Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 266

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 19 of the 19 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Synthesis of behavioral models from scenarios

Uchitel, S., Kramer, J., Magee, J.·2003·IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering

Abstract

Scenario-based specifications such as Message Sequence Charts (MSCs) are useful as part of a requirements specification. A scenario is a partial story, describing how system components, the environment, and users work concurrently and interact in order to provide system level functionality. Scenarios need to be combined to provide a more complete description of system behavior. Consequently, scenario synthesis is central to the effective use of scenario descriptions. How should a set of scenarios be interpreted? How do they relate to one another? What is the underlying semantics? What assumptions are made when synthesizing behavior models from multiple scenarios? In this paper, we present an approach to scenario synthesis based on a clear sound semantics, which can support and integrate many of the existing approaches to scenario synthesis. The contributions of the paper are threefold. We first define an MSC language with sound abstract semantics in terms of labeled transition systems and parallel composition. The language integrates existing approaches based on scenario composition by using high-level MSCs (hMSCs) and those based on state identification by introducing explicit component state labeling. This combination allows stakeholders to break up scenario specifications into manageable parts and reuse scenarios using hMCSs; it also allows them to introduce additional domain-specific information and general assumptions explicitly into the scenario specification using state labels. Second, we provide a sound synthesis algorithm which translates scenarios into a behavioral specification in the form of Finite Sequential Processes. This specification can be analyzed with the Labeled Transition System Analyzer using model checking and animation. Finally, we demonstrate how many of the assumptions embedded in existing synthesis approaches can be made explicit and modeled in our approach. Thus, we provide the basis for a common approach to scenario-based specification, synthesis, and analysis.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/tse.2003.1178048

Cites

19 of 19 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 19 references

Cited by

See all 266

Metadata

Authors
Uchitel, S., Kramer, J., & Magee, J.
Venue
IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering
Published
2003-02
Volume
29
Issue
2
Pages
99-115
ISSN
0098-5589 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2164440547
Cited by
266
References
19
FWCI
65.47
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Synthesis of behavioral models from scenarios. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/tse.2003.1178048
The paper
Uchitel, S., Kramer, J., & Magee, J. (2003). Synthesis of behavioral models from scenarios. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering. https://doi.org/10.1109/tse.2003.1178048

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.