Metamodel Adaptation and Model Co-adaptation

Wachsmuth, Guido

doi:10.1007/978-3-540-73589-2_28

Cited by 145 publications

(146 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

145

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…2. Our solution overlaps the solutions presented in [14][16] [17] in the sense of considering both simple and complex changes. 3.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 57%

“…The works described in [14][15] [16][17] [18] assume traces of changes are available, and derive adaptation transformations from them. In particular, [14], [18], and [17] apply stepwise automatic transactions on MM1 to obtain MM2. These approaches then reuse the logs of applied transactions to derive adaptation transformations.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Data set We have results from experimentations which use 8 versions of the Netbeans Java metamodel, and 6 versions of a Petri Net metamodel provided by [14]. For the sake of readability, we just present the results in applying our approach on three versions of each metamodel.…”

Section: Experimental Settingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Managing Model Adaptation by Precise Detection of Metamodel Changes

Garcés

Jouault

Cointe

et al. 2009

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Technological and business changes influence the evolution of software systems. When this happens, the software artifacts may need to be adapted to the changes. This need is rapidly increasing in systems built using the Model-Driven Engineering (MDE) paradigm. An MDE system basically consists of metamodels, terminal models, and transformations. The evolution of a metamodel may render its related terminal models and transformations invalid. This paper proposes a three-step solution that automatically adapts terminal models to their evolving metamodels. The first step computes the equivalences and (simple and complex) changes between a given metamodel, and a former version of the same metamodel. The second step translates the equivalences and differences into an adaptation transformation. This transformation can then be executed in a third step to adapt to the new version any terminal model conforming to the former version. We validate our ideas by implementing a prototype based on the AtlanMod Model Management Architecture (AMMA) platform. We present the accuracy and performance that the prototype delivers on two concrete examples: a Petri Net metamodel from the research literature, and the Netbeans Java metamodel.

show abstract

“…2. Our solution overlaps the solutions presented in [14][16] [17] in the sense of considering both simple and complex changes. 3.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 57%

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Managing Model Adaptation by Precise Detection of Metamodel Changes

Garcés

Jouault

Cointe

et al. 2009

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Our work differentiates from these in being the only one to investigate the automatic synchronization between refinement transformations of application and test cases. Similar problems to our framework are addressed in the field of model and transformation co-evolution, for instance in [18], [26] and [11]. While some of the design issues are shared with these works, our proposal addresses the peculiar relationship between the model of an artifact and the model of a test case.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 89%

Multi-level Tests for Model Driven Web Applications

Fraternali

Tisi

2010

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Model Driven Engineering (MDE) advocates the use of models and transformations to support all the tasks of software development, from analysis to testing and maintenance. Modern MDE methodologies employ multiple models, to represent the different perspectives of the system at a progressive level of abstraction. In these situations, MDE frameworks need to work on a set of interdependent models and tranformations, which may evolve over time. This paper presents a model transformation framework capable of aligning two streams of transformations: the forward engineering stream that goes from the Computation Independent Model to the running code, and the testing stream that goes from the Computation Independent Test specification to an executable test script. The "vertical" transformations composing the two streams are kept aligned, by means of "horizontal" mappings that can be applied after a change in the modeling framework (e.g., an update in the PIM-to-code transformation due to a change in the target deployment technology). The proposed framework has been implemented and is under evaluation in a real-world MDE tool.

show abstract

“…However, for the latter whenever a metamodel evolves, corresponding migrations have to be operated since existing model instances could not be well-formed any more [SK04]. This problem is known as co-evolution or co-adaptation, and a relevant number of research works propose solutions ranging from manual co-adaptation [RKPP10,SK04], to semi-automatic migration through re-use of recurring strategies [HBJ08,Wac07,DIP11] and automatic co-evolution directly generated from the manipulations made to the metamodel [CDP09,DV07].…”

Section: Metamodel Versioningmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Solution for Concurrent Versioning of Metamodels and Models.

Cicchetti¹,

Ciccozzi²,

Leveque³

2012

JOT

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Model-Driven Engineering has been widely recognised as a powerful paradigm for shifting the focus of software development from coding to modelling in order to cope with the rising complexity of modern systems. Models become the main artefacts in the development process and therefore undergo evolutions performed in different ways until the final implementation is produced. Moreover, modelling languages are expected to evolve too and such evolutions have to be taken into account when dealing with model versioning. Since consistency between models and related metamodels is one of the pillars on which model-driven engineering relies, evolution of models and metamodels cannot be considered as independent events in a model versioning system. This article exploits model comparison and merging mechanisms to provide a solution to the issues related to model versioning when considering metamodel and model manipulations as concurrent and even misaligned. A scenario-based description of the challenges arising from versioning of models is given and a running example is exploited to demonstrate the proposed solutions.

show abstract

Metamodel Adaptation and Model Co-adaptation

Cited by 145 publications

References 20 publications

Managing Model Adaptation by Precise Detection of Metamodel Changes

Managing Model Adaptation by Precise Detection of Metamodel Changes

Multi-level Tests for Model Driven Web Applications

A Solution for Concurrent Versioning of Metamodels and Models.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About