The document discusses a framework for improving the reuse of hardware models through automatic traceability between descriptive and analytical models in systems engineering. It outlines the need for a common representation and interoperable access model that integrates various tools and technologies, while also addressing key challenges like vendor lock-in and data consistency. The proposed approach involves a knowledge-centric systems engineering framework that aims to streamline processes and enhance collaboration across engineering teams.

1. Automatic traceability between
descriptive and analytical models
UC3-Functional design
Prof. Jose María Alvarez Rodríguez (UC3M, speaker)
Roy Mendieta (REUSE)
Eduardo Cibrián (UC3M)
Ainhoa Aristimuno (ULMA)

2. www.arrowhead.eu
Context
2
As
So that…
I want to…
Reuse of existing
hardware artefacts
-Recovery traces
(fine-grained)
-Assess hardware
design quality
-Refactor hardware
designs
Hardware Engineer Access, search and trace
hardware models
I am using different tools:
IBM Doors, Altium
Designer, Altium Vault,
MSExcel, IBM Rhapsody
and others…

3. www.arrowhead.eu
The question
3
Is it possible to:
-improve the degree of reuse of any
hardware model and
-deliver added-value services
through a common representation
and an interoperable access model?

4. Definitions & needs
4

5. www.arrowhead.eu
Lifecycle processes
5
Mats Berglund (Ericsson)
http://www.ices.kth.se/upload/events/13/84404189f85d41a6a7d1cafd0db4ee80.p
df
Source: http://beyondplm.com/2014/07/22/plm-implementations-nuts-and-bolts-of-data-silos/

6. www.arrowhead.eu
Traceability definition: ISO/IEC/IEEE 24765:2017
IEEE Systems and Software Engineering Vocabulary
6

7. www.arrowhead.eu
Traceability definition: ISO/IEC/IEEE 24765:2017
7

8. www.arrowhead.eu
Some common needs…
8
A knowledge model to drive the
development lifecycle.Knowledge
Naming
Ad-hoc
integration
Discovery
Collaborati
on
Vendor
Lock-in
A common vocabulary to
standardize the naming of any
system artefact.
Integration of different tools.
A method to automatically
discovery and manage traces.
An engineering environment to
ensure quality, save costs and
enable team collaboration.
A method to avoid the vendor
lock-in ensuring compatibility in
terms of models, formats,
access protocols, etc.

9. www.arrowhead.eu
…more common needs…
9
• Common data model (vocabulary)
• Language
Data representation
• Check integrity
Data consistency & conformity
• Methods to ease reuse
As a service
• Standardized formats and access
protocols
Data exchange (and sharing)
• Semantics
Data interpretation
01
02
03
04
05

10. Conceptual approach
10

11. www.arrowhead.eu
Conceptual approach: Knowledge-Centric Systems Engineering
11

12. www.arrowhead.eu
12
Conceptual approach: Internet of Tools
Figure based on the OSLC architecture

13. www.arrowhead.eu
KCSE Framework: building blocks
13
KnowledgeManagement
(OSLC-inspired)
Resource Shape
System Representation
Language
Data representation &
consistency
System Knowledge
Base
Domain Ontology
Data consistency &
interpretation
System Assets Store Domain artifacts Data exchange
Metadata
Contents
Delegated Operations
Functionality As a Service
Interface As a Service

14. www.arrowhead.eu
Resource shape: System Representation Language
14

15. www.arrowhead.eu
Domain ontology layers
15
Taxonomy
Semantic relationships
Controlled vocabulary
Domain vocabulary
Patterns
Templates built on top
of the domain
vocabulary and semantic
relationships.
E.g. requirements,
design, etc.
Inference
Generation of new
knowledge
Consistency
…

16. www.arrowhead.eu
Example: Smart authoring (REUSE)
16

17. www.arrowhead.eu
System assets generation
17
Input artefact
Tool k
Transformation
rules
SKB
SRL
(industrial knowledge graph)
Linked Data
Text
SysML
Altium
Modelica
Simulink
…

18. www.arrowhead.eu
KCSE framework implementation
18
Tool k
Step 5
Common
Services
KCSE
Provider
(.Net, Java)
HTTP
&
RDF
KCSE
Client &
Provider
(.Net)
CAKE
(.Net)
KM
SAS & SKB
(.Net)
KCSE
adapter
(.Net, Java, XSLT)

19. www.arrowhead.eu
KCSE framework implementation (real effort)
19
Tool k
Step 5
Common
Services
KCSE
Provider
(.Net, Java)
HTTP
&
RDF
KCSE
Client &
Provider
(.Net)
CAKE
(.Net)
KM
SAS & SKB
(.Net)
KCSE
adapter
(.Net, Java, XSLT)

20. Application to the UC3
20

21. www.arrowhead.eu
Context
21
As
So that…
I want to…
Reuse of existing
hardware artefacts
-Recovery traces
-Assess hardware
design quality
-Refactor hardware
designs
Hardware Engineer Access, search and trace
hardware models
I am using different tools:
IBM Doors, Altium
Designer, Altium Vault,
MSExcel, IBM Rhapsody
and others…

22. www.arrowhead.eu
UC-EP Enginering process (based on ISO 15288)
22
System Requirements
Definition
Architecture Definition Design Definition Implementation
Verification and validation (and Measurement process)
Information Management

23. www.arrowhead.eu
Mapping to AHT-EP
23
UC-EP Enginering process AHT-EP
System Requirements Definition Requirements
Architecture Definition Functional Design
Design definition Functional Design
Implementation Procurement & engineering,
Training & education
Verification & Validation (Measurement process) Procurement & engineering,
Deployment & Commissioning
Information Management Not available

24. www.arrowhead.eu
AHP Toolchain
KCSE Framework (aka OSLC KM)
24
Traceability Manager
System Artefact Reuser
(knowledgeManager)
Repository
(knowledgeManager)
OSLC KM
IBM Doors IBM Rhapsody Altium Designer
OSLC KMOSLC KM
OSLC KM OSLC KM
Quality Manager
(Verification Studio)
OSLC KM
Communication Bus (HTTP REST)

25. www.arrowhead.eu
Technological solution
25
Data representation
• SRL representation of requirements ,
descriptive and analytical/physical models.
Connected tools: sources
• IBM Doors (requirements)
• IBM Rhapsody (descriptive models)
• Altium (physical/analytical models)
Traceability Studio: implementation
• Function on top of the Traceability Studio
• KnowledgeManager (domain ontology)
Traceability
• Automation of the trace recovery
process (content level) and
documentation.
• Support to other lifecycle processes.

26. www.arrowhead.eu
Demo I: Trace recovery and documentation
26

27. www.arrowhead.eu
Demo II: Trace recovery between models
27

28. www.arrowhead.eu
Interoperability evaluation (progress)
x) a connector or integration already exists but it is not based in standards in both senses (data and
communication model) and
R) a new standard-based connector is required to properly implement the use case.
28
Source/Target tool IBM
Doors
IBM
Rhapsody
Requirement
Authoring tool
Verification
Studio
Traceability
Studio
KnowledgeManager Altium
designer
IBM Doors x x x R R
IBM Rhapsody x x, R R
Requirements
Authoring tool
x x, R x x x
Verification Studio x x, R x x x R
Traceability Studio x R x x x R
KnowledgeManager R R x x x R
Altium designer R R R R R

29. www.arrowhead.eu
Interoperability evaluation (II): before & after
29
Aspect Description Standardized
Communication
protocol
FILE Yes
Data format
(syntax)
Native No
Data interpretation
(semantics)
Native for
each
connector
No
Security access Native
(login/pass)
?
Secure
communication
No No
Aspect Description Standardized
(Open API spec. and
OSLC)
Communication
protocol
FILE/HTTP/H
TTPS
Yes
Data format
(syntax)
JSON/RDF
/XML
Yes
Data
interpretation
(semantics)
Shape SRL Yes
Security access OAUTH Not implemented
Secure
communication
HTTPS Not implemented

30. www.arrowhead.eu
Engineering costs (realistic evaluation)
Before
3 connectors required
• 1 unit of connection (file)
• 5 units of interpretation
(read and write operations,
semantics of data is
embedded in the programs)
6 units of resources
After
1 connector is required
• 1 unit of connection
(service)
• 3 units of SRL shape creation
(semantics of data is
published as a schema)
4 unit of resources
Reduction of engineering costs: (6-4) / 6 = 2/6 = 33%

31. www.arrowhead.eu
Conclusions & Next Steps
• Altium connector not fully developed (official SDK under
development)
• Traceability scenario (fine-grained granularity) ready to
be validated with real data from the UC
• Data ready but configuration (ontology) still missing
• Focus on the reuse scenario
• Interoperability evaluation (many models)
• Connection through the Arrowhead Framework
31

32. www.arrowhead.eu
Some references
[1] Jose María Álvarez Rodríguez, Roy Mendieta, Jose Luis de la Vara, Anabel
Fraga, Juan Lloréns: Enabling System Artefact Exchange and Selection
through a Linked Data Layer. J. UCS 24(11): 1536-1560 (2018)
[2] Jose María Álvarez Rodríguez, Valentin Moreno, Juan Lloréns: Formal
ontologies and data shapes within the Software Engineering development
lifecycle. SEKE 2019: 64-93
32

33. Automatic traceability between
descriptive and analytical models
UC3-Functional design
Prof. Jose María Alvarez Rodríguez (UC3M, speaker)
Roy Mendieta (REUSE)
Eduardo Cibrián (UC3M)
Ainhoa Aristimuno (ULMA)