User Tools

Site Tools


sysml-roadmap:system_analysis_workgroup

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revision Previous revision
Next revision
Previous revision
sysml-roadmap:system_analysis_workgroup [2016-04-19 13:32]
mbajaj
sysml-roadmap:system_analysis_workgroup [2017-05-23 14:50] (current)
sfriedenthal [Presentations]
Line 1: Line 1:
-Back to [[http://​www.omgwiki.org/​OMGSysML/​doku.php?​id=sysml-roadmap:​sysml_assessment_and_roadmap_working_group| ​System Modeling Assessment and Roadmap ​Working Group]]+Back to [[http://​www.omgwiki.org/​OMGSysML/​doku.php?​id=sysml-roadmap:​sysml_assessment_and_roadmap_working_group| ​SysML v2 RFP Working Group]]
  
  
Line 11: Line 11:
  
 ===== Overview ===== ===== Overview =====
-The Systems Analysis Workgroup is formed under the [[SysML Assessment and Roadmap Working Group]] to research and gather requirements for seamless and integrated analyses of complex systems across their lifecycle. This workgroup focuses on the analysis challenge ​ in {{sysml-roadmap:​incose_themed_insight_article-evolving_sysml_and_the_system_modeling_environment_to_support_mbse-draft-2015-02-01.pdf| ​INCOSE Insight article (Vol 18, Issue 2, Aug 2015) //Evolving SysML and the System Modeling Environment to Support MBSE//}} that states:+The Systems Analysis Workgroup is formed under the [[SysML Assessment and Roadmap Working Group]] to research and gather requirements for seamless and integrated analyses of complex systems across their lifecycle. This workgroup focuses on the system ​analysis challenge ​stated ​in INCOSE Insight article (Vol 18, Issue 2, Aug 2015) {{sysml-roadmap:​incose_themed_insight_article-evolving_sysml_and_the_system_modeling_environment_to_support_mbse-draft-2015-02-01.pdf| Evolving SysML and the System Modeling Environment to Support MBSE}} that states:
  
 //The next-generation modeling language must include precise semantics that avoid ambiguity and enable a concise representation of the concepts. SysML currently leverages the UML metamodel for much of its semantic foundations. The language must derive from a well-specifed logical formalism that can leverage the model for a broad range of analysis and model checking. This includes the ability to validate that the model is logically consistent, and the ability to answer questions such as the impact of a requirement or design change, or assess how a failure could propagate through a system. The language and tools must also integrate with a diverse range of equation solvers and execution environments that enable the capture of quantitative data. //  //The next-generation modeling language must include precise semantics that avoid ambiguity and enable a concise representation of the concepts. SysML currently leverages the UML metamodel for much of its semantic foundations. The language must derive from a well-specifed logical formalism that can leverage the model for a broad range of analysis and model checking. This includes the ability to validate that the model is logically consistent, and the ability to answer questions such as the impact of a requirement or design change, or assess how a failure could propagate through a system. The language and tools must also integrate with a diverse range of equation solvers and execution environments that enable the capture of quantitative data. // 
Line 19: Line 19:
 ===== Goals ===== ===== Goals =====
 The System Analysis Workgroup is pursuing the following goals for SysML 2.0: The System Analysis Workgroup is pursuing the following goals for SysML 2.0:
-  ​Analysis must be seamless integrated with system development and operation +  ​Analysis must be seamless integrated with system development and operation 
-  ​Support various types of system analyses and execution tools +  ​Support various types of system analyses and execution tools 
-  ​Manage analysis models and relate results to decisions +  ​Manage analysis models and relate results to decisions 
-  ​Improved user interaction to define/​generate,​ execute, archive analysis models (analysis lifecycle)+  ​Improved user interaction to define/​generate,​ execute, archive analysis models (analysis lifecycle)
  
  
  
-===== Example Use Cases ===== 
  
-  - Elaborating a SysML Block with a behavioural model described in a different language (e.g. Modelica) ​and keeping the interfaces in synch +===== Analysis Definition ​and Examples =====
-  - Rendering a SysML diagram on a lightweight / web based tool +
-  - Reading SysML models by analysis tools, for example, making sure the model conforms to some pre-defined rules +
-  - Linking SysML elements with external elements such as requirements or test cases +
-  - Model transformation rules (UPDM->​SysML,​ SysML->​UML)+
  
-and more...+System Analysis is the systematic investigation of a real or planned system to (a) compare ​and select candidate system architectures,​ or (b) determine causes & resolutions of failures / exceptions [SEBoK - http://goo.gl/RCtAKt, NASA SE Handbook (2007) - http://goo.gl/iVBVES]Some common examples of system analysis are as follows:
  
- +  ​Compute ​and compare ​the mileage/cost for a set of car designs 
-===== Status Quo ===== +  - What is the design impact ​of a requirement change? 
-  +  - Optimize manufacturing process ​to max yield/cost 
-  * No cross-disciplinary traceability +  - Trace parts or functions ​that caused ​the failure of a system
-  * Different (proprietary) data formats +
-  * Need to capture multi-disciplinary engineering data and relationships in a common data format  +
-  * No standard API to access SysML data +
-  * No standard Web API to access SysML data +
-  * No standard Query API to perform complex queries on SysML data  +
- +
- +
- +
-===== Limitations of SysML ===== +
- +
-SysML data is currently not available:​ +
-  * in a standardized graph-based data format ​  +
-  * through a standard API  +
-  * through a standard Web API  +
-  * through a standard Query API to perform complex queries  +
- +
- +
-===== Derived Requirements for Interoperability ===== +
- +
-System Modeling Environment (SME) should support: +
-  * a data format suitable for describing graphs +
-  * a non-proprietary data format +
-  * a widely adopted data format +
-  * Standard Web API to access SysML data +
-  * Standard Web API supporting complex queries +
- +
- +
- +
-===== Key Features of New Concepts ===== +
- +
-  * Adoption of data format and data access standards aligned with W3C standards +
-  * Adoption of data format and data access standards aligned with the larger web community +
-  * Merging/Linking different systems engineering standards (STEP/​OMG/​ISO/​OSLC) through Linked Data +
- +
- +
- +
-===== Recommended Standards ​for Interoperability ===== +
-  * **Data** ​of the System Modeling Environment (SME) should be available in the W3C standard **[[http://​www.w3.org/​RDF/​Resource Description Framework (RDF)| Resource Description Framework (RDF)]]** +
-  ​* **Metadata** (semantics) in the System Modeling Environment (SME) should be defined in RDF vocabularies (W3C standard **[[http://​www.w3.org/​TR/​rdf-schema/| RDF Schema]]**) and shape constraints (W3C standard **[[http://​www.w3.org/​TR/​shacl/​| SHACL]]**) +
-  * **Web API** of the System Modeling Environment (SME) should be RESTful and conform to the W3C standard **[[http://​www.w3.org/​TR/​rdf-schema/​| Linked Data Platform]]** +
-  * **Query API** of the System Modeling Environment (SME) should conform to the W3C standards **[[http://​www.w3.org/​TR/​sparql11-query/​| SPARQL]]** and **[[http://​www.w3.org/​TR/​sparql11-protocol/​| SPARQL Protocol]]** +
- +
- +
- +
- +
- +
-===== Review Documents ===== +
- +
-  ​* {{sysml-roadmap:​sysml_v2_model_interoperability_requirements_-_axel_reichwein_-_dec_10_2015_v3.pptx|SysML v2 Model Interoperability Requirements - Axel Reichwein - Dec 10 2015}} +
- +
- +
-===== Prototypes ​to demonstrate feasibility ===== +
-  ​* Open-source OSLC and Linked Data solutions available at [[https://​github.com/​ld4mbse| GitHub ld4mbse]]  +
- +
- +
- +
- +
- +
- +
- +
- +
- +
- +
- +
- +
- +
- +
- +
- +
- +
- +
- +
- +
-===== SME/SysML v2 Service requirements (e.g. functions) to support interoperability ===== +
- +
-Most services listed in the {{00-SysML v2-Services-2015-11-26.xlsx| spreadsheet}} are useful for supporting data traceability/​interoperability. +
- +
-  * Services to create, read, update, and delete links between tools +
-  * Services to create, read, update, delete, and execute transformations to/from SysML models +
-  * Services to export and import unstructured and structured data +
-  * Services to create, update, delete, and execute model elements and patterns +
-  * Services to create, resd, update, and delete viewpoints +
-  * Services to create, read, update, delete, and execute model queries to support visualization and analysis +
-  * Services to generate and manage views +
-  * Services to create, read, update, delete, and execute model validation rules to validate input data and model +
-  * Services to create, read, update, delete, and execute analytical models +
-  * Services to manage model metadata +
-  * Services to manage changes to model +
-  * Services to create, read, update, delete, and execute workflows and notifications+
  
  
 +===== Challenges in formulation,​ representation,​ and execution of system analyses =====
 +The current generation of SysML (1.x) has the following challenges related to formulating,​ representing,​ and executing system analyses.
 +  - Analysis is a missing concept in SysML
 +  - Lack of formal represenation of analysis objectives, subject system, analysis models, results, and decisions
 +  - Lack of formal representation of design <-> analysis model transformations
 +  - Incomplete definitions of types and units
 +  - Lack of formal representation of complex data structures, such as vectors, tensors, and matrices
 +  - Lack of formal representation of mathematical operators, such as needed for differentials and integrals
 +  - Lack of formal representation of primitive geometry concepts, as needed for precise representation and verification of requirements ​
 +  - Lack of formal representation of visualization concepts, such as mathematical graphs as needed for representing analysis results
 +  - Lack of a unique identifier system for model elements
 +  - Lack of element-level version and configuration management
  
 ===== Presentations ===== ===== Presentations =====
 +  - {{sysml-roadmap:​sysml_v2_analysis_requirements_omg_reston_2017-03-23.zip|SysML 2 Analysis Requirements presentation (zip) at SysML 2 RFP WG mtg at OMG Technical Meeting, Reston (Mar 20-24, 2017) }}
 +  - {{sysml-roadmap:​sysml_2_analysis_requirements_2017-02-08_.pdf|SysML 2 Analysis Requirements presentation at SysML 2 RFP webcon (Feb 8, 2017) }}
 +  - {{sysml-roadmap:​sysml_2_analysis_wg_2016-11-16.pdf|System Analysis presentation at SysML 2 RFP webcon (Nov 16, 2016) }}
 +  - {{sysml-roadmap:​sysml_2_analysis_wg_2016-09-13.pdf|System Analysis presentation at Chicago (Sep 2016) }}
   - {{sysml-roadmap:​sysml_v2-analysis_concept-manas_bajaj_intercax-reston-2016-03-16.pdf|System Analysis presentation at Reston (Mar 2016) }}   - {{sysml-roadmap:​sysml_v2-analysis_concept-manas_bajaj_intercax-reston-2016-03-16.pdf|System Analysis presentation at Reston (Mar 2016) }}
   - {{sysml-roadmap:​05-sysml_v2-system_analysis-bajaj-intercax-_2015-12-08.pdf|System Analysis presentation at La Jolla (Dec 2015)}}   - {{sysml-roadmap:​05-sysml_v2-system_analysis-bajaj-intercax-_2015-12-08.pdf|System Analysis presentation at La Jolla (Dec 2015)}}
 +
  
 ====== System Analysis Workgroup Team ====== ====== System Analysis Workgroup Team ======
sysml-roadmap/system_analysis_workgroup.1461087140.txt.gz · Last modified: 2016-04-19 13:32 by mbajaj