Feature Models, Grammars, and Propositional Formulas

Batory, Don

doi:10.1007/11554844_3

Cited by 854 publications

(649 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

615

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…2. 3) we show that PPLs generated by complex models are more naturally, and even necessarily, to be considered as transition systems.…”

Section: Feature Models and Partial Product Linesmentioning

confidence: 87%

“…A common approach is to consider features as atomic propositions, and view a model as a theory in the Boolean propositional logic (BL), whose valid valuations are to be exactly the valid products defined by the model [3]. For example, model M 1 represents the BL theory (i.e., a set of Boolean propositional formulas) BL(M 1 ) = {car} ∪ {eng→car, brakes→car, abs→brakes} ∪ {car→eng, car→brakes}: the first three implications encode subfeature dependencies (a feature can appear in a product only if its parent is in the product), the last two implications encode the mandatory dependencies between features (if a parent of a mandatory feature is included in the product, then it must included too), and the root feature must be always included in the product.…”

Section: Car Eng Absmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Figure 3 (left) shows a fragment of the model in Fig. 1, in which, for uniformity, we have presented the XOR-group as an OR-group with a new CC added to the tree (note the ×-ended arc between mnl and atm) 3 . To build the PPL, we follow the idea described above, and first consider M 3 as a pure tree-based poset with all the extra-structure (denoted by black bullets and black triangles) removed.…”

Section: Partial Product Lines: From Lattices To Transition Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A common approach to formalizing the PL (of full products) of a given model is to use Boolean propositional logic [3]. Features are considered as atomic propositions, and dependencies between features are specified by logical formulas.…”

Section: The Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Specifically, an important problem is to find so called dead features, which do not occur in any product [24]. A typical practical approach to these analysis problems is to encode the model by a Boolean theory, and then use off-the-shelf tools like SAT-solvers [3].…”

Section: Analysis Of Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Faithful Modeling of Product Lines with Kripke Structures and Modal Logic

Diskin¹,

Safilian²,

Maibaum³

et al. 2016

SACS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Software product lines are now an established framework for software design. They are specified by special diagrams called feature models. For formal analysis, the latter are usually encoded by Boolean propositional theories. We discuss a major deficiency of this semantics, and show that it can be fixed by considering a product to be an instantiation process rather than its final result. We call intermediate states of this process partial products, and argue that what a feature model really defines is a poset of its partial products. We argue that such structures can be viewed as special Kripke structure that we call partial product Kripke structures, ppKS. To specify these Kripke structures, we propose a CTL-based logic, called partial product CTL, ppCTL. We show how to represent a feature model M by a ppCTL theory ML(M ) (ML stands for modal logic) such that any ppKS satisfying the theory is equal to the partial product line determined by M . Hence, ML(M ) can be considered a sound and complete representation of M . We also discuss several applications of the modal logic view in feature modeling, including refactoring of feature models.

show abstract

“…2. 3) we show that PPLs generated by complex models are more naturally, and even necessarily, to be considered as transition systems.…”

Section: Feature Models and Partial Product Linesmentioning

confidence: 87%

Section: Car Eng Absmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Partial Product Lines: From Lattices To Transition Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Analysis Of Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Faithful Modeling of Product Lines with Kripke Structures and Modal Logic

Diskin¹,

Safilian²,

Maibaum³

et al. 2016

SACS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Software Architecture for Product Lines

Arboleda¹,

Casallas²,

Chavarriaga³

et al. 2014

Software Architecture 1

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Gaspar: a compositional aspect‐oriented approach for cluster applications

Medeiros

Silva

Sobral

2015

Concurrency and Computation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARYThis paper presents a framework that enables the development of Java applications that execute on CPUs, graphics processing units (GPUs) and clusters of CPUs/GPUs. Applications are specified in an OpenMPlike fashion, accessing data through a framework-provided data API. The framework enables the efficient execution of applications in CPU and/or GPU by relying on two key features: (i) parallelism exploitation patterns are specified by additional aspect modules; and (ii) data layout can be selected according to the target platform. This paper describes how the framework abstractions are mapped and how the framework intrinsically supports the development of applications with hybrid parallelism by composing aspect modules with a given base program. Performance results show that the framework provides a performance level similar to traditional approaches and enables better performance portability for a given base program.

show abstract

Feature Models, Grammars, and Propositional Formulas

Cited by 854 publications

References 12 publications

Faithful Modeling of Product Lines with Kripke Structures and Modal Logic

Faithful Modeling of Product Lines with Kripke Structures and Modal Logic

Software Architecture for Product Lines

Gaspar: a compositional aspect‐oriented approach for cluster applications

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About