Pass the OMG OMG Certification OMG-OCUP2-ADV300 Questions and answers with CertsForce

The execution semantics of Alf (Action Language for Foundational UML) are defined by mapping the concrete syntax of Alf to the abstract syntax of fUML3. Alf provides a textual surface representation for a subset of UML model elements, and its main benefit is an execution semantics that allows for the generation of executable code out of Alf specifications4. This mapping ensures that Alf can be used to specify behavior in a way that is directly executable in the context of an fUML model.

State Machine Events in UML are triggers for transitions and do not classify as objects or classifiers; thus they do not inherently have features:

A.Incorrect, because State Machine Events are not treated as classifiers with features.

B.Incorrect, though it hints at an extended use case, State Machine Events do not extend classifiers in standard UML usage.

C.Correct, State Machine Events are not Classifiers and therefore cannot have features such as properties or operations.

D.Incorrect, because UML State Machines certainly have an Event concept, but these Events are not classified as having features.

References:

UML Specification: State Machine chapter, specifically sections discussing the nature of events and triggers.

Further insights can be found in the event and trigger management sections of the UML 2.5 Documentation.

A FunctionBehavior in UML is a specialized form of behavior that specifies a function that, when executed, yields results influenced only by its input arguments and its internal attributes, without any side effects (e.g., altering global variables or I/O operations). This makes it stateless. Among the options provided:

Ainvolves I/O operations which are not covered under FunctionBehavior as it implies side effects.

Bdeals with environmental inputs and actuator control, not just function computation.

Ccould be considered but implies a state change which again might involve side effects, depending on the implementation.

Dpurely involves calculation based on input parameters, which fits the definition of FunctionBehavior perfectly, as it is a stateless computation.

Eis incorrect because UML indeed includes the concept of FunctionBehavior.

References:

UML Specification, Section on Behaviors

Further details on FunctionBehaviors can be found in the UML 2.5 Documentation under the Classification and Behaviors sections.

In UML, the «bind» relationship is used to specify that a class is a template instantiation of a template class, where actual parameters are bound to the formal parameters of the template class1. However, in the case of the relationship between a concrete class like Vector and an abstract class like AbstractList, the correct relationship should be Generalization, not «bind».

Generalization is a taxonomic relationship between a more general classifier and a more specific classifier. Each instance of the specific classifier is also an instance of the general classifier1. Thus, Vector being a concrete implementation of AbstractList, should inherit from AbstractList, which is correctly represented by a Generalization relationship in UML.

The other options can be evaluated as follows:

Option A: The upper limit for the size of PhontyQueue is a design decision that should be based on the requirements and use cases of the application. It is not inherently incorrect in UML to have a specific upper limit.

Option C: The Generalization relationship is correctly used between PriorityQueue and AbstractQueue as it represents inheritance in UML.

Option D: While it is true that template parameters are typically defined at the top of the hierarchy, the statement is too absolute. In UML, template parameters can be added to specialized classes, but it depends on the specific design and requirements. Therefore, without additional context, this statement cannot be deemed universally valid.

In conclusion, the most applicable and valid review comment is option B, which correctly identifies the misuse of the «bind» relationship in the context of the class diagram provided.

The UML diagram fragment provided shows a UML profile with a required extension from the metaclassClassto the stereotypeDisplayArea, which in turn has two subclassesFrameandForm. The use of{required}indicates that whenever an instance ofClassis extended by theDisplayAreastereotype, it becomes mandatory to do so. However, this does not enforce that every instance ofClassmust be linked toDisplayAreaor its subclasses (FrameorForm). It only means that if theDisplayAreastereotype is applied, it is required. Therefore, there is no obligation for every instance ofClassor its subclasses to be stereotyped asDisplayArea,Frame, orForm. It's also worth noting that the last option (E) could be considered true in some interpretations of UML, but given the options provided and common UML practices, option D is more accurate.

To represent specific hardware environments in a deployment model, a modeler should create a UML profile that includes the necessary hardware stereotypes with applicable details. A profile allows the modeler to extend the standard UML metamodel to include domain-specific elements that can be applied to deployment models. These stereotypes can represent different types of hardware components and their attributes, which can then be used to model the physical aspects of the deployment environment. The creation and application of profiles are supported by the UML 2.x Superstructure Specification, which details how to tailor UML to particular domains or platforms using profiles.

 In the context of the Meta-Object Facility (MOF), a metamodel is essentially a model that defines the structure and semantics of a modeling language. It is a set of constructs and rules that describe how models can be constructed for a particular domain or purpose. The MOF itself is an example of a metamodel because it provides the language for defining other metamodels, such as the UML metamodel1.

Given that the system is inStateA1, the sequence of triggers that will move the system toStateCmust take into account the transitions and their associated triggers as defined in the UML state diagram. Starting fromStateA1, the triggera5will cause a transition withinStateA, followed bya6, which moves toStateA2. The triggera5is not relevant as it is an internal transition inStateA1. Then,a3(the exit action forStateA) anda2would be followed to leaveStateAaltogether. Once out ofStateA,a1is used to transition toStateB, wherea10is an entry action, not a trigger. Finally, to get fromStateBtoStateC, the triggersa11followed bya12are needed. This sequence of triggers reflects the correct usage of exit, entry, and transition triggers as defined by UML state machine semantics.

In UML, operations can have preconditions defined, which are constraints that must be true before the operation is invoked. When an operation is redefined in a subclass, it is possible to add new preconditions or alter existing ones. Redefining an operation does not typically allow for changes to its scope or the addition of templates, but the preconditions may be expanded to reflect the semantics of the subclass. This is in line with the behavioral specification of operations in UML, where preconditions are part of the behavioral contract of an operation, as described in the UML 2.x Superstructure Specification.

Protocol Conformance in UML is a relationship between protocol state machines that ensures consistency in behavior inheritance:

A.Incorrect as it describes a general-to-inherited relationship, which is not the focus of protocol conformance.

B.Incorrect, as it describes a relationship the wrong way around (general to nested).

C.Correct. Protocol Conformance ensures that a specific Protocol State Machine conforms to the rules and constraints specified by a redefined, more general Protocol State Machine.

D.Incorrect, because it generally describes conformance but does not specifically focus on the relationship between specific and general state machines in the context of protocols.

References:

UML Specification: Protocol State Machines section.

Specifics of protocol conformance are detailed under state machine and classifier behaviors in the UML 2.5 Documentation.