[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":3,"doc-seo-657486-105":59,"doc-detail-657486-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",[7,13,18,23,28,33,38,43,48,51,55],{"id":8,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":10,"show_sort_weight":11,"slug":12},1,"Document","Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":14,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":15,"show_sort_weight":16,"slug":17},2,"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":19,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":20,"show_sort_weight":21,"slug":22},4,"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":24,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":25,"show_sort_weight":26,"slug":27},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":29,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":30,"show_sort_weight":31,"slug":32},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":34,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":35,"show_sort_weight":36,"slug":37},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":39,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":40,"show_sort_weight":41,"slug":42},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":44,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":45,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":47},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":46,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":49,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":50},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":52,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":53,"show_sort_weight":52,"slug":54},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":56,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":57,"show_sort_weight":24,"slug":58},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":60,"data":61},"ok",{"site_id":62,"language":63,"slug":64,"title":65,"keywords":66,"description":67,"schema_data":68,"social_meta":123,"head_meta":125,"extra_data":127,"updated_unix":129},105,"en","modeling-transactions-in-uml-activity-diagrams-via-nonsequential-automata","Modeling Transactions in UML Activity Diagrams via Nonsequential Automata","","Modeling concurrent and parallel systems requires composing finer-grained activities into atomic “transactions,” yet UML activity diagrams lack compositional constructs for such atomicity. The paper develops a formal interpretation using nonsequential automata, defining transactions via a special morphism that maps transitions in a source automaton to transaction-level transitions in target automata. UML activity diagrams are extended with a dedicated stereotype to represent transactions explicitly.",{"@graph":69,"@context":122},[70,84,105],{"@type":71,"itemListElement":72},"BreadcrumbList",[73,77,79,82],{"item":74,"name":75,"@type":76,"position":8},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":78,"name":9,"@type":76,"position":14},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/",{"item":80,"name":40,"@type":76,"position":81},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/",3,{"item":83,"name":65,"@type":76,"position":19},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/modeling-transactions-in-uml-activity-diagrams-via-nonsequential-automata/657486/",{"url":83,"name":65,"@type":85,"image":86,"author":91,"headline":65,"publisher":94,"fileFormat":97,"inLanguage":63,"description":67,"dateModified":98,"datePublished":99,"encodingFormat":97,"isAccessibleForFree":100,"interactionStatistic":101},"DigitalDocument",{"url":87,"@type":88,"width":89,"height":90},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/modeling-transactions-in-uml-activity-diagrams-via-nonsequential-automata/657486.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":92,"@type":93},"AditGamingID","Person",{"url":74,"name":95,"@type":96},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-28","2026-10-26",true,{"@type":102,"interactionType":103,"userInteractionCount":81},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":104},"ViewAction",{"@type":106,"mainEntity":107},"FAQPage",[108,114,118],{"name":109,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":111},"What problem does the paper address in UML activity diagrams?","Question",{"text":112,"@type":113},"It addresses the lack of compositional constructs in UML for defining atomic activities when modeling transactions built from finer-grained sub-activities.","Answer",{"name":115,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":116},"How are transactions formally defined in the proposed approach?",{"text":117,"@type":113},"Transactions are defined through a special morphism between automata that maps transitions from a source automaton to transaction transitions in target automata.",{"name":119,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":120},"How does the paper extend UML activity diagrams to represent transactions?",{"text":121,"@type":113},"It introduces a proper stereotype in UML activity diagrams dedicated to defining transactions explicitly.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":83,"og:type":124,"og:title":65,"og:site_name":95,"og:description":67},"article",{"robots":126,"canonical":83},"index,follow",{"doc_id":128,"site_id":62},657486,1793105121,{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":131},{"doc_id":128,"user_id":132,"nickname":92,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":39,"category_name":40,"doc_title":65,"doc_description":67,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":81,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":8,"is_downloadable":8,"audit_status":8,"page_count":139,"language":140,"language_code":63,"site_id":62,"html_lang":63,"table_of_contents":141,"faqs":142,"seo_title":143,"seo_description":67,"update_tm":144,"read_time":145},962094249103,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_276721f389ce27ea32af1340a28f341c","Modeling Transactions in UML Activity Diagrams via Nonsequential Automata  \nJ􀀓ulio P. Machado  \nPontif􀀓􀀐cia Universidade Cat􀀓olica do Rio Grande do Sul, Faculdade de Inform􀀓atica  \nPorto Alegre, RS, Brazil  \n[juliopm@inf.pucrs.br](juliopm@inf.pucrs.br)  \nand  \nPaulo B. Menezes  \nUniversidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Instituto de Inform􀀓atica  \nPorto Alegre, RS, Brazil  \n[blauth@inf.ufrgs.br](blauth@inf.ufrgs.br)  \nAbstract  \nWhen modeling concurrent or parallel systems, we must be aware that basic activities of each system maybe constituted by smaller activities, i.e. transitions are conceptually re􀀌ned into transactions. Nevertheless, the Uni􀀌ed Modeling Language (UML) seems to lack compositional constructs for de􀀌ning atomic activities. We discuss nonsequential automata for the formal interpretation of the concept of composing transitions into transactions under UML activity diagrams. Transactions are formally de􀀌ned through a special morphism between automata that maps transitions from the source automaton to transactions of the target (more concrete) automata. UML activity diagrams are then extended with a proper stereotype for de􀀌ning transactions.  \nKeywords: Formal Speci􀀌cation, UML, Nonsequential Automata, Concurrent and Distributed Systems.  \n1 Introduction  \nThe Uni􀀌ed Modeling Language (UML) [8, 3, 20, 10] is a language which may be used to describe both the structure and behavior of object-oriented systems using a combination of notations. UML o􀀋ers a variety of graphical diagrams for specifying, visualizing and documenting object-oriented systems. These models can be classi􀀌ed as concerned with the static structure of systems and those concerned with the dynamic behavior. For the modeling of the dynamic behavior, a number of di􀀋erent models are o􀀋ered: sequence, collaboration, statechart and activity diagrams.  \nUML has a precisely-de􀀌ned syntax, however it still lacks a generally accepted formal semantics which precisely 􀀌xes the meaning of its diagrams. This is particularly noticeable for the notations which model the dynamic behavior of systems. Several approaches to translating UML diagrams into formal models have been based on Petri nets [17] . For example, [9] describes a formal translation of activity and collaboration diagrams into place/transition Petri nets and [7] compares di􀀋erent proposals for the semantics based on Petri nets. Also work􀀍ow models have been given semantics based on place/transition nets, e.g. [6] de􀀌nesa formal semantics for UML activity diagrams that is suitable for work􀀍ow modeling. Widely application of Petri nets in theoretical and applied research to specify and visualize the behavior of systems are due to their intuitive graphical representation and several supporting tools.  \nActivity diagrams are one of the means for describing behavior of systems within the UML language and has been chosen here for its capability in describing 􀀍ows of activities of a desired system. Broadly speaking, states of an activity diagram mostly represent the execution of sequential and concurrent steps in a computational process or a work􀀍ow step. Although activity diagrams have been used for modeling work􀀍ow processes [6, 7, 8, 3], such view is not going to be explored in this paper. Here we concentrate on describing groups of sequential or concurrent activities that are responsible for performing a computation, and we address the issue of modeling transactions, a feature not present in activity diagrams, by using a Petri net related model, named Nonsequential Automata ([11], [13], [15], [14]) .  \nFigure 1: UML activity diagram without (left) and with (right) composite state  \nWe remark that in our setting the term “transaction” denotes a certain activity of the system that might be composed by many, possibly concurrent, sub-activities. Moreover, we require this composition of activities to be considered atomic.  \nThe importance of discussing composition mechanisms is based on the fact that, as","cbCaimS53GwscTQ3","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaimS53GwscTQ3","pdf",334067,11,"English","# Introduction\n# UML Activity Diagrams\n## Activity diagrams and control flow\n# Conclusions and future work","[{\"question\":\"What problem does the paper address in UML activity diagrams?\",\"answer\":\"It addresses the lack of compositional constructs in UML for defining atomic activities when modeling transactions built from finer-grained sub-activities.\"},{\"question\":\"How are transactions formally defined in the proposed approach?\",\"answer\":\"Transactions are defined through a special morphism between automata that maps transitions from a source automaton to transaction transitions in target automata.\"},{\"question\":\"How does the paper extend UML activity diagrams to represent transactions?\",\"answer\":\"It introduces a proper stereotype in UML activity diagrams dedicated to defining transactions explicitly.\"}]","Modeling Transactions in UML Activity Diagrams via Nonsequential Automata | PDF",1792980990,28]