A Survey of Model Comparison Approaches and Applications

Stephan, Matthew; Cordy, James R.

doi:10.5220/0004311102650277

Cited by 20 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 62 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As already said, two models, possibly written into two different languages, cannot in general be compared directly, see [17] for an interesting survey on model comparison techniques. Therefore, the synchronization process is made of three steps: first, models are abstracted in a common language; second, their abstractions are compared; third, actions are possibly taken to adjust original models according to findings of the comparison.…”

Section: Model Synchronization Principlementioning

confidence: 99%

Model Synchronization: A Formal Framework for the Management of Heterogeneous Models

Batteux

Prosvirnova

Rauzy

2019

Model-Based Safety and Assessment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this article, we present the conceptual foundations and implementation principles of model synchronization, a formal framework for the management of heterogeneous models. The proposed approach relies on S2ML (System Structure Modeling Language) as a pivot language. We show, by means of a case study, that model synchronization can be used to ensure the consistency between system architecture models designed with Capella and safety models written in AltaRica 3.0.

show abstract

Section: Model Synchronization Principlementioning

confidence: 99%

Model Synchronization: A Formal Framework for the Management of Heterogeneous Models

Batteux

Prosvirnova

Rauzy

2019

Model-Based Safety and Assessment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Other tools such as emfcOmpare could also be used for the computation of model differences and there are no other criteria to favour one over the other. An overview of the different matching techniques is given by Kolovos et al (2009); a survey of model comparison approaches is given by Stephan and Cordy (2013).…”

Section: Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mining domain-specific edit operations from model repositories with applications to semantic lifting of model differences and change profiling

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Model transformations are central to model-driven software development. Applications of model transformations include creating models, handling model co-evolution, model merging, and understanding model evolution. In the past, various (semi-)automatic approaches to derive model transformations from meta-models or from examples have been proposed. These approaches require time-consuming handcrafting or the recording of concrete examples, or they are unable to derive complex transformations. We propose a novel unsupervised approach, called Ockham, which is able to learn edit operations from model histories in model repositories. Ockham is based on the idea that meaningful domain-specific edit operations are the ones that compress the model differences. It employs frequent subgraph mining to discover frequent structures in model difference graphs. We evaluate our approach in two controlled experiments and one real-world case study of a large-scale industrial model-driven architecture project in the railway domain. We found that our approach is able to discover frequent edit operations that have actually been applied before. Furthermore, Ockham is able to extract edit operations that are meaningful—in the sense of explaining model differences through the edit operations they comprise—to practitioners in an industrial setting. We also discuss use cases (i.e., semantic lifting of model differences and change profiles) for the discovered edit operations in this industrial setting. We find that the edit operations discovered by Ockham can be used to better understand and simulate the evolution of models.

show abstract

“…Model comparison [41], [42] matches model elements across models and calculates the differences between the models [43]. Our approach uses model comparison to derive the changes between two view states.…”

Section: E Model Comparisonmentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards the Co-Evolution of Models and Artefacts of Industrial Tools Through External Views

Saglam

Kühn

2021

2021 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems Companion (MODELS-C)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Modern software systems comprise multiple models. When these models are changed, interdependent models must be evolved accordingly. Manually managing this co-evolution of models is tedious and error-prone. Moreover, other interdependent artefacts, such as persisted states of industrial software applications, must co-evolve accordingly. Automated consistency preservation allows for efficiently managing the co-evolution of models. However, while state-of-the-art approaches operate delta-based, typical software applications persist changes statebased without conforming to explicit metamodels. Additionally, software applications may persist changes infrequently, even though interdependent models might be concurrently modified. As such, current approaches are insufficient for artefacts of industrial tools. To address these issues, we propose an approach for the co-evolution of models and artefacts of industrial tools by treating these artefacts as external views on the models.

show abstract

A Survey of Model Comparison Approaches and Applications

Cited by 20 publications

References 62 publications

Model Synchronization: A Formal Framework for the Management of Heterogeneous Models

Model Synchronization: A Formal Framework for the Management of Heterogeneous Models

Mining domain-specific edit operations from model repositories with applications to semantic lifting of model differences and change profiling

Towards the Co-Evolution of Models and Artefacts of Industrial Tools Through External Views

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About