V-model with graphviz - graphviz

I want to draw a V-Modell for software development. I want to use graphviz to keep it more maintainable than in Visio.
How can I get the typical V-structure in Graphviz?
I think I need horizontal and vertical alignment.
I tried to work with dummy-nodes but the layout is still poor.

This code works for me. It has a bit of a workaround in it to create the V shape. I use an invisible node and invisible edges to create a wedge between the 2 sides of the V-model.
digraph Vmodel {
// Transparent background
graph [bgcolor=none]
// Node style
node [
shape=record
style="rounded, filled"
width=2.5
height=0.8
fillcolor=white
];
// Create the nodes
user_req_models [label="User\nRequirements\nModels"]
sys_req_models [label="System\nRequirements\Models"]
arch_models [label="Architectural\Models"]
comp_design_models [label="Component\Design\Models"]
unit_design_models [label="Unit\nDesign\nModels"]
units [label="Units\n(SW, HW and Data)"]
components [label="Components\n(SW, HW and Data)"]
subsystems [label="Subsystems"]
integrated_system [label="Integrated System"]
operational_system [label="Operational System"]
// Create a hidden node to form a V-shaped wedge
hidden [style="invis"]
// Create the basic layout of the V model
user_req_models->sys_req_models
sys_req_models->arch_models
arch_models->comp_design_models
comp_design_models->unit_design_models
unit_design_models->units
units->components
components->subsystems
subsystems->integrated_system
integrated_system->operational_system
// Create the dashed edges
user_req_models->operational_system [style="dashed", constraint=false]
sys_req_models->integrated_system [style="dashed", constraint=false]
arch_models->subsystems [style="dashed", constraint=false]
comp_design_models->components [style="dashed", constraint=false]
// Create a wedge between the two parts
hidden->user_req_models [style="invis"]
hidden->sys_req_models [style="invis"]
hidden->arch_models [style="invis"]
hidden->comp_design_models [style="invis"]
hidden->operational_system [style="invis"]
hidden->integrated_system [style="invis"]
hidden->subsystems [style="invis"]
hidden->components [style="invis"]
hidden->unit_design_models [style="invis"]
hidden->units [style="invis"]
// Ranking on the same level
{rank=same; user_req_models, operational_system}
{rank=same; sys_req_models, integrated_system}
{rank=same; arch_models, subsystems}
{rank=same; comp_design_models, components}
{rank=same; unit_design_models, units}
}

I have used the following graph for requirements and tests specified in DO-178C.
digraph V_Cycle {
ranksep=0.3;
graph [fontname = "Handlee"];
node [fontname = "Handlee"];
edge [fontname = "Handlee"];
bgcolor=transparent;
/* ==== NODES === */
// Create hidden nodes to lower derived req
hid_sys_hl [style="invis"];
hid_hl_ll [style="invis"];
hid_ll_code [style="invis"];
hid_sr_hsi[style="invis"];
hid_req_tests[style="invis"];
// Requirements
node [color="#FFB71B", shape=note];
sys_req[label="System Requirements"];
hlr[label="High-Level\nSW Requirements"];
d_hlr[label="Derived\nHigh-Level Req.", style="dashed"];
llr[label="Low-Level\nSW Requirements"];
d_llr[label="Derived\nLow-Level Req.", style="dashed"];
// Code
node [color="#FFB71B", shape=component];
code;
// Tests
node [color="#000000", shape=box];
hsi_tests[label="Hardware/Software\nIntegration Tests"];
si_tests[label="Software\nIntegration Tests"];
ll_tests[label="Low-Level\n(Unit) Tests"];
/* ==== EDEGES === */
// Hidden to create intermediate level for derived req
hlr:sw -> hid_hl_ll:ne -> llr:sw[style="invis"];
llr:sw -> hid_ll_code:ne -> code:w[style="invis"];
{rank=same; d_hlr, hid_hl_ll}
{rank=same; d_llr, hid_ll_code}
// Requirements
edge[splines="ortho"];
sys_req:s -> hlr:w[weight=10];
hlr:s -> llr:w[weight=10];
hlr:s -> d_hlr:w[splines="spline",style="dashed", weight=5];
llr:s -> code:w[weight=10];
llr:s -> d_llr:w[splines="spline",style="dashed", weight=5];
// Tests
hsi_tests:s -> si_tests:e[dir="back", weight=10];
si_tests:s -> ll_tests:e[dir="back", weight=10];
// REQ & CODE -- TESTS
edge[splines="spline",color="#C89211", dir="back"];
{rank=same; hid_sys_hl, hid_sr_hsi}
hid_sys_hl -> hid_sr_hsi -> hsi_tests[style="invis"];
{rank=same; d_hlr, hid_req_tests}
llr -> d_hlr -> hid_req_tests -> ll_tests[style="invis"];
{rank=same; sys_req, hsi_tests}
sys_req -> hsi_tests;
{rank=same; hlr, si_tests}
hlr -> si_tests;
d_hlr:ne -> si_tests:sw;
{rank=same; llr, ll_tests}
llr -> ll_tests;
d_llr:ne -> ll_tests:s;
}
When using https://sketchviz.com/, the rendering is the following:

Related

DOT graph from superstate to substate

I'd like to generate the DOT code to draw the equivalent state machine diagram shown.
I going to be created programmatically, I've got the transitions between states and superstates done. ButI need a bit of help with this:
This gives me an initial transition, but the State1 should be the cluster:
digraph {
compound=true;
node [shape=Mrecord]
rankdir="LR"
subgraph clusterOpen
{
label = "State1"
State2
}
State1 -> State2 [style="solid"];
node [shape = point label="" ] i ->State1
}
Normally Graphviz programs try hard to avoid placing nodes on top of other nodes. But you can place nodes anywhere you like if you explicitly provide a pos attribute for each node (see https://graphviz.org/faq/#FaqDotWithNodeCoords).
The program that creates your input files should calculate a pos attribute for each node. (Remember that pos coordinates are in points, while node sizes are in inches!). You can probably skip calculating the splines for the edges and just let neato do that.
This program:
digraph {
graph [bb="0,0,482.8,337"];
node [label="\N"];
State1 [height=4.0139,
label="{State 1|\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n}",
pos="162,144.5",
shape=Mrecord,
width=4.5];
State2 [height=1.3333,
label="{State 2|\n\n\n\n}",
// pos="403,144.5",
pos="220,88",
shape=Mrecord,
width=1.6944];
xp3 [height=0.05,
label="",
// pos="429,331",
pos="0,194",
shape=point,
// style=dotted,
style=invis,
width=0.05];
r1 [height=0.16667,
label="",
// pos="455,331",
pos="154,194",
shape=square,
width=0.16667];
xp4 [height=0.05,
label="",
// pos="481,331",
pos="0,88",
shape=point,
// style=dotted,
style=invis,
width=0.05];
xp1 [height=0.16,
label="",
pos="162,331",
shape=point,
width=0.16];
xp1 -> State1:n [pos="e,162,288.5 162,325.23 162,319.09 162,308.89 162,298.63",
style=dashed];
xp2 [height=0.16,
label="",
// pos="403,331",
pos="220,194",
shape=point,
width=0.16];
xp2 -> State2:n [pos="e,403,192.5 403,325.19 403,307.39 403,251.8 403,202.57"];
// manually added:
xp3 -> r1 [label="Trigger 1" dir=none ]
xp4 -> State2 [label="Trigger 2" ]
}
Run with this command line:
neato -n -Tpng stateDiagram.dot >stateDiagram.png
Produces this graph:

Align nodes in a Graphviz directed graph

I have the following Graphviz code:
digraph {
Technique [shape = box];
Path [shape = box];
KnowledgeObservation [shape = box, label = "Knowledge\nObservation"];
ManagementIntervention [shape = box, label = "Management\nIntervention"];
ResultsModification [shape = box, label = "Results\nModification"];
SharedCode [label = "Shared Code"];
MediatedRelationship [label = "Mediated Relationship"];
Art -> Technique;
Therapy -> Path;
{Technique Path} -> KnowledgeObservation -> ManagementIntervention -> ResultsModification;
{MediatedRelationship SharedCode} -> {KnowledgeObservation ResultsModification}
subgraph {
rank = same
Technique -> Path [dir = none]
}
subgraph {
rank = same
SharedCode
ManagementIntervention
MediatedRelationship
}
}
It currently produces the following output:
How can I vertically align "Management Intervention" with both "Knowledge Observation" and "Results Modification"?
"Shared Code" should be moved to the left of "Management Intervention".
"Mediated Relationship" should be moved to the right of "Management Intervention".
"Shared Code", "Management Intervention" and "Mediated Relationship" should stay horizontally aligned.
How can I accomplish this?
This can be achieved without subgraphs; the most important modification is the line
{ rank = same; SharedCode -> ManagementIntervention -> MediatedRelationship[ style = invis ] }
which keeps the three nodes not only on the right level, but also within the desired order.
Altogether, this code here
digraph
{
// node definition
Art Therapy;
Technique[ shape = box ];
Path[ shape = box ];
KnowledgeObservation[ shape = box, label = "Knowledge\nObservation" ];
ManagementIntervention[ shape = box, label = "Management\nIntervention" ];
ResultsModification[ shape = box, label = "Results\nModification" ];
SharedCode[ label = "Shared Code" ];
MediatedRelationship[ label = "Mediated Relationship" ];
// edges
Art -> Technique;
Therapy -> Path;
{ rank = same; Technique -> Path [dir = none] }
{ Technique Path} -> KnowledgeObservation -> ManagementIntervention -> ResultsModification;
{ rank = same; SharedCode -> ManagementIntervention -> MediatedRelationship[ style = invis ] }
{ MediatedRelationship SharedCode } -> { KnowledgeObservation ResultsModification }
}
gives you
which is, in my understanding, what you are looking for.
Still I would recommend to replace the last line of code with these three
KnowledgeObservation -> { SharedCode MediatedRelationship }[ dir = back ];
SharedCode -> ResultsModification;
MediatedRelationship -> ResultsModification;
Reason is that once your graph gets more complicated, graphviz will recognize and maintain the hierarchical relationships, rather than interpreting ambiguous instructions in surprising ways.
How can I vertically align "Management Intervention" with both "Knowledge Observation" and "Results Modification"?
This can be achieved with increasing the weight of the edge. Edges with higher weight tend to be straighter and shorter than with the lower.
"Mediated Relationship" should be moved to the right of "Management Intervention".
You can control this with the order in which the nodes are defined. If you define "Management Intervention" before the "Shared Code", it (MI) will be drawn first, i. e., to the left of the SI.
"Shared Code", "Management Intervention" and "Mediated Relationship" should stay horizontally aligned.
You did it right, using the rank=same subgraph attribute. Though I would put the subgraph already in the moment of node definitions. This will shorten the source size and limit the rank specification to the place where the nodes are defined, which is good for readability (everything stated in one place).
Your modified example:
digraph {
Technique [shape = box];
Path [shape = box];
KnowledgeObservation [shape = box, label = "Knowledge\nObservation"];
ResultsModification [shape = box, label = "Results\nModification"];
subgraph {
rank=same
ManagementIntervention [shape = box, label = "Management\nIntervention"];
MediatedRelationship [label = "Mediated Relationship"];
SharedCode [label = "Shared Code"];
}
Art -> Technique;
Therapy -> Path;
{Technique Path} -> KnowledgeObservation
KnowledgeObservation -> ManagementIntervention -> ResultsModification [weight=3]
{MediatedRelationship SharedCode} -> {KnowledgeObservation ResultsModification}
subgraph {
rank = same
Technique -> Path [dir = none]
}
}
Result:

how do I add arbitrary, positioned, text/symbols to a graphviz diagram?

I would like to have an "implies" arrow between the two graphs here
digraph G {
subgraph case {
x;
left [shape=diamond];
right [shape=diamond];
left -> x;
right -> x;
}
subgraph case_ {
x_;
left_ [shape=diamond];
right_ [shape=diamond];
left_ -> x_;
right_ -> x_;
}
}
Trying to GraphViz - How to connect subgraphs? doesn't work because I'm using the dot algorithm. But I don't need anything too fancy since I have a bunch of diagrams like this where there is a "before" and "after" state and I want to put some visual indicator.

Can I have different font style/sizes in the same graphviz record?

I have the following simple graph and I want to have only the text GetArea() in italics. Is this possible?
digraph {
rankdir = BT;
node [shape=record];
cPolygon [label="{cPolygon|GetArea()}"];
{rank=same; cSquare cTriangle}
cSquare -> cPolygon;
cTriangle -> cPolygon;
}
I think you should use HTML like labels:
digraph {
rankdir = BT;
node [shape=record];
cPolygon [label=<<table border="0"><tr><td>cPolygon</td></tr><tr><td><i>GetArea()</i></td></tr></table>>];
{rank=same; cSquare cTriangle}
cSquare -> cPolygon;
cTriangle -> cPolygon;
}
yields
edit
a horizontal row:
...
cPolygon [label=<<table border="0"><tr><td>cPolygon</td></tr><hr/><tr><td><i>GetArea()</i></td></tr></table>>];
...

Graphviz crossing edges

I am trying to avoid the crossing of the lines between 20->40 and 30->70. Does anyone know how to do this? I am using single points to straighten out the edges but I would have expected the rendering engine to avoid these edges to overlap. Here is my dot code:
digraph {
graph [splines="ortho", nodesep = "1", overlap = false];
node [shape=rectangle, color=lightgrey, style=filled ];
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
node[shape=none, width=0, height=0 label=""];
edge[dir=none];
{rank=same;
p1->10
10->p2
}
p1->20
p2->30
{rank=same;
p3->40
40->p4
}
p3->50
p4->60
{rank=same;
p5->70
70->p6
}
p5->80
p6->90
20->40
30->70
}
I wanted to post an image, but stackoverflow does not allow me to do this... You can see what I mean when you copy the code into: http://stamm-wilbrandt.de/GraphvizFiddle/
I really appreciate your help on this!
You could give graphviz a hint by adding an invisible edge between p4 an dp5:
{
rank=same;
p3 -> 40;
40 -> p4;
p4 -> p5 [style=invis]; // new invisible edge
p5 -> 70;
70 -> p6;
}
If you are not able to add invisible edges (dynamic graph generation), make sure nodes which are part of a subgraph do appear first within the subgraph, and therefore avoid upfront node definitions.
In this example, I removed the node definitions in the beginning of the script and inlined the style of the elbow-joint nodes.
Here's the GraphvizFiddle
digraph {
graph [splines="ortho", nodesep = "1", overlap = false];
node [shape=rectangle, color=lightgrey, style=filled ];
//node[shape=none, width=0, height=0, label=""];
edge[dir=none];
{
rank=same;
p1[shape=none, width=0, height=0, label=""];
p2[shape=none, width=0, height=0, label=""];
p1->10
10->p2
}
p1->20
p2->30
{
rank=same;
p3[shape=none, width=0, height=0, label=""];
p4[shape=none, width=0, height=0, label=""];
p3->40
40->p4
}
p3->50
p4->60
{
rank=same;
p5[shape=none, width=0, height=0, label=""];
p6[shape=none, width=0, height=0, label=""];
p5->70
70->p6
}
p5->80
p6->90
20->40
30->70
}

Resources