Automated SysML-Based Verification of Discipline-Specific Models

2026-06-30 · Source: cs.SE updates on arXiv.org · Field: Technology & Digital — Software Development & Engineering, Emerging Technologies & Innovation · Depth: Expert, extended

Summary

This project introduces a tool-agnostic process and supporting SysML profile for automated verification of discipline-specific models, addressing limitations in current SysML-based Model-Based Verification (MBV). Existing methods often rely on proprietary APIs, limiting portability, and primarily verify performance properties via parametric diagrams, neglecting crucial behavioral and interface requirements like ordering, timing, and state-based responses. The new process, synthesized from ISO/IEC/IEEE 15288, ISO/IEC/IEEE 24641, and the INCOSE Systems Engineering Handbook, enables automated verification using SysML test cases and returns results for traceability. A minimal SysML profile, informed by the UML Testing Profile, was designed for common SysMLv1 tool capabilities. Demonstrated end-to-end in Magic Systems of Systems Architect and IBM Engineering Systems Design Rhapsody against a Simulink model, the approach successfully verifies behavioral and interface requirements, extending MBV scope beyond parametric-only methods. While broadly applicable, full seamless portability across SysMLv1 tools remains challenging due to inconsistent vendor implementations.

Key takeaway

For Systems Engineers and MBSE practitioners aiming to enhance verification processes, this work demonstrates that you can achieve automated, tool-agnostic verification of discipline-specific models using SysMLv1. You should adopt behavioral diagram constructs like decision nodes and time events to verify complex ordering, timing, and state-based requirements, moving beyond traditional parametric-only approaches. Be aware that while portability is significantly improved, full seamless toolchain integration may require fallback mechanisms like API-based result capture due to SysMLv1 implementation inconsistencies.

Key insights

A tool-agnostic SysML-based verification process extends scope beyond parametric properties to include behavioral and interface requirements.

Principles

• Tool-agnostic design enhances portability.
• Behavioral diagrams verify complex requirements.
• Synthesize standards for robust processes.

Method

Define SysML test cases using executable Activity Diagrams, integrate with discipline-specific models via FMI, execute verification actions, and record results back into the SysML model for traceability.

In practice

• Employ FMI for tool-agnostic model exchange.
• Use decision nodes, time events, and accept change events for behavioral tests.
• Implement test logs as instance specifications for runtime results.

Topics

• SysML
• Model-Based Verification
• MBSE
• Functional Mock-up Interface
• Behavioral Verification
• Verification Automation

Best for: AI Scientist, Research Scientist, Software Engineer, Director of AI/ML

Related on AIssential

• Metaprogramming, Synthesis & Verification • Nada Amin • YOW! 2025 — Integrating formal verification with LLM-driven code synthesis is essential for ensuring strong guarantees and correctness.
• Formal Methods Meet LLMs: Auditing, Monitoring, and Intervention for Compliance of Advanced AI Systems — Formal methods combined with machine learning enhance AI system auditing and runtime monitoring for compliance.
• Model-Based Systems Eng. & Requirements Definition • Dennis Hansen & Jorge Orellana • GOTO 2026 — Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) provides a structured, iterative, and collaborative approach to define complex systems, ensuring consistency and compliance.
• Q-READY: Predictive Feasibility Assessment for Hybrid Quantum-Classical Applications — The Q-READY framework systematically assesses hybrid quantum-classical application feasibility using MBSE and MDE before implementation.
• SysML Modeling of Digital Twins for Renewable Energy Communities — SysML modeling for REC Digital Twins requires semantic enrichment from ontologies like SAREF4ENER to bridge structural and semantic gaps.
• As You Wish: Mission Planning with Formal Verification using LLMs in Precision Agriculture — Integrating LLMs with LTL formal verification enhances robotic mission planning in precision agriculture by resolving natural language ambiguity.

Open in AIssential →

Editorial summary, takeaway, and curation by AIssential. Original article published by cs.SE updates on arXiv.org.