2008
DOI: 10.1007/s11219-008-9048-5
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Evaluating pattern conformance of UML models: a divide-and-conquer approach and case studies

Abstract: A design pattern is realized in various forms depending on the context of the applications. There has been intensive research on detecting pattern instances in models and in implementations. However, little work addresses variations of pattern realization. This paper describes an approach for evaluating conformance of pattern variations. This approach uses a divide-and-conquer strategy to evaluate the structural conformance of a UML class diagram to the solution of a design pattern. A design pattern is specifi… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
24
0

Year Published

2010
2010
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 34 publications
(24 citation statements)
references
References 28 publications
0
24
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Kim and Khwand [3], Kim and Shen [4] use class diagrams and collaboration diagrams to generate a meta-model for each design pattern. However, this approach has two limitations which are: 1) the metamodels of some patterns will be similar as some patterns are similar in their structure but they have different intent for example State, Strategy patterns and Fa莽ade, Adapter patterns.…”
Section: Uml Based Approachmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Kim and Khwand [3], Kim and Shen [4] use class diagrams and collaboration diagrams to generate a meta-model for each design pattern. However, this approach has two limitations which are: 1) the metamodels of some patterns will be similar as some patterns are similar in their structure but they have different intent for example State, Strategy patterns and Fa莽ade, Adapter patterns.…”
Section: Uml Based Approachmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Some of these studies developed techniques for suggesting the suitable pattern based on the UML design diagrams [3], [4]. Other techniques are based on question-answer [5], [6].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Unfortunately, only a simple pattern is shown and no detection semantics is discussed, thus making it difficult to assess the genericity of the approach. Another approach [38] specifies patterns by extending their target metamodels, adding pattern-related constraints. For example, the structural aspect of GoF patterns is defined by extending the classifier-related metaclasses, while the behavioral aspect is defined by extending the interaction-related metaclasses of the UML metamodel.…”
Section: Metamodeling Approachesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Since FullAdderBase is a condition of FullAdder1 (line 26) and their domains are bound to each other, the execution engine efficiently narrows down the candidate sets of variable bindings to those previously obtained for FullAdderBase (in this case, a single set of bindings). The engine additionally verifies FullAdder1's own conditions (e.g., on [38][39][40][41][42][43][44][45], which leads to creating a PResults pattern occurrence corresponding to that valid set of bindings (Fig. 24).…”
Section: Inputto=g2:gate {})mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…They have implemented it as a tool called RBMLCC, an add-on component of IBM Rational Rose. They also report a case study where 7 of the 23 GoF patterns are specified (Kim and Shen, 2008). However, the tool does not fully support RBML yet.…”
Section: Related Work and Associated Problemsmentioning
confidence: 99%