UML Vs. classical Vs. Rhapsody statecharts: Not all models are created equal

37Citations
Citations of this article
7Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

State machines, represented by statecharts or statechart diagrams, are an important formalism for behavioural modelling. According to the research literature, the most popular statechart formalisms appear to be Classical, UML, and that implemented by RHAPSODY. These three formalisms seem to be very similar; however, there are several key syntactic and semantic differences. These differences are enough that a model written in one formalism could be ill-formed in another formalism. Worse, a model from one formalism might actually be well-formed in another, but be interpreted differently due to the semantic differences. This paper summarizes the results of a comparative study of these three formalisms with the help of several illustrative examples. Then, we present a classification of the differences together with a comprehensive overview. © Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2005.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Crane, M. L., & Dingel, J. (2005). UML Vs. classical Vs. Rhapsody statecharts: Not all models are created equal. In Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics) (Vol. 3713 LNCS, pp. 97–112). https://doi.org/10.1007/11557432_8

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free