Formal Methods in Describing Architectures

Abstract

Formal methods are gaining prominence in software engineering as a way to insure that a specification is consistent with its intended meaning, and that two formally-rendered artifacts (e.g., a specification and an implementation) are consistent with each other in some precise way. Formal methods in the arena of software architecture tend to manifest themselves in representation technology, principally in architecture description languages (ADLs). Rapide, UniCon, Wright, ACME, ArTek, RESOLVE, Gestalt, and other ADLs are populating the software architecture literature, each offering a formal way to represent the architecture of a software system. But to what end? Formal methods are useful to help a human organize thought patterns into a more disciplined form, thus heading off conceptual errors. However, formal methods are most valuable when they precipitate automated checking of an artifact, or automated translation of an artifact from one form to a more useful form. Where do ADLs stand on these capabilities?

Open PDF

Document Details

Document Type
Technical Report
Publication Date
Jan 01, 1995
Accession Number
ADA638434

Entities

People

  • Paul C. Clements

Organizations

  • Carnegie Mellon University

Tags

Communities of Interest

  • Air Platforms
  • Weapons Technologies

DTIC Thesaurus Topics

  • Computations
  • Department Of Defense
  • Engineering
  • Engineers
  • Environment
  • Graphical User Interface
  • Guided Missiles
  • Language
  • Models
  • Safety Analysis
  • Simulations
  • Simulators
  • Software Design
  • Software Development
  • Specifications
  • Transitions
  • User Interface

Fields of Study

  • Computer science
  • Engineering

Readers

  • Software Engineering.
  • Systems Analysis and Design