Small or medium-scale focused research projects … Web viewDeliverable: Development of the software...

ARTEMIS-2011-1 Full Project Proposal Decisive

ARTEMIS Call 2011ARTEMIS-2011-1

DECISIon and platform support for model‐based eVolutionary development of Embedded systems

Date of preparation: June 1622, 2011Version number (optional): 0.32

ARTEMIS Sub-programme addressed (see Annual Work Programme 2011 section 3.2)Major: ASP1: Methods and processes for safety‐relevant embedded systemsMinor: ASP5: Computing platforms for embedded systems

Industrial Priority addressed see Annual Work Programme 2011 section 3.1)

Proposal Part B: of 68


Major: Design methods and toolsMinor: Reference designs and architectures

Name of the coordinating person: Frank van der Lindene-mail: [email protected]

List of participants:

Participant no. (1)

Participant organisation name

Part. short name

Country ARTEMIS Member State

(Y/N)

Other EU Member or State/Ass.

country(Y/N)

National eligibility

checked by applicant (Y/N) (2)

1 (Coordinator)

Philips Medical Systems Nederland BV

PHILIPS NL Y N Y

2 AVL List GmbH AVL AT Y N Y

3 CISC Semiconductor Design+Consulting GmbH

CISC AT Y N Y

4 NXP Semiconductors Austria GmbH

NXP-A AT Y N Y

5 Technical University of Denmark

DTU DK Y N Y

6 PAJ Systemteknik PAJ DK Y N Y

7 Contribyte Oy COY FI Y N Y

8 Konecranes Heavy Lifting Corporation

Knr FI Y N Y

9 Mega Electronics LtdMegaKoto Oy

MEGA FI Y N Y

10 Nokia Siemens Networks

NSN FI Y N Y

11 TBDSamFinder Oy SAMF FI Y N Y

12 University of Eastern Finland

UEF FI Y N Y

13 University of Oulu UoO FI Y N Y

14 Technical Research Center of Finland

VTT FI Y N Y

15 Atego SAS Atego FR Y N Y

16 Commissariat à l'’Energie Atomique et aux Energies

CEA FR Y N Y



Alternatives

17 European Aeronautic Defence and Space Company EADS France SAS

EADS FR Y N Y

18 Valeo Valeo F Y N Y

19 Bauhaus Luftfahrt e.V. BHL DE Y N Y

20 Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel

CAU DE Y N Y

21 Fraunhofer Gesellschaft zur Förderung der angewandten Forschung e.V.

FHG DE Y N Y

22 NXP Semiconductors Germany GmbH

NXP-D DE Y N Y

23 Centro Ricerche Fiat S.C.p.A

CRF IT Y N Y

24 Computers Guard CG LV Y N Y

25 Latvian Railway LDZ LV Y N Y

26 Riga Technical University

RTU LV Y N Y

27 Almende Almende NL Y N Y

28 Océ Technologies BV OCE NL Y N Y

29 Technische Universiteit Eindhoven

TUE NL Y N Y

30 Deimos Space Deimos ES Y N Y

31 Ikerlan-IK4 IKER ES Y N Y

32 Integrasys ISYS ES Y N Y

33 Mondragon Unibertsitatea

MU ES Y N Y

34 ULMA Embedded Solutions

UES ES Y N Y

35 Mälardalen University MDH SE Y N Y

36 TDBVolvo Volvo SE Y N Y

37 EIS SemconTBD EIS SE Y N Y

38 TBD FI Y N Y

39 Technische Universiteit Delft

TUD NL Y N Y

40 Prodrive Prodrive NL Y N Y



(1) Please use the same participant numbering as that used in Proposal submission forms A2(2) For partners from ARTEMIS Member States, please indicate whether you consider that you comply with the national eligibility criteria for funding as stated in the document "Eligibility Criteria" published in the Call.

Proposal abstract(copied from Part A)The objective of the project is to develop a methodology and tool support for model-driven evolutionary development of complex embedded systems. Supporting evolutionary design will reduce the development time and time-to-market, reduce development and unit costs, increase the quality of the products and of the engineering processes and reduce re-certification costs. Today, most systems are engineered in an evolutionary fashion: introducing a new version of an existing product, introducing new features—possibly as part of an evolution of a product line, performing a design iteration, etc. The models of an embedded system will evolve at the same time with the system. However, none of the current state-of-the-art approaches to model-based engineering of embedded systems support evolutionary development.We will extend the state-of-the-art modelling frameworks to capture the knowledge learned during evolutions, such as, when and how can a component be reused, performance metrics recorded during the runtime, design rationale for a design decision, time and effort required for different development phases. We will develop non-intrusive analysis and monitoring techniques to systematically collect information during the evolutions, and link this information to the models.Often, embedded system architectures are derived with little concern for extensibility, rendering evolutions very costly. We will develop decision support methods and tools for the creation of system architectures that are extensible, but without compromising other objectives such as performance, cost, energy consumption, safety and dependability. The evolution of models is often done manually which is tedious and error prone, without any systematic model management. We will develop methods and tools for model management and visualization, to automate the management of models and improve comprehension during the system evolution.


Frank van der Linden, 05/02/82,

Responsible: Frank van der Linden


Table of Contents

Section 1 - Relevance and contributions to the content and objectives of the Call...............................51.1 Relevance...............................................................................................................................5

Section 2 - R&D innovation and technical excellence.............................................................................62.1 Concept and objectives..........................................................................................................62.2 Progress beyond the state-of-the-art.....................................................................................6

Section 3 - S&T approach and work plan................................................................................................73.1 Quality and effectiveness of the S&T methodology and associated work plan......................7

Section 4 - Market innovation and market impact...............................................................................134.1 Impact...................................................................................................................................134.2 Dissemination and exploitation............................................................................................134.3 Contribution to standards and regulations...........................................................................134.4 Management of intellectual property..................................................................................13

Section 5 - Quality of consortium and management............................................................................145.1 Management structure and procedures...............................................................................145.2 Individual participants..........................................................................................................145.3 Consortium as a whole.........................................................................................................145.4 Resources to be committed..................................................................................................14

Annex A – Funding calculation forms...................................................................................................16



Section 1 - Relevance and contributions to the content and objectives of the Call (Weight Factor: 1) Please refer to the "Guide for applicants" for information on evaluation criteria

1.1 Relevance

o Show the relevance of your proposal in relation to at least one or more of the Industrial Priorities (see section 3.1 in Annual Work Programme (AWP) 2011) and one or more of the sub-programmes (section 3.2 in Annual Work Programme 2011). In addition please explain how your proposed work is relevant to the overall ARTEMIS targets listed in section 4 of the AWP. (Recommended length 2 pages)

Today, most systems are engineered in an evolutionary fashion, but none of the current model-based engineering solutions support evolutionary development. The objective of DECISIVE is to develop a methodology and tool support for model-driven evolutionary design of complex embedded systems. DECISIVE will contribute to the following industrial priorities of the AWP 2011:Design methods and tools: DECISIVE will provide model-based engineering methods and tools to overcome the current problems with evolutionary development by: (1) capturing in the models the knowledge gained by developing the previous product versions, (2) increase model reuse by improving the maintainability and comprehension of models (3) provide tool support for the design of extensible system architectures, and (4) support decision makers by improving the accuracy of information used to take decisions in the early stages.Reference designs and architectures: A further goal of DECISIVE is to provide resource-efficient, nonintrusive, and deterministic monitoring techniques to extract properties from executing systems during both test and deployment.DECISIVE will contribute to the priorities of the following sub-programmes:ASP1: Methods and processes for safety-relevant embedded systems: We aim at major technological breakthroughs in the areas of Requirement Management, and Architecture Modelling and Exploration, which will contribute to progress in the areas of Design for Reuse and Design for Safety.

• We will contribute to a European Standard Reference Technology platform, proposing metamodels, methods and tools for evolutionary development. The focus on evolutionary development will reduce the times needed for re-certification and re-qualification after change.

• There is a lot of knowledge gained from building a previous version of a product, and from the design flow used. Currently, this information is used informally, and is not systematically captured in the models. No solutions exist for back-annotation of information from previous product versions, gained over the whole previous development cycle: from simulations, analysis, runtime monitoring, testing, etc. We will propose (meta-) models dealing with model evolution and reuse.

• Model reuse can be supported by improved model comprehension and model management. We will propose (semi-) automated model transformations to support evolutionary development. Models will have to be updated based on the knowledge learned in the previous product development. In evolutionary development, handovers between teams could be significantly improved by automated generation of standardized model-views and semi-automated editing that prevent errors from being entered into the model.



Responsible: paul Pop


• “Architectural design decisions are largely based on experience of past designs and this is difficult to apply to new situations” (ARTEMIS Strategic Research Agenda). The accuracy of decisions will be improved through the use of information gained from previous product versions. We will develop decision support methods and tools for the synthesis of system architectures that are extensible, increase quality of the product, reducing the time and development cost of evolutions.

ASP5: Computing platforms for embedded systems: There is a strong connection between contributions by the DECISIVE project to ASP1 and ASP5. To support evolutionary design, we have to record information during the runtime of previous product versions. The information recorded in this way will be fed back to the high-level models to be used in designing the new product versions. The SRA identifies the challenge of “evolvability”. We will propose architectural design patterns that improve evolvability. DECISIVE will provide methods and tools that will allow trade-offs between evolvability and other properties such as cost and performance.

DECISIVE addresses the following overall ARTEMIS targets:Reduce the cost of system design by reusing models and knowledge from previous products.Achieve reduction in development cycles through decision support and trade-off analysis tools.Manage complexity increase by facilitating the reuse of models from previous product versions and

by (semi-) automatic model management to aid comprehension across evolutions.Reduce the effort required for re-validation and re-certification by capturing and reusing the

knowledge gained in the validation and certification of the previous product versions and by the reuse of artefacts for qualification and certification.



Section 2 - R&D innovation and technical excellence (Weight Factor: 1) Please refer to the "Guide for applicants" for information on evaluation criteria

2.1 Concept and objectives

Explain the concept of your project. What are the main ideas that led you to propose this work?Describe in detail the overall objectives as well as the underpinning S&T objectives. The objectives should be those to be achieved within the project, not through subsequent development. They should be stated in a measurable and verifiable form.

The main goal of DECISIVE is to develop a methodology and tool support for evolutionary development of complex embedded systems using a model-based design flow. Based on modelling languages that support both system design and analysis we will develop technology for annotation of system models with the results from verification and validation (V&V) activities and the empirical knowledge of the properties of the system and its components. These annotations will be used to guide decisions both on product-management level and for technical development during systems evolution, the annotation are also useful artefacts to support certification and qualification of safety related functions.The motivation for the project is that contemporary technologies for model-based engineering do not account for the fact that most systems are developed in an evolutionary fashion. Contemporary technology lack functionality and needs improvements in the following aspects:1. Methods to systematically and homogenously associate knowledge of system properties

obtained during various V&V activities and from deployed systems to the models used at various design stages. That is, current modelling techniques focus on describing what we want the system to do (as-specified), but not what it actually does (as-is).

2. Low- and non-intrusive monitoring methodologies with architecture independent APIs for system analysis, with the purpose both to extract run-time properties to be back-propagated to the model and to monitor and validate the system functionality.

3. Efficient and effective model and code management. Understanding and modification of models is often hindered by ad-hoc modelling techniques, bulky graphical presentations, non-intuitive model editors, and lack of adequate two-way synchronization between models and code.

4. Support for decision making based on quantitative and qualitative information about the product. That is, product management and architects have no effective tools or models to aid steering the product requirement and design during development projects and between releases.

To bridge these gaps DECISIVE will create innovative solutions by addressing the following objectives: • Extend existing modelling languages to support annotation of system properties obtained

during various V&V-activities (such as analysis, simulation, testing, and safety certification). These extensions will support product-line variability and versioning to fit the evolutionary system development process. Furthermore, the associated modelling tools will be enriched to support analysis and simulation of models at various abstraction levels, e.g., where part of the system exists in its final form and part of the system only exist as abstract models. This will allow early stage impact analysis of proposed evolutionary changes with respect to, quality attributes (e.g., safety).

• Develop model-to-model transformations and APIs that allow tracing of system properties through design stages and compilation phases. Also, transformations and APIs that allow mapping V&V-results back to the model needs to be provided.



Responsible:Mikael (editor) + inputs from Steffen, Paul, VTT, Mondragon


• Ensure availability of information from early verification and validation techniques, allowing business and architectural decisions to be based on solid technical data throughout the development process. Methods for defining and visualizing data from models and prototypes will improve the process for decision makers.

• Improve model-editing capabilities and easy model understanding. In evolutionary system development, handovers between teams will be significantly improved by automated generation of standardized model-views and semi-automated editing preventing errors from being introduced into the model. Also, in the context of model-to-model transformations, and code-to model synchronization, automated model-views will improve readability.

• Implement resource-efficient, non-intrusive, and deterministic monitoring techniques to extract properties from executing systems during both test and deployment.

Project results

2.2 Progress beyond the state-of-the-art

Describe the state-of-the-art in the area concerned, and the advance that the proposed project would bring about. Explain the main technological or scientific innovations you aim to achieve and why they would be important.

(Recommended length for the whole of Section 2 –5 pages)The objective of DECISIVE is to deliver an integrated tool chain consolidating novel technology for evolutionary software development and run-time platform support for monitoring. As such a tool chain is not yet available; the project will set a new standard in this field. DECISIVE will extend state-of-the-art with respect to the above identified aspects as follows:1. Existing modelling languages, such as MARTE and SysML, lack a structure to model both

requirements and actual properties of the system. They all focus on modelling desired behaviours and properties, but methods to store properties obtained from the actual system are not supported. A modelling language, which allows storage of empirical properties, must be able to express that these properties may be attained at different stages during the development process, and with varying degree of quality and confidence. In fact, it is often the case that conflicting, or at least non-consistent, data is obtained during the life cycle of a product (e.g. the longest response-time for an event could be quite different when obtained through scheduling analysis, simulation, testing or observation of the final system). Also, modelling languages that support product-line variability, such as EAST-ADL2, lack possibility to trace system properties through the variation points. The DECISIVE project will add support to model which properties are preserved over a variation point (and conversely, which properties are affected by a variation). For early impact analysis, contemporary techniques lack the support to analyze subsystems of various abstraction levels. E.g. scheduling analysis and execution-time analysis typically depend on clock-cycle accurate representation of the final executable, whereas high-level analysis with e.g. Petri-nets and time-automata cannot accurately and safely model execution characteristics of modern hardware platforms. Thus, hybrid techniques are called for.

2. Existing model-to-model, and model-to-code, transformations focus on semantic preservation, and sometimes, also property-preservation (e.g. the CHESS modelling language, currently developed in an ARTEMIS-project ending in 2011). However, there is no support in the transformations that allow back-tracing of properties from the target to the source. E.g. there are no methods that allow the memory associated to a signal-queue to be traced back to a particular connection between two components, or more complex, to associate the execution time of a task to the response-time of a signal path in the model. In order to obtain such traceability, we need both to associate meta-data to the target-models, indicating their sources,



and provide for structured and automated insertions of probes in the target to allow tracing of interesting properties. Furthermore, processing of the probe-data in order to extract relevant properties and relate them back to the model needs new model-guided analysis technologies and text-to-model transformation techniques. While most operating systems for embedded and real-time systems provide some performance monitoring mechanisms, e.g. supporting memory-profiling and task-level execution monitoring, these mechanisms do not give detailed enough data to allow back-annotation of properties to models. Conversely, naïve instrumentation of code during model-to-code transformation will likely consume too many resources in terms of both execution time and memory. To remedy this situation, we will develop platform-level monitoring techniques both in hardware for nonintrusive monitoring, and in software for low-intrusive monitoring, that can be automatically customized with respect to the amount of resources required. These mechanisms can then be used by the model-to-code transformations. We will also implement optimization techniques to limit both the amount of probes that need to be generated and the amount of data that need to be stored for each probe in order to obtain a given quality of the observation.

3. An advantage of graphical models is their intuitiveness. However, the graphical modelling of realistic applications often results in very large and unmanageable graphics, severely compromising their readability and practical use. The DECISIVE Project will provide a methodology, which seeks to support a system developer in modelling, simulation and comprehending complex system models and their analysis results.Graphical system models for embedded systems are commonly created using some “What You See Is What You Get” (WYSIWYG) editor. Even for novices WYSIWYG editors are very easy to use due to their intuitiveness. However, WYSIWYG editors can also be a limiting factor in the practical usability. The system developer often spends a lot of time with rearranging graphical elements instead of modifying the system. We will develop model editing techniques that are rather oriented on the underlying model structure to enable fast and efficient model creation and modification. These proposals permit a design flow, where the designer efficiently develops the structure of a system, but uses a graphical browser and simulator to inspect and validate the system under development (SUD). Different views on the SUD will allow exploring and editing the system from different perspectives. Central to our approach will be style guides and layout mechanisms which make the models easy readable at each stage of the development.The classical paradigm to animate a simulated system is to highlight active components, e.g., by marking them in a particular colour. When the total number of graphical elements goes significantly beyond what can be visible on a screen simultaneously, keeping track of the active objects of a system becomes a rather frustrating exercise. In the DECISIVE project we will develop methods to simulate a system, which allows keeping track of the system simulation state. These methods will allow observing the simulation and analysis results simultaneously and with respect to their meaning for a better system comprehension.

When decisions are made for product portfolios, the best available information must be used. The same is true for architectural and design decisions. Decision-making can be improved through better ways to extract, collect, and present information that is requested for well-informed decisions. The technical information available in models and through simulations can improve the decision-making in early phases. Several aspects need to be further developed to improve the situation. Firstly, the needs from decision-makers should be made clear in the light of available and emerging modelling techniques, i.e. decision-makers are not always aware of what information actually is available early in the development process. Secondly, the extraction of the information must to be automated based on the specified needs from the decision-makers. Finally, the collection and presentation of the information must be made easily retrievable when required.



Topic State of the art Decisive target

Modelling languages

Model transformations

Modelling methodology

Design decisions



Section 3 - S&T approach and work plan (Weight Factor: 1) Please refer to the "Guide for applicants" for information on evaluation criteria

3.1 Quality and effectiveness of the S&T methodology and associated work plan

A detailed work plan should be presented, broken down into work packages1 (WPs) which should follow the logical phases of the implementation of the project, and include consortium management and assessment of progress and results.

Please present your plans as follows:i) Describe the overall strategy of the work plan (Maximum length – one page)ii) Show the timing of the different WPs and their components (Gantt chart or similar). iii) Provide a detailed work description broken down into work packages:

Work package list (please use table 3a); Deliverables list (please use table 3b); List of milestones (please use table 3c) Description of each work package (please use table 3d) Summary effort table (3e)

iv) Provide a graphical presentation of the components showing their interdependencies (Pert diagram or similar)

v) Describe any significant risks, and associated contingency plans

Note: The number of work packages used must be appropriate to the complexity of the work and the overall value of the proposed project. The planning should be sufficiently detailed to justify the proposed effort and allow progress monitoring.

(Recommended length for the whole of Section 3 –15 pages not including the Gantt chart, Pert diagram or tables 3a-e)The objective of the project is to develop a methodology and tool support for model based ‐evolutionary development of complex embedded systems, ensuring comprehensibility of models by human designers and decision makers. This objective defines the decomposition of the project into seven work packages shown in Figure 1 completed by a project management package (WP0, not shown).

Figure 1: Overall project workflow (interactions between technology packages are omitted)

The work packages can be separated in three groups: organizational work packages (WP0, WP7), business case work packages (WP1, WP6), and technology work packages (WP2–5). The project

1 A work package is a major sub-division of the proposed project with a verifiable end-point - normally a deliverable or a milestone in the overall project.



Responsible:Simon (editor) + WP leaders


organization has been set up in such a way as to maximize modularity among the work packages, whilst allowing a clear definition of the individual contributions and the collaboration among partners. The interfaces between the different models and tools will be clearly defined in the beginning of the project. Compliance will be monitored throughout the project duration at biannual board meetings. In order to measure the achievements of the DECISIVE approach, metrics and evaluation techniques will be defined. The DECISIVE approach will be validated in terms of usability of the solution, efficiency in resource usage, and benefits for the developed products. Finally, it should be noted that industrial exploitation strategies—to be defined in WP7—should influence the development of the business case packages.

Organizational work packagesThe role of the organizational work packages is to ensure that the project correctly follows its course; establish and maintain communication links with relevant administration, standardization, industrial and academic bodies.WP0 Project management: This work-package will contain all tasks related to the management of the project, i.e. monitoring and reporting. Central to the success of the project will be the establishment of a good quality plan, risk management plan and communication plans to ensure good information flow between the partners. Moreover this work-package will also include knowledge and IPR management in the project.WP7 Dissemination & exploitation: Among the tasks of this work package will be setting up a project web site and publishing the latest project news and results there, publishing newsletters, conference and journal papers, organization of workshops, etc. An important component will also be to work towards a new European standard reference technology and interact with existing standardization organizations.

Business case work packagesThe business case packages encompass the functional link between real-life industrial requirements and the technology to be developed in the project.WP1 Requirements: WP1 covers the work on the specification of the business requirements and needs that the project is looking to answer. Commercial existing tools and European Patents will be analyzed in order to evaluate the needs about: learning from previous versions of the product, hand-over of models to new engineering teams, supporting product-management in steering the product requirements. Precise and testable requirements will be identified in order to cover these main areas: DECISIVE application monitoring, interfaces between DECISIVE models, DECISIVE human-centric tools interfaces, and decision-support to product management during the decision phase. A appropriated test methodology will be defined in order to verify the requirements fulfilling during the verification and validation phases. WP6 Industrial validation: This package covers the definition, development and evaluation of use cases for the validation of the DECISIVE approach in terms of usability of the solution, efficiency, and benefits for the developed products. Metrics and evaluation techniques will be defined allowing one to quantify the benefit of the DECISIVE approach. Feedback to technology packages will be provided.

Technology work packagesTechnology packages will work on the models and techniques to be used at all stages of the DECISIVE design work-flow in order to produce a coherent approach for evolutionary design and understandability of models by human designers and decision makers.WP2 Modelling and design frameworks: This work package will realize extensions to the current modelling and design frameworks to back-annotate the information learned and gathered during earlier system evolutions; it will provide model-transformations that use this information to improve



the quality of decisions, increase reuse, reduce the development time, increase the quality of the final implementation, improve the overall engineering process and support the creation of safety-cases. WP3 Monitoring and analysis infrastructure: Within this work package the necessary evaluation, simulation and profiling techniques will be developed to generate data for the characterization of software/hardware components in respect to their runtime behaviour, memory footprint, power consumption, etc. Non-intrusive hardware- and low-impact software-monitoring techniques will be aimed at. The obtained information will be back-annotated to the high-level model description for reuse during the evolution of components.WP4 Model management and visualization: This work package will develop methods and tools for model management automation and improved comprehension during the system evolution or handovers between teams, in particular, by automating the generation of standardized model-views and preventing errors from being introduced into the model. In addition, we will improve model management capabilities, e.g., editing, layout, and model comprehension, for analysis and maintenance.WP5 Design for evolvability: This work package will develop decision support methods and tools for the synthesis of system architectures that are extensible, thus greatly reducing time and engineering effort required for evolutions and product line variations. We will provide trade-off analysis tools that will allow a systems architect to decide the right amount of extensibility, without compromising other objectives such as performance, cost, energy consumption and safety.

Project time-line The chart below (Figure 2) shows the proposed time-line for the project. In order to enable the coherent industrial validation of the models and tools developed in the project, the technology packages and validation are split in two phases. First prototypes of the industrial validators based on the results of Phase 1 of the technology packages will provide the feedback necessary for the refinement of the models and tools in Phase 2. The work in the technology packages does not start immediately but only after the specifications of the business requirements have been completed. This will ensure that the business requirements effectively influence the technology to be developed in the project. Furthermore, the work in the technology packages must be completed in advance with respect to the overall project termination in order to allow for the final validation to be effectuated on the obtained results.

Figure 2: Time line for the DECISIVE project.‐



Table 3 a: Template - Work package list

Work package list

Work package

No2

Work package title Lead particno.3

Lead partic. short name

Person-month

s4

Startmonth5

Endmonth5

0 Project management 1 Philips

1 Requirements 23 CRF

2 Modelling and design frameworks

3 CISC

3 Monitoring and analysis infrastructure

4 CEA

4 Model management and visualization

19 BHL

5 Design for evolvability 14 VTT

6 Industrial validation 32 ISYS

7 Dissemination & exploitation 36 ??

TOTAL

2 Workpackage number: WP 1 – WP n.3 Number of the participant leading the work in this work package.4 The total number of person-months allocated to each work package.5 Measured in months from the project start date (month 1).



Table 3 b: Template - Deliverables List

List of Deliverables

Del. no. 6

Deliverable name WP no. Nature7 Dissemi-nation level8

Delivery date9

(proj.

month)

6 Deliverable numbers in order of delivery dates. Please use the numbering convention <WP number>.<number of deliverable within that WP>. For example, deliverable 4.2 would be the second deliverable from work package 4.7 Please indicate the nature of the deliverable using one of the following codes:

R = Report, P = Prototype, D = Demonstrator, O = Other8 Please indicate the dissemination level using one of the following codes:

PU = PublicPP = Restricted to other programme participants (including the JU).RE = Restricted to a group specified by the consortium (including the JU).CO = Confidential, only for members of the consortium (including the JU).

9 Measured in months from the project start date (month 1).



Table 3c Template - List of milestones

MilestonesMilestones are control points where decisions are needed with regard to the next stage of the project. For example, a milestone may occur when a major result has been achieved, if its successful attainment is a required for the next phase of work. Another example would be a point when the consortium must decide which of several technologies to adopt for further development.

Milestone number

Milestone name

Work package(s) involved

Expected date 10 Means of verification11

10 Measured in months from the project start date (month 1).11 Show how you will confirm that the milestone has been attained. Refer to indicators if appropriate. For example: a laboratory prototype completed and running flawlessly; software released and validated by a user group; field survey complete and data quality validated.



Table 3 d: Template - Work package description

Work package description

Work package number 0 Start date or starting event: M1

Work package title Project management

Participant number 1

Participant short name Philips

Person-months per participant

Objectives Project management of DECISIVE will leverage on the vast experience in management structures and procedures of Philips in former EU-funded projects of similar size and impact. Due attention will be given in anticipating issues and maximizing the exploitation of foreground Intellectual Property rights originating from the project.

Description of work (possibly broken down into tasks) and role of partners

Task 0.1. Project managementTiming: M1-M36 Lead: PhilipsContributors: all partners In this task, the project coordinator and all the partners will perform the due project management activities, as described in Section 5 of this proposal. Such activities are comprehensive of technical, strategic, administrative and financial actions, all devoted to an efficient, on-time execution of the project work and the responsible delivery of the corresponding results. Key tool for project management will be the Internal Project Website. It will be used to manage the contact and distribution lists, as well as a repository for communication and documentation exchange among the partners. If possible it will be linked to or integrated in the external project website.

Task 0.2. Communication with the JU and PAsTiming: M1-M36 Lead: PhilipsContributors: country coordinators The project coordinator will be the primary contact point to the JU-Artemis and the reviewers for all matters, technical and administrative, concerning the execution, progress and management of all project activities. Any action concerning communication to the JU and the reviewers, as well as the exchange of technical, administrative and legal documents occurs in the context of this task. A specific section of the Internal Project Web Site will be dedicated to the interaction with the JU and the Project Officers, through secure connections and password protected folders and directories.



Responsible: Frank van der Linden


Deliverables (brief description) and month of delivery

D0.1.1 Internal Project Website M3

D0.2.1 First Periodic Project Report M12 Philips, All

D0.2.2 Second Periodic Project Report M24 Philips, All

D0.2.3 Third Periodic Project Report M36 Philips, All

D0.2.4 Final Publishable Summary Report M36 Philips, All




Work package title Requirements

Participant number

Participant short name


Objectives

The purpose of WP1 is the definition of the requirements for tools and methodologies to be developed by the technology packages. Starting from the evaluation of the current state-of-the-art and state-of-practice approaches related to evolutionary development in the model-based engineering of embedded systems, requirements for tools and methodologies will be defined in order to provide: non-intrusive analysis and monitoring techniques to systematically collect information during the evolutions; decision support for the synthesis of system architectures; model management and visualization, to automate the management of models and improve comprehension during the system evolution. Safety and certification requirements will be also identified.

WP1 is also responsible of the definition of test methodologies that will be applied during validation phase and the preliminary definition of candidate validation cases and scenarios.


T1.1 State of the artLead: IKER Contributors: NXP-D, FADA-CATEC, MU, NXP-A, IKER This Task will accomplish the following activities:

• Evaluation of commercial existing tools and European Patents• Evaluation of the needs about:

o Learning from previous versions of the producto Hand-over of models to new engineering teamso Supporting product-management in steering the product requirements

• Collect relevant and significant industry control use cases

T1.2 Requirement identificationLead: AVL Contributors: CEA, FADA-CATEC, UC3M, BHL, RTU, LDZ, ISYS, NXP-D, CRF, UES, IKER, FHG-HHI, AVL

• Identification of the monitoring and analysis requirements for DECISIVE applications• Identification of the requirements for the definition of interfaces between DECISIVE models (high-

level and analysis models, computation models, and platform specific execution models)• Identification of the requirements for human-centric tools able to provide better understanding of

the systems• Requirements of a DECISIVE Human Interface Guideline able to define unambiguous systems

requirements • Requirements cover model development perspectives - model editing, simulation, and analysis

(with respect of model and result representation)



Responsible: Fiat – Andrea Ghiro


• Identification of the requirements of indexes able to provide support to product management during the decision phase of evolutionary systems

• Identification of requirement related to safety and certification features

T1.3 Test methodology definitionLead: Philips Contributors: NXP-D, FADA-CATEC, MU, CRF, NXP-A, UES, IKER This Task will accomplish the following activities:

• Preliminary definition of candidate validation cases and scenarios• Definition of test methodology to apply during the validation phase (WP6 - T6.3)


D1.1 State-of-the-art

D1.2 Business requirements and needs M6

D1.3 Preliminary validation case and test methodology M36


Work package title Modelling and design frameworks

Participant number



Objectives Based on the requirements identified in WP1, WP2 will select two-three state-of-the-art modelling and design frameworks that are applicable to the main application areas represented by the industrial partners in the project. The case studies provided by the industrial partners will be used to determine the most important data that has to be recorded during the system evolutions, to support evolutionary development. The low-intrusive monitoring infrastructure used to record this information is proposed in WP3. We will propose extensions to the current modelling and design frameworks to back-annotate the information learned during the system evolutions. We will provide model-transformations that use this information to improve the quality of decisions, increase reuse, reduce the development time, increase the quality of the final implementation, improve the overall engineering process and support the creation of safety-cases. WP2 covers the development of various modelling languages and the associated tools. These will include the following

• Models for back-annotation (e.g. extension of CHESS results?)• Models for structured and modular system development, ranging from early stage languages for

requirements elicitation to detailed design and implementation models (e.g. hierarchical extension of the CEA PsyC language for OASIS)

• Models for safety analysis with focus on safety analysis in the early phases of development• Techniques for model-driven design of user-interfaces, with a special focus on user interfaces for

safety-critical systems



Responsible: CISC – Markus Pistauer, Mikael starts


System safety must be considered from the very start of the project. It is thus important that all the formalisms and models used in the project are able to support safety analysis in an efficient way. The problems and challenges in this area are related both to modelling language – what can be expressed – and to the methods used for safety analysis – how can we use the information presented by the model in the most efficient way? In order to achieve an efficient safety analysis, it is also important to study the interplay between models and domain experts so that we can make tools (computers) and experts (humans) cooperate in the most efficient manner. This work should be based simple ideas like Fitts’ list and more advanced topics, such as research on human reliability This WP will also be responsible for the definition of the API's and data interfaces for provision of the monitoring and analysis results from WP3.


T2.1 Development of extensions to existing models and languages

Lead: ???

Contributors: CEA, RTU, ALM, TEC, NXP-A…

CEA:

1. Development of a hierarchical extension of the PsyC language (OASIS programming language) in order to allow compositional design directly in PsyC and in connection with higher-level models

2. Implementation of the mechanisms for model annotation and extraction of information to be back-annotated into higher-level models and provided to analysis and decision-aid tools

TEC:

1. Implementation of the mechanisms for semantic model annotation and extraction of information to be back-annotated into higher-level models and provided to analysis and decision-aid tools

T2.2 Development of modelling techniques for early-stage safety analysis

Lead:

Contributors: , …

T2.3 Techniques for specifying safety requirements

Lead: ??

Contributors: , …

This task is based on the output of T2.2, and will provide:

1. templates and techniques for specifying safety requirements. Here we will also build on and extend the work on requirements boilerplates from the ARTEMIS project CESAR

2. ontology-based support for analyzing completeness, consistency and standard compliance of safety



requirements<del>

TEC: In this task we would like to link variability management techniques to the safety related requirements. How can we manage at early safety requirements specification variability identification and management. This will provide information of decision making at early stages.

T2.4 Model-based development of user interfaces

Lead:

Contributors: CG, …



Work package title Monitoring and analysis infrastructure

Participant number



Objectives WP3 plays an important role in the overall workflow of DECISIVE represented by the technical work packages. Within this workpackage the needed evaluation, simulation and profiling techniques will be developed to generate data for the characterization of software/hardware components in respect to their runtime behaviour, memory footprint, power consumption, etc. This data will be used at runtime and design time of a software component. For reusing this information during the evolution of components it will be back annotated to the high-level model description (cf. WP2). In that sense WP3 covers the development of techniques, which can be distinguished by the time when they will be applied:

Design Time Methodologies: At design time the developer of a software component typically uses simulation and profiling techniques to debug, validate and optimise a given component. Here it will be necessary to implement a framework for the model-based analysis and design of distributed systems. This framework can also incorporate middleware architectures in respect to their RT behaviour, which will be the high level simulation approach within the project. To support model-based analysis techniques with exact results it is needed to implement a low level profiling methodology. This methodology must be able to profile a complete system platform constructed of software and hardware components. The hardware components typically



Responsible:NXP-A – Michael Stark or NXP-D


represent the execution platform of a software component. The methodology needs to be completely independent from the underlying architecture of the execution platform in order to support a wide variety of systems, e.g. simple single-processor embedded systems as well Network on Chip architectures.

Runtime Methodologies: To gather timing information of the runtime behaviour of a software component it is needed to develop monitoring infrastructures, which are ideally integrated in the kernel of the underlying operating system/runtime system. This information can be used for example for optimising RT scheduling mechanisms. For supporting software monitoring mechanisms integrated in the operating/runtime system hardware monitors are needed, which allow non-intrusively gathering of the profiling data. The monitoring infrastructures need to be as generic as possible in order to guarantee a unified approach across the different applications and measurements. In particular we want to achieve better usage of performance counters during execution, and simulation models to give detailed performance data about the dynamic behaviour of the platform. Several different aspects of performance metrics will be important, both those traditionally focused on (e.g. speed and memory consumption) and also additional metrics such as power consumption, which have recently seen increasing interest in response to energy and climate challenges as well as in the field of mobile devices. Hence, it is interesting to look into the use of performance counters and other HW-assisted monitors to estimate energy consumption.

Analysis Methodologies: Design and runtime methodologies generate massive amounts of data, which need to be managed and processed in a way, that the designer can use the information in a fast and efficient way. For that purpose WP3 will not only focus on the generation of analysis information, but as well on post-processing and database concepts for that special purpose.


T3.1 System support for runtime and simulation monitoring

Lead: Philips

Contributors: CEA, UC3M, Philips

CEA: Implementation in OASIS of the operating system support for runtime and simulation monitoring

UC3M: Contribute to the design of a monitoring infrastructure based on general purpose operating systems (possibly Linux RT) with the aim of analyzing the timing properties of systems. The fine tuning of the operating system will be required to integrate or export the appropriate hooks to analyze the fulfillment degree (perhaps based on probabilistic analysis) of the timing properties of a given system with the usage of a wide spread operating system which enables higher impact.

Philips: Philips Healthcare iXR will contribute via the design of a diagnostic infrastructure. This infrastructure consists of monitoring software for both the X-ray acquisition hardware as well as the PC-based infrastructure that controls them. The infrastructure collects this information, provides mechanisms to draw conclusions, and makes it available remotely.

T3.2 Model based analysis and simulation techniques



Lead: Philips

Contributors: MU, UC3M, TEC, Philips, NXP-D

MU: Infrastructure for evolving model based analysis and simulation

UC3M: UC3M will elaborate on a framework for model-based analysis and design of complex distributed systems (integrating service oriented structures, dynamic behavior, and timing properties). The modeling will pay special attention to the properties of the middleware technology used for the communication in complex distributed environments that have strict timing properties.

TEC: TEC will focus on the application of AI techniques as segmentation algorithms and pattern recognition to the model analysis.

Philips: Philips Healthcare iXR will define and implement models to analyse the data acquired by the diagnostics infrastructure to provide just-in-time support to products in the field and speed-up the diagnostics process.

NXP-D: NXP-D investigate novel work flows to advance automation in validation, NXP-D will define and implement regression test suites including automated pass/fail recognition, NXP-D will investigate and implement simulation and model based analysis for evolving systems

T3.3 HW Monitoring techniques

Lead: FHG-HHI

Contributors: FHG-HHI

FHG-HHI: Build System / Hardware Infrastructure for gathering monitoring data

T3.4 Profiling based analysis and simulation techniques

Lead: FHG-HHI

Contributors: FHG-HHI, NXP-A, NXP-D

FHG-HHI: Implementation of a system level software profiler for NoCs

NXP-A: NXP-A will define a laboratory test concept and equipment for automated verification supporting the integral concept and work on an automated data post-processing engine and report generators

NXP-D: NXP-D will work on a database approach allowing to store regression test results on different abstraction levels

T3.5 Abstract interpretation based analyses and profiling

Lead: IMDEA



Contributors: IMDEA

IMDEA: Implementation of automatic source-code analysis and exploration of tracing states using abstractions driven by the models

T3.6 Resource consumption prediction of modelling level constructs

Lead: MDH

Contributors: MDH

MDH: Development of techniques for deriving resource consumption (e.g., CPU time, memory, and energy) estimates of modelling level constructs. Such estimates are useful for estimating resource needs of a system already at the modelling stage, and will reduce the risk that in the end, the system will not meet its particular requirements (which might lead to costly late-stage redesigns). The approach will be based on a combination of statistical analysis and systematic run-time measurements on code generated from models (e.g., made on earlier version of the system).



Work package title Model management and visualization

Participant number



Objectives WP4 covers the development of methods and tools for the model editing/visualization and analysis results representation. This WP will accomplish the following activities:

• Support a process of easy development and understanding of complex embedded systems. • Support for all model development stages providing techniques for

1. efficient system editing,2. traceable system simulation, and3. comprehensible system analysis representation

• this contributes to maintaining consistency between various embedded systems specifications, possibly related to different co-existing modeling paradigms.



Responsible: Bauhaus Luftfahrt – Steffen Prochnow


• Generate different Views that are needed as input for “WP5 Decision making support”


T4.1 Survey of Users

Lead: BHL

Main contributors: EADS, Daimler, DCAITI

Activities:

Based on some representative cases using platform such as SIMULINK, STATEFLOW, etc. EADS will provide current Human Machine Interface issues that Engineers are facing while designing and performing simulation of complex system models.

T4.2 View generation

Lead: MDH

Main contributors: CAU

Finkelstein et al.’s work on viewpoint oriented systems engineering (VOSE) makes explicit the aspects that need to be considered and managed to build an effective system. When it comes to embedded systems in particular, approaches such as STATECHARTS and software cost reduction focus on the functional aspects, while techniques such as Tropos and intent specifications focus more on the systems and safety aspects. We will take such results as basis for research on traceability across different specifications/models, and as a base for generating a set of viewpoints as input for “WP5 Decision making support”.

Acitivities:

• Develop a “unified generic model” by which the different specifications can be linked.• Based on the “unified generic model” different views will generated and given as input to the

“Decision making model in T5.x”

T4.3 Support for efficient Model Editing

Lead: CAU

Main contributors: CAU, DCAITI

Graphical System models for embedded systems are commonly created using some “What You See Is What You Get” (WYSIWYG) editor. Even for novices WYSIWYG editors are very easy to use due to their intuitiveness. However, WYSIWYG editors can also be a limiting factor in the practical usability. Especially the editing of complex embedded system models raises further problems. Here, one is quickly confronted with large and unmanageable graphics originating from a high number of components or from intricate interactions and inter-dependencies. In this task we intend to develop alternative editing approaches for fast and effective modeling of complex systems models.



Acitivities:

This task benefits the model editing tasks (Task T2.1-T2.4) and will provide:

• Modeling style guides• Model layout• WYSIWYG improvements for modeling and editing of embedded system• Provide in-sync textual and graphical editors based on model-transformation• Support of editing syntactic model structure instead of graphical elements• Support of editing multivariate data tables • Support of editing hierarchical structures• Automated diagram generation as basis for T4.3 (view generation)

T4.4 Support for Understandable Model Simulation

Lead: DCAITI

Main contributors: CAU, DCAITI, BHL, RTU

Modeling tools generally support system model simulation, where the SUD is subjected to some input stimuli, and the system model is animated according to the current configuration of the SUD. These animation capabilities are so far rather limited; modeling tools often provide very restricted facilities to explore the structure and the behavior of complex system models. The paradigm generally offered is that the system model is shown as drawn by the user, and active states/components and transitions are marked in a specific color. This is fine if the model is small enough to be entirely visible on the screen; it becomes problematic for realistic, larger models.

Acitivities:

This task benefits the understanding of simulation results (Task 3.2) and will provide:

• Support for visualization of large amounts of simulation results• Visualization of relevant elements (focus+context)• “Dynamic” model simulation• Context-dependent exploration of Data and Dataflow• Visualization of system behaviour and data change over time• Integrated state-space and event/dataflow exploration • Enable user to understand relations between parameter settings and results

T4.5 Support for Analysis Results Representation

Lead: BHL

Main contributors: DCAITI, CAU, BHL, ALM, RTU, EADS?, NXP-A

Activities:



This task benefits the understanding of analysis results (Task T3.4 and Task T3.5) and will provide:

• techniques that enable users to understand relations between parameter settings and analysis results

• Large state space exploration • Cluster exploration for parametric analysis• Automatic isolation of meaningful analysis results• Associate automatically meaning with analysis results

T4.6 Experimental Evaluation of Support Tools

Lead: EADS

Main contributors: EADS, NXP-D, CAU, DCAITI, BHL, UC3M, RTU, LDZ

Activities:

This task will provide:

1. practical evaluation

o application on uses cases

2. “academic” evaluationo model and modelling measurements to justify metricso measure ease of creation and interactiono discover limits of techniqueso TBD



Work package title Design for evolvability

Participant number

Participant short name DTU COY KNR NSN UoO VTT BHL


20 12 6 18 20 28 10

Participant number

Participant short name NXP-D CG RTU LDZ Almende MU



Responsible:DTU – Paul Pop & VTT

http://www.mrtc.mdh.se/projects/decisive/doku.php?id=start:wps:tbd



20 11 6 2 18 30

TODO Question: where are the partner questionnaires? They should be put on the wiki! Question: who will be the WP5 leader? VTT Susanna Teppola – to be decided – Paul will start

working on WP description Question: Will Stig Larsson from MDH continue to be involved? From telco minutes: WP5: responsible Paul & Susanna. Objectives are long. Task need descriptions From telco minutes: Update of WP description: June 15 From telco minutes: The present descriptions are just copies from the Wiki. WP writers should

provide new versions before the next telco. This is needed to improve the generic parts of the section descriptions. Descriptions should include the input from the partner questionnaires. Important update would be to change bullet lists into sentences.

From telco minutes: Deliverables should be identified. Preferable we have 1-2 deliverables per task. Not more, as we should not overload ourselves with deliverables. One deliverable per task should suffice, but with regard to the two phases, two deliverables may sometimes be needed. Finally, do not give all deliverables the same deadline as they need time to be reviewed and accepted, by the same set of people. A task without deliverable should be integrated with another task.

From telco minutes: It was asked whether it is possible to describe each WP in a few words. This helps to explain the project better to industrial partners. The descriptions of a few lines in section 3.1 are not easy to understand.

Objectives The state-of-the-art methods in model-based engineering of embedded systems concentrate on the design and implementation, from scratch, of a new system. For many application areas, however, such a situation is extremely uncommon. Typically, a new product evolved from a previous version. Currently, the embedded system architectures are derived without any concern for extensibility. The focus of WP5 is to develop decision support methods and tools for the synthesis of system architectures that are extensible, thus greatly reducing the time and engineering effort required for evolutions. We will provide trade-off analysis tools that will allow a systems architect to decide the right amount of extensibility, without compromising other objectives such as performance, cost, energy consumption and dependability. Moreover, the information collected in WP3 and linked to the models in WP2 will be used to reduce the risk associated to early design decisions, such that the designer can find an implementation that not only meets the requirements, but also minimizes the risk of not meeting the design objectives. WP5 covers the usage of engineering knowledge created through the use of models and feedback from generated systems. The purpose of WP5 is to ensure that product development projects utilize the knowledge created in the project when decisions are made. This cover decisions on different levels, i.e. design, architectural, and business. It will include the development of the tools for presenting the collected information to the users (decision makers on different levels). The work package includes a substantial amount of data collection through interviews and surveys to understand what type of information would be needed and useful for decisions throughout development projects. To support this data collection, information regarding possible data from WP2, 3 and 4 is needed. Once the data is available, prototypes of how to present data from WP4 can be used for pilots, in workshop formats, and in real development projects (performed in WP6). A characteristic of the majority of approaches to the design of embedded systems is that it concentrates on the design, from scratch, of a new system optimised for a particular application. For many application areas, however, such a situation is extremely uncommon and only rarely appears in practice. A focus is therefore on evolving systems, typically with parts of the system being replaced in each



version/generation/variant of the product or system. The methods that will also include mechanism to separate concerns in complex systems allowing support for evolution (critical partition versus evolvable partitions) When a new product is developed, or a new version is introduced, the decisions taken in the very early design stages are critical. These decisions will influence the set of possible implementation, with an impact on everything from cost, performance, to energy consumption and reliability. However, there are many uncertainties in the information available in the early design stages.


T5.1 Investigation of needs from decision makers based on interviews and surveys Lead:Contributors: MDH, BHL

T5.2 Methods for utilizing available knowledge for project and portfolio decision Lead:Contributors: MDH

T5.3 Automation of result analysis and interpretation Lead:Contributors: NXP-D, ALM, RTU, LDZ, CG, BHL

T5.4 Evolution of safety runtime frameworks Lead:Contributors: IKERFrom the questionnaires: DTUDTU will perform research on methods and tools to support an evolutionary design process.Deliverable: Report on methods for evolutionary design; Trade-off analysis tools for evolutionary design.

DTU has been involved in proposing a method for the incremental design of distributed embedded systems, “An Approach to Incremental Design of Distributed Embedded Systems”, which has been nominated to the best paper award at the Design Automation Conference (DAC), 2001. Since then, DTU has focused on the evolutionary design of embedded systems by incorporating knowledge about previous designs into the design decisions.

The main effort of DTU will be on “WP5— Design for evolvability”, where the focus will be on decision support methods and tools for evolutionary design. DTU will also work with WP2 on how to capture the flexibility of a design into the current modelling framework.

ContribyteChange management practice Deliverable: Contribyte will develop a consistent, visible and traceable system change management practice.Market opportunity: Modeling, analysis, processes and toolsDevelop, prototype, and test a coherent and flexible tool support for evolutionary design and development



of model based products over the life cycle and across related processes and systems: Portfolio management; Requirement management; Release management; Test management; Source code management; Product data management; Application life cycle management; Product life cycle management

KONECRANESDevelop tools for transforming and evolving existing embedded mobile work machine control systems to and within the new high-level model description framework.Deliverable: Tools for evolving existing embedded mobile work machine control systems.

Improving market position: Artemis DECISIVE project will provide better tools for developing complex embedded control systems for work machines. These tools will enable faster new product generation, more flexible tailoring of our products and will also help to ensure the safety of such complex systems.

Project result: Faster design of embedded control systems & improved re-use of existing systemsExploitation: Faster product cycle, flexible tailoring of products.

Project result: Improved embedded systems development tools

NSN

Nokia Siemens Networks is developing its process and practices towards evolutionary mode of operation, thus it participates the work package 5 in purpose to compare its current practices and identify future improvement efforts.Deliverable: D5.1 Applied evolutionary development practices

UoO

University of Oulu will develop approaches for supporting system architect to make appropriate decisions that will result in right amount of extensibility in evolutionary development.Deliverable: D5.1 Definition of support system for architecture related decisions

VTT

Data collection and analysis to understand what type of information would be needed and useful for decisions throughout development projects.Deliverable: Report, publication and a seminar presentation on information needed to enable effective decision making in company’s development projects

BHL

Contribute to the tool requirements regarding data acquisition in interactive collaboration



Deliverable: State-of-the-art & requirements in interactive collaboration

Participate in the development of the prototype of decision support tool contributing decision support based on information gained from developers collaborationDeliverable: Status reports

Generate different Views that are needed as input for “WP5 Decision making support”

NXP-D

NXP-D will evaluate a compact visualization of the regression test results (automated post-procession engine for large data sizes, define report formats for an effective result analysis and interpretation, define decision criteria for result interpretationDeliverable: Report (formats / decision criteria)

Market: Integrated Circuits (high security chips for smart cards and e-government applications)NXP expects to achieve a higher productivity throughout the workflow of IC (integrated circuit) development. Key enabler is the more flexible modeling and the extended validation features on system architecture level. This will not only to improve the mixed signal flow for the next range of standard mixed signal designs, but also shorten the design cycle of these tough technical demands in the chip generations to come. It will bring complex and expensive development closer to “first time right” results and accordingly improve time-to-market significantly…this market is rapidly changing with regard to requirements and sizes. New applications demand increasing high integration of both digital and analog components, low-cost, interoperability, standards compliance, convenience and quality. To stay on top of this market short reaction times and fast ramp ups of new products are mandatory.

Project result: More efficient design infra-structure, faster and more effective way of working, resulting in and optimized workflowExploitation: The result of the project will be transferred into a new working flow for the design of integrated circuits starting with the development site in Germany. All new product designs and future product platforms will be created making use of the advancements of the new flow.Furthermore NXP will be able to profit from significant cost savings, due to faster validation of new developments and decreased efforts through a higher level of automation.

Computers Guard

T.5.3 Automation of result analysis and interpretationDeliverable: Development of the software interface of decision support tool for intelligent railway transport control system

Project result: Models and software of Decision support tool for intelligent railway transport control systemExploitation: Apply the project results in improving the quality of the future IT projects with lower effort.



RTU

Ldz

T.5.3 Automation of result analysis and interpretationDeliverable: Development of the prototype of decision support tool for intelligent railway transport control, using WP2 models and modeling environment

RTU

Project result: Prototype decision support tool for intelligent railway transport control systemExploitation: Apply the project results in improving the quality of the future research projects with lower effort

LDZ

Project result: Evaluation and validation of the prototype for railwayExploitation: Demonstration of the results in railway transport. Evaluates the possibility to use the developed system in railway transport

Almende

Automation of result analysis and interpretationDeliverable: Automated support for data aggregation and information extraction based on state-of-the-art data mining techniques; a reasoning and learning framework for embedded software systems evolution support, preferably through the application of self-organizing principles. Contribution to the derivation of high-level decision support information from low-level simulations with executable models or from run-time generated event traces.Technology: Various in-house developed visualisation techniques and tools for complex software structures;

Project result: Software Evolution FrameworkExploitation: The general software evolution framework resulting from the DECISIVE project will be specifically applied to wireless applications for live updates of the analysis and control software for large-scale sensor devices.

MU

Evolvability in MDD

It is necessary to ensure the interoperability of future electronic devices with current systems, as well as integrate software-enabled features and capabilities more efficiently into existing E/E systems. In order to ensure evolvability on MDD, we propose the following tasks:



1. Model Extensibility mechanisms for evolutionThere are different mechanisms that can help ensuring extensibility on software development:-Modelling languages and extensions (UML, UML profiles, etc.-Standarisation: initiatives such as Autosar help in gaining extensibility-Validation and Verification on modelsThis task will analyse mechanisms that can be used in MDD in order to obtain extensibilityDeliverable: Report about extensibility mechanisms for evolution

2. Evolution patterns and their impact on MDDThis task will analyse evolution patterns in MDD. Evolution will be considered in the following aspects: Functional evolution, QoS evolution, platform evolution, etc.Deliverable: Report about evolution patterns

3. Evolvability guidelines on MDD (willing to lead this task)-Impact of evolution patterns on MDD-Mechanisms vs. Evolution patternsMU will provide guidelines for facilitating evolution to meet new quality attribute requirements.Deliverable: Guidelines for facilitating evolution in MDD approach

Project result: Modeling extensions, evolvability guidelines...Exploitation: Training material for internal and external courses

From the wiki:

Task Lead Partners Description

T5.1 Stig Larsson MDH, BHL Investigation of needs from decision makers based on interviews and surveys

T5.2 MDH Methods for utilizing available knowledge for project and portfolio decision

T5.3 NXP-D, ALM, RTU, LDZ, CG, BHL Automation of result analysis and interpretation

T5.4 IKER Evolution of safety runtime frameworks for embedded systems with code generation, models and metamodels. Mechanism to separate concerns in complex systems allowing support for evolution (critical partition Vs evolvable partitions)

Detailed description of tasks

T5.1

Roles of the involved partners

Partner Task(s) PM Contribution to WP5



TEC TBD 16 TECNALIA will focus their work in providing techniques and tool support for handling decision making as well as automatic variability handling and decision resolution

DTU TBD 16 DTU will perform research on methods and tools to support an evolutionary design process. We will work with WP2 on the modelling framework for such methods.

DTU TBD 18 DTU will perform research on modelling these uncertainties and quantifying the risk associated with design decisions, such that the designer can find an implementation that not only meets the requirements, but also minimizes the risk of not meeting the design objectives.

RTU T5.3 6 RTU will participate in the development of the prototype of decision support tool for intelligent railway transport control, using WP2 models and modeling environment.

LDZ T5.3 2 LDZ will participate in the development of the prototype of decision support tool for intelligent railway transport control.

CG T5.3 11 CG will participate in the development of the software interface of decision support tool.

VTT TBD 30 VTT will participate in data collection to understand what type of information would be needed and useful for decisions throughout development projects.

Contribyte TBD 12 Contribyte will develop a consistent, visible and traceable system change management practice.

MDH T5.1 + others TBD

ISYS TBD 24 ISYS will focus their work on providing modelling solution to express variability of the system. The the semantic information of variability would be an essential input for decision-making support

NXP-D T5.3 12 NXP-D will work on an automated post-procession engine for large data sizes

NXP-D T5.3 4 NXP-D will define report formats for an effective result analysis and interpretation

NXP-D T5.3 4 NXP-D will define decision criteria for result interpretation

ALM T5.3 18 ALMENDE will develop automated support for data aggregation and information extraction based on state-of-the-art data mining techniques

MU TBD 30 MU will identify evolution patterns and their impact on MDD process

FHG-HHI T5.3 or TBD 6 FHG-HHI will work on post-processing of profiling results, such that the results can be applied and integrated easily in the decision making process

IKER T5.4 10 IKERLAN will deal with evolution of safety grade runtime frameworks for embedded with code generation, models and metamodels

BHL T5.1 1 BHL will contribute to the tool requirements regarding data acquisition in interactive collaboration

BHL T5.3 3 BHL will participate in the development of the prototype of decision support tool contributing decision support based on information gained from developers collaboration

Table should eventually be refined to include deliverables for each task



Work package title Industrial validation



Responsible: Integrasys – Pedro Ruiz


Participant number



Objectives WP6 covers the definition of use cases for the validation of DECISIVE approach. Industrial use-cases will be provided for the validation of DECISIVE approach. Candidate use-cases as reference models for the validation of DECISIVE techniques in terms of usability of the solution, efficiency, and benefits for the developed products will be specified. Metrics and evaluation techniques will be defined. These preliminary use cases will be further refined and implemented running on the DECISIVE reference platform demonstrating the full power of the approach for these cases. Feedback to technology providers Work Packages will be provided. The overall system including the methodologies, design tool, and platforms, will be benchmarked with the aid of these leading use-cases. This WP will accomplish the following activities:

• Specification of candidate use-cases as reference models for the validation of DECISIVE techniques in terms of usability of the solution, efficiency, and benefits for the developed products.

• definition of metrics and evaluation techniques• use cases refinement and implementation running on the DECISIVE reference platform in order to

demonstrate the full power of the approach for these cases. • benchmark of the overall system including methodologies, design tool, and platforms, with the aid

of the leading use-cases


T6.1 Industrial validation

Lead: ???

Contributors: CEA, LDZ

CEA:

• Definition of an OASIS meta-model for the generation of a graphical editor for PsyC for the validation of visualization techniques (TBC; in collaboration with Bauhaus-Luftfahrt)

• OASIS expert support for the industrial partners developing validatorsThis Task will accomplish the following activities:

• Validation and demonstration of project results

T6.2.1 Application to a Safety Critical with Certification case-study

Lead: ???

Contributors: LDZ, RTU, UC3M, PAJ, SYS, UES, IKER

This Task will accomplish the following activities:



• Methodology and tool application to an Safety Critical with Certification system (railway, aerospace, medical, …)

• Development of a prototype of the envisioned DECISIVE solutions and methodology for safety relevant industrial control (transport or wind turbines) supported by appropriated modeling including testing. Oriented to mixed criticality architectures and methodology to enable the co-existence of multiple applications of different levels of criticality on the same computational platform.

T6.2.2 Application to a Safety Critical without Certification case-study

Lead: ???

Contributors: RTU, CRF, AVL, ALM, TUE

This Task will accomplish the following activities: • Methodology and tool application to a Safety Critical without Certification system (automotive,

WSN, …)

T6.2.3 Application to a Non-Safety Critical case-study

Lead: ???

Contributors: NXP-D, OCE, TUE,

This Task will accomplish the following activities: • Methodology and tool application to a Non-Safety Critical system (printers, integrated circuits, …)

T6.3 Validation of the three case-studies

Lead: ???

Contributors: ISYS, NXP-D, MU, UES

This Task will accomplish the following activities: • Comparison of results achieved during the T6.2.1, T6.2.2, T6.2.3 respect to the requirements

defined in the WP1



Work package title Dissemination & exploitation

Participant number




Responsible: TDB or VTT – Susanna Teppola



Objectives WP7 covers all the dissemination and exploitation activities carried out in the project. The goal of the work package is to ensure project success by:

• creating awareness about the project by continuously disseminating the research results to critical stakeholders both in industrial and academic communities, and

• integrating and packaging the research results in exploitative form to be used by interested partners, both inside and outside of the consortium.

Effective strategies will be deployed to reach wide audience for project results. These includes: • Establishing a project web site and publishing the latest project news and results there,• Publishing regular project newsletters,• Preparing publications for relevant conferences and journals, • Participating in standardisation bodies, • Organising industrial and other exhibitions, workshops and seminars, • Exploiting and communicating about the project results among the project partners (particularly

the industrial ones).


T7.1 DisseminationTiming: M1-M36

Lead: ???

Contributors: all partners

All partners will work towards dissemination by publications in international, refereed journals and at targeted conferences, and will also be active in individual promotion. They will engage in normal dissemination activities within their areas of expertise. In addition, partners will work together for identifying and carrying out dissemination activities within specific areas, such as conferences and workshops, exhibitions, policy conferences, etcThe task will be initiated by the development of a dissemination plan setting out an agreed approach to dissemination throughout the project. The dissemination strategy is intended to optimise dissemination of project knowledge and results to scientific and medical communities, companies, diagnostic imaging vendors and healthcare organisations. The Consortium will approve the dissemination strategy and the detailed dissemination plan before any dissemination takes place.The dissemination goals will be achieved by various other means, including but not limited to: Courses of various types, conferences and workshops, printed documents, web sites, CDs, etc. The results of the technological research work conducted in the development work packages of the project will be submitted for publication to international, peer-reviewed journals according to the established dissemination plan. A project website will be set up, providing up-to-date information about the project and its results to the public. Goals will be established and followed regarding visitor statistics and a database of registered users will be established and used for dissemination.



This Task will accomplish the following activities: • Creation of basic dissemination material and awareness of the project• Development of detailed dissemination plan• Continuous dissemination according to dissemination plan• Education and training• Networking with relevant stakeholders and communities

T7.2 ExploitationTiming: M1-M36

Lead: ???


Industrial partners will use the results to improve their competitive position and business growth in the imaging diagnosis market. Knowledge management and intellectual property have an economical value that can be directly exploited, in terms of patents, business development and opportunities for creating spin-offs. Academia and research institutes will exploit knowledge, in terms of internal exploitation (training of personnel or students) and external exploitation (promotion of partners’ visibility in the research community). The creation of exploitation plans for the results of individual participants and for the Consortium will be the main point in this task. They will be created in order to ensure that the developed technologies have a significant impact in the market and that they do not stay as theoretical developments that never provide their benefits to potential users. The major results of the exploitation work package are the Market and Competitor Analysis and the Exploitation Plan. In order to represent the project actively, different activities will be undertaken. It will be important to establish liaisons with other relevant projects, standard organizations, and institutions that can be of benefit for the project. The different partners will establish contacts with other companies outside the Consortium and preparing the market for the technology adoption. These derived products, contacts, potential users and exploitation plans will be documented in a final version of the Exploitation Plan. The task involves the following activities:

• Investigate the commercial foundation in terms of user needs, market analysis and business models. Provide the necessary marketing material and demonstration platform for presenting the results to potential users

• Provide information about the potential products, competitors and the technology benchmarks, define the project market position and identify the potential market segments

• The business plans, based on various project results previously identified and on the previous analysis, will establish guidelines to the commercial deployment of the product/service the consortium and the individual partners want to exploit. A section of the plan will elaborate alternative exploitation strategies for those outcomes that cannot be commercialised following traditional business methods

T7.3 Standardisation

Timing: M1-M36

Lead: ???




Certain partners of the CHIRON Consortium are member to International Standardisation Bodies. We will identify one or more standardisation bodies that are relevant to the objectives of the Decisive project and use Decisive results in the standardisation activities. …


D7.1.1 Project website M3

D7.1.2 Dissemination and communication plan M6

D7.1.3 Final dissemination and communication plan M36 All partners

D7.2.1 Market and competitor analysis M24 All industrial partners

D7.2.2 Exploitation strategy and plan M24 All industrial partners

D7.2.3 Final exploitation plan M36 All industrial partners

D7.3.3 Standardisation plan M6

D7.3.2 Final standardisation plan M36 All partners



Table 3e Summary of effort

Summary of effortA summary of the effort is useful for the evaluators. Please indicate in the table number of person months over the whole duration of the planned work, for each work package by each participant.

Identify the work-package leader for each WP by showing the relevant person-month figure in bold.

Partic. no.

Partic. short name

WP1 WP2 WP3 … Total person months

1

2

3

Etc

Total



Section 4 - Market innovation and market impact (Weight Factor: 2) Please refer to the "Guide for applicants" for information on evaluation criteria

4.1 Impact

Describe the contribution, at the European and/or international level, to the expected impacts listed in the work programme under the relevant sub-programme and to the general ARTEMIS targets. Also describe any additional contributions to the broader ARTEMIS goals of industrial competitiveness, sustainability (environmental, energy, use of raw materials etc.), and helping the emergence of new markets or of applications that address societal challenges.

Contribution to European LevelThe DECISIVE project facilitates the transition from a vertically structured market to a horizontally structured market by focusing on software engineering of complex embedded systems as a crosscutting system discipline that transverses many traditional product and service segments. DECISIVE does not focus on any single application domain; instead our results will have high impact on all application domains where embedded software is a driver for growth and increasing competitiveness. In these segments, complexity and size of software makes an evolutionary approach to software development paramount to master increasing demands on cost-efficient development, cost-quality balancing and time-to-market.

Contribution to Artemis targetsThe DECISIVE project contributes to the Artemis targets in the following way:

• The project addresses the reduction of the cost of system design by 10% by providing a model and tools that bridge the gap from abstract design models to advanced hardware platforms with e.g. multi-/many-core, DSPs and GPUs, while still allowing the performance characteristics from such hardware to be modelled and analysed at the abstract model level.

• The project addresses the reduction of the development cycles by 25% by improving the development throughput and productivity by automating collection of system properties to support evolvability and decision making.

• The project addresses the target of managing an increase of complexity of a factor 3 with an effort reduction by 10% by providing methods and tools that improve ever increasing product management and upgrade requirements. This will be possible thanks to educated and evolved decision support with respect to product management and system architecture.

As a tangible result of the investigations and developments in the DECISIVE project, companies expect to achieve a higher productivity throughout the workflow of IC development. Key enabler is the more flexible modelling and the extended validation features on system architecture level. This will shorten the design cycle of technical demands in the product generations to come. It will bring complex and expensive development closer to “first time right” results and accordingly improve time-to-market significantly. Early feedback on the verification coverage of new designs based on evolutionary capabilities of models and a homogeneous concept for the whole system will make this possible. The environment of, e.g., integrated circuits can be included in a simulation to a larger extent, which supports early detection of non-compliance or interoperability issues. Contact-less identification chips for instance have by default a very complex power management. Only thorough estimation over all elements continuously updated with evolutionary data will help to reach higher efficiency, thus better performance and save cost.



Responsible: Frank van der Linden) + UEF + industry inputs


To quantify the above statements exemplified for the semiconductors industry the following rule of thumb calculation can be made. A new chip design (new platform) in contemporary technologies will have development cost in the range of 50+ M€12, every re-design cycle requires a Non-Recurring Engineering (NRE) of about 500k€, a simple correction cycle about 200k€, cost for test and verification after each cycle will be in the same magnitude. The time needed for another redesign, including production and test and verification afterwards will delay a new product for at least 9 months if not for a whole year. Furthermore, the commercial loss due to late delivery can be significantly higher.

Contribution to the degree of application innovationEmbedded systems are increasingly important within Europe. The DECISIVE project aims to improve the competitiveness of the European industry through the improvement of the development of embedded systems in many application areas, including (but not limited to) the areas represented by our industrial partners: healthcare, automotive, rail, aerospace, telecom and manufacturing.As a tangible result of the investigations and developments in the DECISIVE project companies expect to achieve a higher productivity throughout the workflow of embedded systems development. Key enabler is the more flexible modelling and the extended validation features on system architecture level. It will bring complex and expensive development closer to “first time right” results and accordingly improve time-to-market significantly. Early feedback on the verification coverage of new designs and a homogeneous concept for the whole system will make this possible. The environment of the embedded system can be included in the simulation to a larger extend, which supports early detection of non-compliance or interoperability issues.

Philips: The results of Decisive will be used to produce high reliable medical embedded systems for a lower development and maintenance cost. This reduces the cost-of-ownership of such systems. The first targeted systems will be used for the growing field of image guided intervention. Philips will raise its share in the interventional imaging market by offering integrated solutions. Through Decisive Philips will also be able to create a position in the expanding and profitable delivery system and therapy business areas. On basis of successful IGIT market propositions, Philips expects to generate €500M extra annual sales in 5 yearsGeneral the healthcare area:

• Global economic growth: increased spending on health related services, access to healthcare for a larger number of people and increased awareness of available healthcare options

• Dramatic changes in demographics; aging population:o By 2045 more people will be over 60 than under 15 years, rising from 600 million to 2

billion.o Rise in number of patients with age-specific, chronic and degenerative diseases

(cardiac, cancer, diabetes, Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s). The number of US patients with a chronic illness grows from 118 million in 1995 to 157 million in 2020. For Europe, a few key numbers are (Frost & Sullivan 2005):

o neurodegenerative diseases: 3,600,000 people affected with Alzheimero cardiovascular disease: 460,000 deaths of strokeo oncology: 240,000 deaths for breast cancer

• Healthcare professional staffing shortages rise, due to higher demand for patient attention• Efficiency and effectiveness of healthcare: need to further improve hospital work flow

efficiency, integration of diagnosis and treatment. E.g. the average length of stay for acute care has fallen in nearly all OECD countries - from 9 days in 1990 to 6 days in 2005

12 http://www.designchain.com/column.asp?id=2&issue=summer02



• Skyrocketing healthcare costs: global health care spending expected to grow from 9% of world wide gross domestic product (GDP) in 2006 to 15% by 2015

The global market for medical imaging (diagnostic and interventional imaging) is estimated to be $20B (2007 TriMark study). The European market is about a quarter of this total and the US market almost half. The medical imaging market records solid growth percentages. Depending on the modality, the average compound annual growth rate (CAGR) is about 4% (for interventional imaging this is 8%). There a few specific areas where growth is markedly higher than average. Image-based software applications that support intervention processes in healthcare. The MEDUSA consortium is active in several medical imaging software segments such as for 3D/4D medical imaging software, clinical decision support systems (CDSS), navigation software and user interfaces. To illustrate these growth opportunities:

• The European market for 3D/4D imaging software has a CAGR of 14% from 2004-2014• The global CDSS market grows from €159M to €289M during 2006-2012 (Frost & Sullivan)

OCE: The results of DECISIVE will be used for capturing multidisciplinary design information, including formalisms to describe dynamic behaviour and to specify latitudes and tolerances for systems for document management and printing for professionals. Tools to generate executable models of the physical system and to generate control code from the dynamic behaviour descriptions taking into account for example specified tolerancesAlmende: The results of DECISIVE will be used to develop of self-organized critical agent-based solutions that sustain and improve the coordination of communication and collaboration across evolving networks of humans and ICT systems. These solutions will be applied to several application domains, including healthcare, logistics and crisis management.

4.2 Dissemination and exploitation

Describe the plans and measures for the dissemination and exploitation of project results. Show how the project results would be used to produce innovative products, processes or services that have a significant market potential. Include if relevant a market analysis section including competitor descriptions and market opportunities.

To make the project objectives, key technological innovations and project results of DECISIVE visible to the world, a broad range of dissemination channels are needed. Academic and industrial partners will effectively organise these channels. This ensures synchronisation of publications and conference presentations in the relevant fields; presence on the Internet and at embedded systems events; press releases, workshops and on-site demo installations.

Project disseminationProject identity: The development of a common public identity for all public communication, including logo, presentation template and a general information brochure. Internet: The Internet is an important dissemination channel for DECISIVE. A public project website will be set-up and maintained. The partners are encouraged to incorporate a page presenting the project into their academic or corporate websites. Social media like Linked-In and Twitter will be used to create public information channels to stakeholders inside and outside the consortium. Workshops: Internal workgroups and expert sessions will take place at 6-month intervals, in order to assure the most efficient communication and project development. Four external workshops with potential interested parties will be organised to bring together research teams and end-users to show potentials and get buy-in from the public. Two of these workshops will be organised in collaboration with other projects working on relevant fields to improve mutual dissemination.



Demo installation: Running demos at the sites of industrial partners and at domain specific and fair events will interactively show the status of developments and the potential for applications. The DECISIVE consortium will cooperate with the EC and ARTEMIS JU to disseminate information through the EU supported R&D initiatives: ARTEMIS events, scientific and public events of the EC, international conferences, workshops and synopsis. This will be useful for increasing awareness about the project within the EU and identifying and promptly seizing any possibility for cooperation with other JU and Eureka funded projects.

Partner dissemination and exploitationEvents: The target audience for DECISIVE will be engaged at national, international, and EU congresses, fairs, and exhibitions. Participants in these events will be targeted to promote both uptake of specific developments and a wider interest in the project as a whole. Several conferences are accompanied by exhibitor presentations, where partners present and inform the visitors about advances in the field of embedded systems etc. Relevant participants will integrate this commercially driven dissemination with academic presentations.Scientific publications and conferences: Independent studies based on the findings and conclusions produced during the development phase will be produced by project experts and be published in relevant peer-reviewed journals and international conferences. The multi-disciplinary nature of the project means we will ensure that the project results will be published in the relevant journals to fully disseminate project advances. Articles for the wider and more general audiences will be published in connection with conferences and lectures and sent to relevant online and print magazines. The most relevant conferences and meetings are summarized in the following list:

• ACM Conference on Embedded Network Sensor Systems• IEEE International Conference on Embedded and Real-Time Computing Systems and

Applications• IEEE Real-Time and Embedded Technology and Applications Symposium• International Conference on Pervasive and Embedded Computing and Communication

Systems• ACM SIGPLAN/SIGBED Conference on Languages, Compilers, Tools and Theory for Embedded

Systems• Embedded Systems Week

The technology and products to be developed in the DECISIVE project are planned to be exploited in various ways by the various partners, as summarised briefly below. Research and academic: The academic partners will exploit the project results by integrating them into the educational curriculum, and hence train and educate MSc and PhD students in the field of the project topics. They will participate in relevant academic events like conferences, workshops and organisation of national and local events on the project results.Intellectual property: Exploitation will also be undertaken by the generation of patents when critical and innovative results are obtained in the fields of technology or in case of new openings for applications. The DECISIVE consortium is well aware of the importance of Intellectual Property Rights issues to develop common and individual dissemination and exploitation strategies and its policy in this regard is in accordance with the Commission’s recommendation on the management of IPR and knowledge transfer, in order to “facilitate and promote the optimal use of intellectual property created in public research organisations to increase both knowledge transfer to industry and the socio-economic benefits resulting from publicly funded research”. In this respect, an agreement will be developed during the project execution taking into account the following preliminary agreements:

• Concerning exploitation of the project results, it is the intention that the partners’ preexisting know-how will be made available to the consortium members on favourable conditions if this should be necessary in order to perform the research in this project.



• Foreground knowledge is owned by the partner generating such information or result. Each partner shall make its foreground knowledge available to other partners on a royalty-free basis, to the extent that such information is necessary for the production of their own foreground knowledge.

• Throughout the execution of the project, all partners will continuously contribute to the identification of project results that may qualify for IPR protection. In case certain IP is identified to be essential for the future business opportunities of the involved partners, the necessary steps are taken to protect that IP. The patenting procedure will be in line with the regulations described in the Consortium Agreement (CA).

New activities: The increased level of knowledge, technology, and/or product portfolio will enable new customer projects and/or R&D projects; in the various fields related to embedded systems. Commercial products and services: The industrial partners will use the project results to leverage the development of their commercial products. This will require high integration of both digital and analogue components, low-cost, interoperability, standards compliance, convenience and quality. The commercial market for these applications is large and is growing fast. Furthermore, tools and methods developed in DECISIVE will also be applicable in a cross-domain fashion to tackle similar issues that exist beyond a particular sector such as certification, product upgrades and obsolescence management. Thus, a wide commercial service demand and adoption are to be expected.

4.3 Contribution to standards and regulations

Describe any contributions to standards which may arise from the proposed project and explain their importance as requested in section 4.6 of the Annual Work Programme 2011.

During the last few years, standardization has been identified both by the European Commission (EC) and by industry as a new issue of strategic importance for the creation of markets. It was one of the concerns of the EC, especially of the Embedded Systems Unit of the Directorate General 'Information Society and Media', that the results of funded research projects are having only a minimal impact on standardization. DECISIVE will work with the Standards Working Group of ARTEMIS, the European Technology Platform for Embedded Intelligence and Systems, which e.g. proposed an FP7 support action ProSE (Promotion of Standardization for Embedded Systems), to promote standardization in the (dependable) embedded systems field.The research and development in DECISIVE project will fulfil the regulations and recommendations written in the ARTEMIS Strategic Research Agenda (SRA) for standardization. With respect to standardization, the key objectives for DECISIVE are:

• Disseminating knowledge of existing standards within the various embedded systems domains.

• Providing a set of good candidates for standardization in a systematic and selective manner.• Proposing a practicable methodology for the candidate’s maturation towards their eventual

acceptance, so as to enable or facilitate cross-domain compatibility and a higher degree of reusability of project results.

DECISIVE project will utilize and establish links between the embedded systems industry (facilitating the engagement of SMEs), EU standardization bodies (CEN, European Standardization Committee), CENELEC (European electrotechnical/electronic Standards Committee), ETSI (telecommunications industry), AUTOSAR (automotive system/software architecture, etc) and worldwide standardization bodies (ARINC (aircraft), ITU (transportation), ISO (International Standards Organization), IEC (International Electrotechnical Commission), etc), and the research community (particularly Networks of Excellence)



4.4 Management of intellectual property

Describe the arrangements made by the consortium for the management of intellectual property brought to the project by the participating partners, and arising from the joint work within the project.

(Recommended length for the whole of Section 4 – 10-15 pages)



Section 5 - Quality of consortium and management (Weight Factor: 1) Please refer to the "Guide for applicants" for information on evaluation criteria

5.1 Management structure and procedures

Describe the organisational structure and decision-making mechanisms of the project. Show how they are matched to the complexity and scale of the project.(Recommended length 5 pages)

The DECISIVE consortium contains 35 partners from 10 countries, each of them having a very clear role in the project and all sharing a strong commitment towards its achievement. For each country the partners of that particular country have appointed a Country Coordinator (CC) (See Annex B), who is responsible to coordinate the national proposal, project progress, and reporting and communication with national authorities.This section presents the main organization principles. The Project Leader (PL) will be responsible for the coordination and day-to-day management of the project throughout its whole lifecycle. PL is the primary interface to contacts and organizations external to the project. In this role, PL is supported by the Work Package Leaders (WPL) and Country Coordinators (CC) who, on a regular basis, will provide PL with all necessary technical and organizational information. Each CC will send a biannual status update (with, e.g., the expended effort, technical achievements, etc.) to the PL. When recognizing major problems, PL has the possibility to call for an extraordinary meeting of the Project Coordination Committee (PCC) or Project Management Team (PMT) or a full meeting of the partners depending on the type or severity of the problem.The Project Coordination Committee (PCC) is responsible for all strategic and financial decisions; the PCC will be composed of one representative from each partner; each representative should be in a position (inside his/her own organization) which allows him/her to make decisions and to take corrective actions if needed, for all matters regarding effort allocation and priorities, and will be responsible for the partner's involvement in the project.

PMTProject coordinator

Project management

WP0

Technical manager

WP1 WP2 WP4 WP6

Generalassembly

Project manager

WP3 WP5 WP7

Exploitation manager

Figure 3: project management

The Project Management Team (PMT) is responsible for the daily operation of the project and consists of a Project Leader (PL), Technical Coordinator (TC), Exploitation Manager (EM), Work Package Leaders (WPL) and Country Coordinators (CC) who together will be in charge of the



Responsible: Frank van der Linden + all partners


technical decisions as well as the quality check of the deliverables. PMT will identify problems and risks and coordinate technical risk mitigation action plans with the approval of the PCC.PCC and PMT will meet face-to-face or via video-conferencing, every three months. In the mean-time, other meetings will be arranged if needed, including audio-conferences when appropriate. It is assumed that most (not to say all) decisions will be made by consensus. However, in case this is not achievable, the controversial decision will be voted at the majority; in case of equality, the project leader will make the decision. Technical meetings, focused on specific technical topics, will be encouraged. Biannually, PL will send a short update to the project officer, by email, to report on status. A project internal file repository/web site and mailing lists will be set up at the beginning of the project, to facilitate sharing of information amongst partners.

Work Organization The project has been organized in eight work packages, themselves composed of tasks. Work tasks will be named “Tx.y”, where “x” is the work package number, and “y” is the number of the task. Deliverables will be assigned to tasks and will therefore be named “Dx.y.n”, where “x.y” is the task number and “n” is the number of the deliverable inside the work task. Each work package is under the responsibility of a Work Package Leader (WPL) who is in charge of the overall quality of the work achieved in this area. Each work task has itself a Work Task Leader (WTL), who is responsible for the quality of the work done within the work task, including the timely delivery of deliverables.

Decision making mechanisms and conflicts resolution In DECISIVE, the quite detailed project planning makes it possible to let most of the detailed technical decisions to be taken in a decentralized and bottom-up manner. First, partners working together in a work package identify and solve open issues on their own. Next, these findings are contemplated in the PCC on a regular basis with respect to the other work package’s concerns. In some cases the PCC may get to a point where a very fundamental decision has to be taken, having a great impact on the general direction of the entire project or gravely influencing one of its major objectives. Then, this decision is forwarded to the PCC. In contrast, management issues are handled by the PCC in the first place. On all levels, conflicts should primarily be resolved by finding a solution that is well acceptable for all partners. Only if this is not achievable, the issue is put to the vote. Equal votes are resolved by the WP Leader or Project Leader respectively.

Information FlowExchange of information will mainly occur via an internal wiki work area. The basis of the project communication lies upon the adoption of mailing lists, one for technical and business development matters and a closed one for administration and evaluation purposes. A global mailing list will be used for project management announcements. Sub-lists will be used to support country and WP specific communication. Partners will be individually responsible for communication by mail and organising technical meetings within tasks.

Quality proceduresFor each Project Deliverable, each partner has to provide a specific contribution according to the project Work Plan and the Action Item List, provided by the WP Leader at the start of each Work Package and agreed by the partners participating in the work package and the PCC. Each partner will apply its individual Quality Procedures in order to self-assess his/her own contribution. For the Major Deliverables of public dissemination type, a review procedure with the following steps will be adopted: release by the Work Package Leader to the Technical Coordinator (TC), two-week review period for comments by PCC, two-week amendment period to incorporate PCC recommendations, one-week balloting period for final approval by the PCC. For other deliverables, the following review procedure will be adopted: release by the Work Package Leader, one-week balloting period for comments by all PCC members. In any case, the comments of each partner are communicated by



email addressing all other involved partners in the deliverable (mainly by using mailing lists). The responsible partner is responsible to forward guidelines for the incorporation of comments to all other related partners according to a specific time schedule.

5.2 Individual participants

For each participant in the proposed project, provide a brief description of the legal entity, the main tasks they have been attributed, and the previous experience relevant to those tasks. Provide also CVs of the individuals who will be undertaking the work.(Recommended length: one page per participant + CVs)

Philips Medical Systems Nederland BV

Royal Philips Electronics is a leading healthcare and well-being company. In healthcare, Philips’ innovation revolves around improving the quality and efficiency of healthcare through a focus on care cycles. Central to care cycle thinking is a patient-centric approach that optimizes healthcare delivery for all the major diseases. In the Philips Healthcare (PH) sector, over 12% of systems sales are invested in R&D. The last 3 years PH strengthened its global leadership position by market share gains, margin expansion and enhancement of its competitive position with key acquisitions and partnerships. Underlying this leadership position is that Philips combines its expertise in medical technology with the clinical know-how of its customers to produce innovative solutions that meet not just the needs of individual patients, but which also enable healthcare professionals to work faster, more easily and more cost-effectively. While PH has a large global organization, in the Netherlands 3500 people work at PH, of which 1000 in R&D. Sales of PH’s total sector amounted to 7.8B€ in 2009. Philips is globally number one in medical diagnostic imaging and patient monitoring. More information on PH can be found at: http://www.medical.philips.com.

Main role in the projectPhilips Healthcare is project coordinator. Philips Healthcare is involved in the various tasks related to model base simulation and run-time assessment of quality.

Staff members profileDr. Frank van der Linden works at Philips Healthcare CTO Office. He received his Ph.D. in Mathematics in 1984 at the University of Amsterdam. His main topics of interest are software architecture and processes, emphasizing software product line engineering. He was involved in Esprit-projects (FP1, FP2 and FP4) and project leader of the three successive ITEA projects on product line engineering: (ESAPS, CAFÉ, FAMILIES – 1999-2005), and successively on distributed development, including open source development (COSI 2005-2008). As part of these projects he was member of the organizing committee of a series of workshops on conferences in product lines (PFE & SPLC). In the last years he has organised several workshops on open source and product lines.He is editor of many proceedings of SWAPF (Software Architectures for product Families), PFE (Product Family Engineering) workshops and SPLC (Software product lien conference. He is co-author of several books on Software product lines.Robert Huis in ’t Veld Studied computer science at the Technische Universiteit Eindhoven. In 1994 he did his PhD at this university on “Developing a design framework for communication systems”. Between 1992 and 1996 he was working at the Technische Universiteit Twente and connected to the Race Project Cassiopeia en the Dutch national project Platinum. In 1996 he moved to Philips. He has been working as system architect for Philips Digital Transmission Systems, as programme manager at Philips Semiconductors, aand as technical product manager at Philips Consumer Electronics and finally as system architect bij Philips iXR.



AVL List GmbH

AVL is the world's largest privately owned company for development, simulation and testing technology of power trains (hybrid, combustion engines, transmission, electric drive, batteries and software) for passenger cars, trucks and large engines. The company is acting global and has 4.570 employees (2.050 in Graz, and an additional 2.520 world-wide). Turn over in 2010 was 650 M€, where approx. 12.5 % of is invested in company-financed research.

Main role in the project

Staff members profile

CISC Semiconductor Design+Consulting GmbH



NXP Semiconductors Austria GmbH



Technical University of Denmark

DTU Informatics, at the Technical University of Denmark, is the largest IT department in Denmark and represents a unique combination of modern applied mathematics and computer science & engineering. DTU Informatics employs around 90 PhD students with an annual production of 30 PhDs. The section on Embedded Systems Engineering (ESE) is one of ten sections in DTU Informatics. ESE conducts research in a broad range of topics central for design of modern embedded systems, including real-time systems, fault-tolerant and safety-critical systems, hardware/software co-design, concurrent and parallel programming, heterogeneous distributed multi-core architectures and execution platforms, as well as a range of models, methods and tools for the analysis, design and verification of such systems. http://www.imm.dtu.dk/ Starting with early work on hardware/software partitioning within the Lycos system, ESE has a lot of experience on modelling, analysis and deign methods for software-intensive embedded systems. ESE has been involved in proposing a method for the incremental design of distributed embedded systems, “An Approach to Incremental Design of Distributed Embedded Systems”, which has been nominated to the best paper award at the Design Automation Conference (DAC), 2001. Since then, ESE has focused on the evolutionary design of embedded systems by incorporating knowledge about previous designs into the design decisions.

Main role in the projectThe main effort of DTU will be on “WP5— Design for evolvability”, where the focus will be on decision support methods and tools for evolutionary design. DTU will also work with WP2 on how to capture the flexibility of a design into the current modelling framework.



Staff members profileAssoc. Prof. Paul Pop ping University in 2003 and since 2006 he is an associate professor at DTU Informatics, Technical University of Denmark. His research is focused on developing methods and techniques for the analysis and optimization of dependable embedded systems. In this area, he has published 11 journal papers, 6 book chapters, one book and over 30 conference papers. He and has received the best paper award at DATE 2005, RTiS 2007 and CASES 2009. His research on models has been highlighted as “The Most Influential Papers of 10 Years DATE”. He has served as technical program committee member on several relevant conferences, such as DATE and ESWEEK.

PAJ Systemteknik

PAJ Systemteknik is a private owned SME situated in Sønderborg, Denmark, a single source supplier of mechatronics. PAJ was established by owner Poul Jessen in 1996 and employ today approximately 29 professional and engaged employees. PAJ Systemteknik produces safety critical mechatronical equipment for industries where reliability is the main criterion. Using platform technology PAJ is able to provide mechatronical development, sourcing, assembly and test in low volumes at competitive prices and with increased customer value in terms of increased reliability and reduced risk as a result of testing and traceability. The core competence is the creation of safety critical components. Marketing and distribution to end-user through OEMs who are monitoring market needs and specify them to the PAJ in the sales phase. PAJ Systemteknik is targeting customers who seek long term profitable collaboration. These customers are in the short term located in Denmark, Germany and Sweden. In the longer term, Europe is the market. The best customers are larger companies who market products where a part of or the entire product consists of complex safety critical mechatronical parts. PAJ Systemteknik has developed special resources within Medico and Traffic sectors.





Contribyte Oy



Konecranes Heavy Lifting Corporation



Mega Electronics Ltd

MegaKoto Oy



Nokia Siemens Networks



SamFinder Oy



University of Eastern Finland





University of Oulu



Technical Research Centre of Finland

VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland is a government organisation operating under the auspices of the Finnish Ministry of Employment and the Economy. VTT’s objective is to develop new technologies, create new innovations, and value added, thus increasing clients' competitiveness and competencies. With it’s know-how, and with it’s staff of 2900 VTT experts, VTT produces research, development, testing and information services to public sector and companies as well as international organizations. VTT has gained considerable experience in embedded systems and software from numerous research and industrial projects. These projects have been carried out in close co-operation with Finnish companies in multiple branches of industry. VTT’s research centers in ICT research area bring large expertise on software product quality, software process improvement and measurement, component based software engineering, software reuse, product information management, proof of concept methods, software security assurance, e.g. static analysis, security assurance of industrial automation systems and information security and safety testing, for example.

Main role in the project VTT is the leader in Dissemination and Exploitation Work package. As a Research Institute and having background of participating in many international research projects, VTT is experienced as an organizer and coordinator of dissemination and exploitation activities. In Decisive VTT is also involved in the various tasks related to how to support iterative, evolutionary SiS design and decision makers throughout development projects via visual and semantic models of systems. VTT has actively contributed in several international projects in which MDD have been studied both from technical, processes, and practices point of view. VTT is also a strong player in researching iterative and incremental development methods (i.e. Agile and Lean) in SiS (Software Intensive Systems) development, in which area VTT has published numerous scientific articles.

Staff members profile Lic.Sc. (Tech.) Tuomas Ihme is a Senior Research Scientist at VTT, the Technical Research Centre of Finland. His professional experience involves several years in the industry as a project manager as well as more than 20 years in research of embedded software and management of industrial development projects and national joint research projects. His areas of expertise are architectural design methods, modelling tools and software architectures in component software, product lines and agile software development. He has authored more than thirty scientific publications. M.Sc Susanna Teppola works as a Research Scientist in Software Technologies research area at VTT. Susanna has a Master of Science degree from University of Oulu from the department of Information Processing Sciences, and she has worked at VTT since 1999. Susanna’s main interests are in the field of product management, software development methods and process improvement. Susanna has participated in the ITEA2-MoSiS and in the ITEA2-Evolve projects, in which MDD processes and practices have been her main research topics. In that area Susanna has authored several conference articles.

Atego SAS

Atego Systems Ltd is a leading independent supplier of industrial-grade, collaborative development tools and runtime environments for engineering complex, mission- and safety-critical architectures, systems, software and hardware. Atego delivers a stable, robust working environment to thousands



of users across an extensive range of complex applications in demanding engineering sectors such as aerospace, defence, automotive, transportation, telecommunications, electronics, and medical. Founded in 2010 in a merger between Artisan Software Tools™ and Aonix®, Atego is headquartered in Cheltenham, UK and Paris, France with offices in the U.S., Germany and Italy, and is supported by a global distributor network. Atego is committed to the support of standards and is an active member of the Object Management Group (OMG). Atego also provides professional services including training, consultancy and customisation that cover the whole of the system and software engineering life cycle. These services are delivered by our team of world-class systems professionals. Atego are thought-leaders in systems thinking through our many publications, for which we have won several awards.

Main role in the project Atego is an industrial partner that carry to the project its expertise in modelling safety critical systems and certification, the Artisan Studio tool, and support the DECISIVE results by developing a prototype. Atego is involved in tasks that are related to modelling the safety (critical) system.

Staff members profile Sébastien Rocher received a Ph.D. in Robotics at the Laboratoire de Robotique de Paris , Université Pierre et Marie Curie (paris VI). Sébastien has ten years of expertise in the industrial development of critical systems (that should be certified). Sébastien distinguishes himself as the responsible for the verification process of the CBTC system (railway application domain). Since 2009, he is certifier for railway systems. Since 2010, Sébastien is the responsible for all Atego France research projects.

Daniela Cancila received a Ph.D. in Theoretical Computer Science from the University of Udine, Italy. From 2008 to 2010, she is a Research Engineer at the “Commissariat à l’Energie Atomique et aux Energies Alternatives” (CEA), France. She has been teaching computer science at Italian and French universities. She has a strong record of publications in the main international workshops, conferences and journal in the field of computer science. Her research interests include methodologies, design and tools for model-based engineering of critical systems; safety issues and their integration in model-based engineering approaches.

Commissariat à l'Energie Atomique et aux Energies Alternatives



European Aeronautic Defence and Space Company EADS France SAS

EADS is a leading global aerospace and defence company, whose business depends heavily on the development and integration of state-of-the-art technologies in its products to provide the necessary competitive edge in its markets. A global network of Technical Capability Centers, collectively known as EADS Innovation Works, is operating the corporate Research and Technology (R&T) laboratories that guarantee the company’s technical innovation potential with a focus on the long-term. The structure of the network is consistent with the EADS R&T strategy and covers the skills and technology fields that are of critical importance to EADS. The teams within EADS Innovation Works are therefore organized into seven transnational Technical Capability Centers. Supporting all the EADS Business Units, they have the mission to identify new value-creating technologies and to develop technological skills and resources.



EADS Innovation Works fosters technological excellence and business orientation through the sharing of competences and means between the various partners of the EADS Group and develops and maintains partnerships with world-famous schools, universities and research centers. Within this organization, the “Intelligent & Semantic Systems” team will be responsible for the work done within Decisive project. This team focuses on themes such as semantic technologies, innovation management, knowledge engineering, artificial intelligence (machine learning) and user-UI interactions. As such, members of the team involved in the Decisive project will be researchers working with EADS business units on problems regarding Model Based Development platforms usability.

Main role in the project EADS is involved in the various tasks related to model management and visualization.

Staff members profile Romaric Redon is an experienced engineer in the field of knowledge engineering. He was graduated in mechanical engineering in 1999 and started straightforwardly to work in the knowledge engineering field with AIRBUS. He started with operational projects aiming at the development of Knowledge Based Engineering (KBE) applications in the structural domains. Then he joined the information technologies for engineering department in EADS Corporate Research Center in 2001. There he developed research activities linked to the use of innovative Knowledge based system to assist or automate engineering processes and facilitate knowledge sharing and retrieval. In 2009 he took the leadership of the Intelligent and Semantic system research team in EADS Innovation Works. The objective of this research team are to develop innovative capabilities based on AI data mining, semantic technologies and knowledge engineering to support engineering and maintenance activities in EADS Richard Leblond is an experienced engineer in the field of knowledge engineering. He obtained a DEA in Oceanography in 1979 and was graduated in industrial computer sciences in 1984 started to work in the CAD/CAM field in the Technical Center of Aerospatiale then Aerospatiale-Matra. He followed with projects aiming at introducing knowledge based systems applications in design and engineering activities for several Bus in particular for the design office of AIRBUS. Within the EADS Corporate Research Center he developed and contributed to research activities in Knowledge Engineering. He was graduated in 1996 with a DEA in Ergonomics. He participated during the last years in several EU projects (VIVACE, APOSDLE) for EADS Innovation Works. He was nominated as EADS Knowledge Engineering expert and is in charge of projects concerning Human Factors and Innovation.

Bauhaus Luftfahrt e.V.

Bauhaus Luftfahrt was created in November 2005 by the three aerospace companies EADS, Liebherr-Aerospace and MTU Aero Engines as well as the Bavarian Ministry for Economic Affairs. The non-profit association is an internationally-oriented think tank. The team of around 35 scientists deals with the future of mobility in general and with the future of air travel in particular. The goal of the research work is to consider the complex system of aviation from different points of view. In every project, the technical, economic, social and ecological aspects are considered holistically. More information on Bauhaus Luftfahrt can be found at: http://www.bauhaus-luftfahrt.net.

Main role in the project Bauhaus Luftfahrt is WP4 leader. Bauhaus is involved in various tasks related to tools and methods for easy editing, comprehension and maintainability of complex embedded systems and decision support. We will focus on

• efficient model editing,



• understandable system simulation, and • meaningful representation of analysis results.

Staff members profile Dr. Steffen Prochnow received a Diploma degree in computer science from the Technische Universität of Braunschweig/Germany in 2003 and a doctorate in software engineering from the University of Kiel/Germany in 2007. His research in Kiel focused on the human-centric Statechart modeling process. He has worked as a research engineer in the field of component-based system modeling and system analysis at the VERIMAG research Labs in Grenoble/France. During the time at VERIMAG he contributed to the EU SPEEDS project with an analysis of hierarchical system components. He joined the computer science group at Bauhaus Luftfahrt in October 2010.

Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel

The RTSYS group at CAU (http://www.informatik.uni-kiel.de/rtsys) has explored pragmatics-aware modelling with various facets, including novel visualisation, version-management, editing and browsing paradigms. These efforts have been evaluated and validated with experimental design environments and cognitive studies. To that end, KIEL (Kiel Integrated Environment for Layout) and its successor, KIELER (KIEL Eclipse Rich Client), have been used extensively as experimental platforms for numerous projects, including about 25 publications and 40 theses.

Main role in project CAU will mainly be involved in developing pragmatics-aware modelling that aims to increase designer productivity when designing complex systems. This includes novel view-management methods (Task 4.2), support for efficient editing (Task 4.3), and support for model simulation (Task 4.4).

Staff Members Profile Reinhard von Hanxleden ([email protected]) is full professor at CAU since 2001. He conducted his studies of Computer Science and Physics at CAU and the Pennsylvania State University (M.Sc., 1989), followed by dissertation work at Rice University (Ph.D., conferred 1995). He then joined DaimlerChrysler R&D, until 2000 in Berlin, then – with the Airbus A380 development – in Toulouse and Hamburg. At DaimlerChrysler (now Daimler), his research focus was model-based design of safety-critical systems. This – for realistic, complex systems rather frustrating – industrial experience with modelling tools motivates his continued interest in pragmatics-aware model-based design. Prof. von Hanxleden has been a research visitor to UC Berkeley (2007), is affiliated to the EU Artist2 Network of Excellence, and chairs the steering committee for the WCET Tool Challenge 2011 (WCC'11). Miro Spönemann ([email protected]), member of the scientific staff of the RTSYS group, has studied Computer Science at CAU from 2003 until 2009 (diploma with distinction). His diploma thesis was on the automatic layout of data flow diagrams, which also has been covered in a publication at the International Symposium on Graph Drawing (GD) 2009.



Fraunhofer Gesellschaft zur Förderung der angewandten Forschung e.V.



NXP Semiconductors Germany GmbH



Centro Ricerche Fiat S.C.p.A



Computers Guard



Latvian Railway



Riga Technical University



Almende

Almende is a research company specializing in information and communication technologies aimed at supporting self-organization. At the core of all Almende research are hybrid agent networks: humans and computers working together in one system. In 2006 Almende BV has been awarded the European Eureka status for Innovative ``market oriented R&D''. Almende is member of the European Agentlink network bringing together knowledge and expertise on multi-agent systems. Almende is



also member of the Dutch DevLab initiative, in which SME's have bundled their innovative strength in the fields of embedded systems and WSN. Almende BV researches and develops self-organized critical agent-based solutions to sustain and improve the coordination of communication and collaboration across evolving networks of humans and ICT systems. Almende applies these solutions to several application domains, including healthcare, logistics and crisis management, through commercialization in spin-off companies. Currently, Almende BV has six daughter companies including ASK Community Systems, DEAL Services, Luna.nl, Sense Observation Systems, Regas and Rotterdam Community Solutions. Almende has substantial expertise on formal modeling approaches to embedded and non-embedded software. Its expertise lies currently in three areas: Semi-automatic verification of software based on high-level behavioral models possibly enriched with information about non-functional requirements; schedulability analysis based on automata extended with timings; and formal models of trust and trustworthiness for embedded software systems with complex feature interactions. Almende has been involved in the European FP6 Project CREDO about the modelling of evolvable software services. A vast experience with and expertise on (wireless) embedded systems has been built by participating in nationally funded projects, e.g., Containers At a Network (CAN), Ambient Living with Embedded Networks (ALwEN), and Sensor Technology on Radio Modules (STORM). Almende currently participates in the Artemis project SIMPLE (development of an intelligent, self-organizing embedded middleware platform) and the FP7 IP REPLICATOR project on evolutionary self-programming and self-assembling micro-robots, and the FP7 STREP Fit4Green on energy reduction technology for large data centers.


Staff members profileAndries Stam is a Senior Researcher at Almende. He has a Ph.D in Computer Science from Leiden University on the modeling of interaction in evolving distributed systems. He worked as a consultant for various companies in The Netherlands. He participated in the Dutch research project ArchiMate on Enterprise Architecture, the ITEA project Trust4all on trust principles for embedded systems, and the European CREDO project on the modeling and analysis of evolutionary structures for distributed services. Andries' research interests include model-driven software development, distributed systems, and coordination principles for evolving software systems. He has published in the areas of software engineering, coordination languages, and enterprise architecture. Alfons H. Salden has a Ph.D. in Computer Science from Utrecht University on computer vision. He has over 15 years of research experience in cognitive science, computer vision, multimedia system theory and applications, multi-scale physics, ambient intelligence, mobile computing to communication and system research. Before joining Almende, he worked at the Telematica Institute, Enschede, the Netherlands (2000-2006) on (mobile) system access and categorization of complex systems. Currently, he is Senior Researcher at Almende, responsible for project acquisition, development, management and scientific research. He has been involved in the Credo project and is currently involved in the FP7 Projects Replicator and Fit4Green. Peet van Tooren is one of the founders and the technical director of Almende. He has a master's degree in computer science from Delft Technical University. He has worked at AND Software as a system architect, project leader, R&D manager and CTO on embedded systems, component-, object- and agent-oriented programming, interface design, next generation car navigation, a component based type-sensitive object compression library, and a vehicle routing application for car transportation.



Océ Technologies BV

Océ is one of the world’s leading providers of document management and printing for professionals. The broad Océ offering includes office printing and copying systems, high-speed digital production printers and wide format printing systems for technical documentation and color display graphics. Océ is also a foremost supplier of document management outsourcing. Many of the world’s Fortune 500 companies and leading commercial printers are Océ customers. With headquarters in Venlo, the Netherlands, Océ is active in around 100 countries and employs some 21,000 people worldwide. Total revenues in 2009 amounted to € 2.6 billion.The company has its own research and manufacturing facilities in Europe, the United States, Canada and Singapore. Through its own Research & Development (R&D) Océ develops core technologies and the majority of its own product concepts.

Main role in the projectDevelop a framework for capturing multidisciplinary design information, including formalisms to describe dynamic behaviour and to specify latitudes and tolerances. Tools to generate executable models of the physical system and to generate control code from the dynamic behaviour descriptions taking into account for example specified tolerances. Validation / application in the printer context.Océ has participated or still participates in the ITEA projects MOOSE and TWINS, FP7 project CON4COORD, and the Dutch national projects Boderc and Octopus, all of which address relevant aspects of model driven design of embedded systems.

Staff members profileLou Somers received his Ph.D. in theoretical physics from Radboud University Nijmegen (1984). He has been active both in software industry and academia. He holds a part time position as associate professor industrial software architecting at Eindhoven University of Technology. At Océ-Technologies, he currently leads the embedded software development for a new printer platform.

Technische Universiteit Eindhoven

Eindhoven University of Technology is a leading international university, specializing in engineering science & technology, and contributing through its high-quality teaching and research to progress in the technical sciences, to the development of technological innovations and as a result to growth, prosperity and welfare in the immediate region (technology & innovation hotspot Eindhoven) and beyond. TU/e is among the world’s ten best-performing research universities in terms of research cooperation with industry according to the UIRC Scoreboard university ranking in 2011. The Department of Mathematics and Computer Science of Eindhoven University of Technology strives to be leading in the science and engineering of software systems. It focuses on generic aspects of the design of software systems. In particular, focus is on the following two related and complementary themes: Design methods for large-scale, reliable software systems and Analysis of software systems. The Model Driven Software Engineering (MDSE) section contributes to this high quality research by combining model based software engineering and formal modeling and verification techniques to improve the efficiency and the quality of the software development process. LaQuSo (Laboratory for Quality Software) provides access to a wide range of research groups and their social and technical infrastructure, in particular on various aspects of model driven software engineering, secure and embedded networked systems, and algorithms and visualization.



Main role in project TUE is involved in the tasks related to the development of the modeling and design frameworks, in particular those related to definition of model-to-model transformation. In addition, TUE will take an active role in the validation of the project approach.

Staff Members Profile Prof. dr. Mark van den Brand is a full professor of Software Engineering and Technology at TU/e in the Department of Mathematics and Computer Science. He is scientific director of the research laboratory LaQuSo. His current research activities are on generic language technology, model driven engineering and reverse engineering. Five of his PhD students are working on the application of generic language technology to the field of model driven engineering. Mark van den Brand has outstanding publications in the field of generic language technology and he has an H-index of 19 (based on Google Scholar). He was keynote speaker at the Software Language Engineering (SLE2008) conference which combines the research fields of model driven engineering and language technology. He was three times guest editor (2007, 2008, 2009) of special issues of Science of Computer Programming devoted to academic software development (Experimental Software and Toolkits (EST). Since May 2009 he is visiting professor at Royal Holloway, University of London. He is invited to the editorial board of the journal of Science of Computer Programming. ir. Harold Weffers PDEng is director of LaQuSo, the Laboratory for Quality Software at the Department of Mathematics and Computer Science. For more than 13 years he has been involved in various projects related to the design and development of software for high tech systems and technical applications. He holds an M.Sc. degree in Computer Science and a PDEng degree in Software Technology. Dr. Suzana Andova is an assistant professor at Software Engineering and Technology group. Her research interests include semantics of modeling languages, and analysis of requirements for complex software systems. She is active in several industry-university interactive research projects with the goal to connect the academic research with industry and there relevant problems.



Technische Universiteit Delft



Prodrive



Deimos Space



Ikerlan-IK4



Integrasys



Mondragon Unibertsitatea



ULMA Embedded Solutions





Mälardalen University



Volvo



EIS Semcon



5.3 Consortium as a whole

Describe how the participants collectively constitute a consortium capable of achieving the project objectives, and how they are suited and committed to the tasks assigned to them. Show the complementarity between participants. Explain how the composition of the consortium is well-balanced in relation to the objectives of the project and in order to ensure exploitation of the results and to achieve the desired impacts. Show how the opportunity of involving SMEs has been addressed.

DECISIVE brings together leading companies and SMEs across Europe together with selected universities and research institutes providing the required leading edge competence across a number of important domains. At the moment, 35 partners from 10 different European countries constitute the DECISIVE consortium. Special emphasis will, before FPP, be put on balancing the consortium between technology users and technology providers on the one side, and the partner types (large enterprises, SMEs, and researchers) on the other side. A good balance in both dimensions will enable the transfer of model-based evolutionary system development techniques and tools for complex embedded systems into industrial practice.The multi-domain setup in DECISIVE – Health care, Transportation (including Automotive, Rail, Aerospace), Telecom, and Manufacturing – all focused on model-based evolutionary engineering, is a strength for the consortium as a whole. This setup will be instrumental in ensuring that innovative decision making, improved modelling techniques and tools, and both technical and process support for evolvable development, will reduce time to market, increase competiveness, and pave the way for the cross-domain market for complex embedded systems.Besides the partners named in the table on page 2, there are some further industrial partners who are interested in joining, but who came too late to join already in the PO phase. These are Volvo CE (Enterprise, SE), Bombardier (Enterprise, SE), and Daimler (Enterprise, DE). In addition, we are in a dialog with tool vendors, already working in close relation to some of the DECISIVE partners, to join the project. A figure depicting the current DECISIVE consortium can be found in Annex C.



For the preparation of the FPP special emphasis will be put on including SMEs with special world leading competences in tooling and infrastructure for model-based system development into the consortium.

i) Sub-contracting: If any part of the work is to be sub-contracted by the participant responsible for it, describe the work involved and explain why a sub-contract approach has been chosen for it.(No recommended length for this section – depends on the size and complexity of the consortium)

5.4 Resources to be committed

Describe how the necessary resources will be mobilised. Show how the overall financial plan for the project is adequate.

In addition to the personnel effort indicated elsewhere in the proposal, please identify any other major costs (e.g. personnel, equipment, travel, etc.) (please use table 5a).

(Recommended length – 2 pages)



Table 5a Summary of effort and costs

Indicative breakdown of costs

This should be a breakdown table with common items of expenditure and, if necessary, additional customised columns (e.g. Category X in the table below) in case your corresponding national cost categories do not fit the common ones

Partic. no.

Partic. short name

Personnel Travel Durable Equipment

Consumables (Category X)

Indirect costs

Subcontrating

Total costs

1

2

3

etc

Total

The figures indicated in the column "Total costs" must match the figures of the "Total eligible costs" of the funding calculation forms (Annex A).



Annex A – Funding calculation forms

Annex A.1 (for partners established in ARTEMIS Member States)

For each participant from an ARTEMIS Member State please fill in the standard form underneath and include it in this Annex A.1 (see Guide for Applicants for further explanations).

Partner x

Total eligible costs according to national rules

(in €)

National Contribution

requested (in €)

Percentage of the national subsidy

to the beneficiaries

applied for the calculation

Fundamental/Basic Research

Industrial/Applied Research

Experimental development

Total

Total requested from the JU (16.7%

of total above)

National eligibility criteria information

Please also provide in this Annex any additional necessary information, which does not fit in any other section of the proposal that will allow the national funding authorities to verify the corresponding eligibility criteria for national funding.



Annex A.2 (for partners established in other Member States and Associated Countries (Albania, Bulgaria, Croatia, Iceland, Israel, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, FYR Macedonia, Malta, Montenegro, Poland, Serbia, Slovakia, Switzerland, Turkey), the JRC13 and international organisations14 (i.e. ESA) having a seat in EU Member States or Associated Countries to the Seventh Framework Programme

For each participant from the above countries, for JRC or for each international organisation, fill in the standard form underneath and include it in this Annex A.2 (see Guide for Applicants for further explanations).

Partner x Total eligible costs (in €)

Direct costs (in €)

Indirect costs 20% (in €)

Total

Total requested from the JU

(16.7% of total above)

13 Unless the JRC applies in the proposal for national funding from an ARTEMIS Member State. In that case, the Annex A.1 should be used14 Unless the international organisation applies in the proposal for national funding from an ARTEMIS Member State. In that case, the Annex A.1 should be used


Small or medium-scale focused research projects … Web viewDeliverable: Development of the software...

Documents

Transcript of Small or medium-scale focused research projects … Web viewDeliverable: Development of the software...