Using Maude

Clavel, Manuel; Durán, Francisco; Eker, Steven; Lincoln, Patrick; Martí-Oliet, Narciso; Meseguer, José; Talcott, Carolyn

doi:10.1007/978-3-540-71999-1_2

Cited by 56 publications

(122 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

122

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In particular, given a mel theory (Σ, E), its initial algebra is denoted T (Σ/E) ; its elements are E-equivalence classes of ground terms in T Σ . Under appropriate executability requirements explained in [9], such as confluence, termination, and sort-decreasingness modulo A, a mel theory (Σ, E), where E = E 0 ∪ A, becomes executable by rewriting with the equations and memberships E 0 modulo some structural axioms A. Furthermore, the initial algebra T (Σ/E) then becomes isomorphic to the canonical term algebra Can Σ/E0,A whose elements are A-equivalence classes of ground Σ-terms that cannot be further simplified by the equations and memberships in E 0 .…”

Section: Preliminariesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Maude [9] is a declarative language where programs are rewrite theories, and where Maude computations are logical deductions using the axioms specified in the theory/program. Maude provides several verification techniques, including model checking, for systems specified as rewrite theories.…”

Section: Preliminariesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although without OCL, in [23], the authors present how to directly use Maude to provide the structural and dynamic semantics of DSLs, where metamodels are encoded as rewrite theories and models as collections of objects. Therefore, Maudebased formal verification techniques can be applied as described in [9]. Despite the similar use of verification techniques, there are several differences between both approaches.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The main new contributions of this work are: (i) the notion of metamodel specification as a pair (M , C ), where M is a MOF metamodel and C is a set of OCL constraints that are meaningful for M ; (ii) algebraic semantics for metamodel specifications, so that the structural conformance relation is enriched with the satisfaction of OCL constraints and characterized by equational axioms; (iii) the use of OCL expressions for dynamic analysis using Maude-based verification techniques [9]; and (iv) the implementation of these new concepts in the MOMENT2 framework by enabling the validation of OCL constraints over models in the Eclipse Modeling Framework (EMF) [10].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Algebraic Semantics of OCL-Constrained Metamodel Specifications

Boronat

Meseguer

2009

Objects, Components, Models and Patterns

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. In the definition of domain-specific languages a MOF metamodel is used to define the main types of its abstract syntax, and OCL invariants are used to add semantic constraints. The semantics of a metamodel definition can be given as a model type whose values are well-formed models. A model is said to conform to its metamodel when it is a value of the corresponding model type. However, when OCL invariants are involved, the concept of model conformance has not yet been formally defined in the MOF standard. In this work, the concept of OCL-constrained metamodel conformance is formally defined and used for defining style-preserving software architecture configurations. This concept is supported in MOMENT2, an algebraic framework for MOF metamodeling, where OCL constraints can be used for both static and dynamic analysis.

show abstract

Section: Preliminariesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Preliminariesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Algebraic Semantics of OCL-Constrained Metamodel Specifications

Boronat

Meseguer

2009

Objects, Components, Models and Patterns

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…architectural reconfigurations ensuring a good load-balance but involving a low number of re-bindings, or class diagram refactorings reducing the number of classes but not requiring too many method pull-ups. For this purpose we define some basic machinery based on rewriting logic and we devise a methodology to use it in practice with Maude [5], the rewrite engine tool supporting rewriting logic. In particular this paper presents 1) a novel representation of models based on nested collections of objects described with rewriting logic, 2) a methodology for exploiting the nesting structure in the declaration of rules, 3) a purely declarative presentation of planning problems with multi-criteria optimisation, i.e.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploiting the Hierarchical Structure of Rule-Based Specifications for Decision Planning

Boronat¹,

Bruni²,

Lafuente³

et al. 2010

Formal Techniques for Distributed Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Rule-based specifications have been very successful as a declarative approach in many domains, due to the handy yet solid foundations offered by rule-based machineries like term and graph rewriting. Realistic problems, however, call for suitable techniques to guarantee scalability. For instance, many domains exhibit a hierarchical structure that can be exploited conveniently. This is particularly evident for composition associations of models. We propose an explicit representation of such structured models and a methodology that exploits it for the description and analysis of model-and rule-based systems. The approach is presented in the framework of rewriting logic and its efficient implementation in the rewrite engine Maude and is illustrated with a case study.

show abstract

Search‐based model transformations

Fleck

Troya

Wimmer

2016

J Software Evolu Process

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Model transformations are an important cornerstone of model‐driven engineering, a discipline which facilitates the abstraction of relevant information of a system as models. The success of the final system mainly depends on the optimization of these models through model transformations. Currently, the application of transformations is realized either by following the apply‐as‐long‐as‐possible strategy or by the provision of explicit rule orchestrations. This implies two main limitations. First, the optimization objectives are implicitly hidden in the transformation rules and their orchestration. Second, manually finding the best orchestration for a particular scenario is a major challenge due to the high number of possible combinations. To overcome these limitations, we present a novel framework that builds on the non‐intrusive integration of optimization and model transformation technologies. In particular, we formulate the transformation orchestration task as an optimization problem, which allows for the efficient exploration of the transformation space and explication of the transformation objectives. Our generic framework provides several search algorithms and guides the user in providing a proper search configuration. We present different instantiations of our framework to demonstrate its feasibility, applicability, and benefits using several case studies. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

show abstract

Using Maude

Cited by 56 publications

References 0 publications

Algebraic Semantics of OCL-Constrained Metamodel Specifications

Algebraic Semantics of OCL-Constrained Metamodel Specifications

Exploiting the Hierarchical Structure of Rule-Based Specifications for Decision Planning

Search‐based model transformations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About