Ian Simmonds (eds.)
    Behavioral specifications of businesses and systems
    Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1999. 
    A collection of papers around business modelling, including some work about how to use UML for this purpose.

    [21] S. Cook, A. Kleppe, R. Mitchell, B. Rumpe, J. Warmer, A. Wills
    Defining UML Family Members Using Prefaces
    In: Technology of Object-Oriented Languages and Systems, TOOLS'99 Pacific. Ch. Mingins, B. Meyer (eds.) IEEE Computer Society.
    Discusses how to broaden the currently discussed UML profile idea and apply it to customize the users needs.

    [22] S.Kent and J.Howse
    Mixing a visual and textual constraint language
    In: 2nd International Conference on the Unified Modeling Language. Editors: B.Rumpe and R.B.France, Colorado, LNCS, 1999.
    Describes how visual constraints and textual (OCL) constraints can be mixed in specification. Emphasis is placed on equivalences between the two forms.

    [23] A.S.Evans (moderator), S.Cook, S.Mellor, J.Warmer, A.Wills
    Advanced Methods and Tools for a Precise UML (Panel paper)
    In: 2nd International Conference on the Unified Modeling Language. Editors: B.Rumpe and R.B.France, Colorado, LNCS 1723, 1999.
    A collection of `visions' by leading UML methodologists and developers on the future impact of a precise UML on tools and methods.

    [24] Robert France, Bernhard Rumpe (eds.)
    <<UML>>'99 - The Unified Modeling Language. Beyond the Standard
    Proceedings of the Second International Conference in Fort Collins, Colorado, USA, October 28-30, 1999. Springer Verlag Berlin, LNCS 1723.
    The definitive source for recent hot topics around UML and their treatment.

    [25] David Harel, Bernhard Rumpe
    Modeling Languages: Syntax, Semantics and All That Stuff
    Technical paper number MCS00-16, The Weizmann Institute of Science, Rehovot, Israel, 2000.
    The first in a series of three documents which explores the theoretical foundations of building semantics for modelling languages (including diagrammatical languages).

    [26] Andy Evans, Stuart Kent, Bran Selic (eds.)
    <<UML>>2000 - The Unified Modeling Language. Advancing the Standard
    Proceedings of the Third International Conference in York, UK, October 2-6, 2000. Springer Verlag Berlin, LNCS 1939.
    The updated definitive source for current hot topics around UML and their treatment.

    [27] <<UML>>2000 Workshops
    Links to workshops in advanced UML topics at <<UML2000>> and their submissions.