Advertisement

A feature-based survey of model view approaches

  • Hugo BruneliereEmail author
  • Erik Burger
  • Jordi Cabot
  • Manuel Wimmer
Regular Paper
First Online:

Abstract

When dealing with complex systems, information is very often fragmented across many different models expressed within a variety of (modeling) languages. To provide the relevant information in an appropriate way to different kinds of stakeholders, (parts of) such models have to be combined and potentially revamped by focusing on concerns of particular interest for them. Thus, mechanisms to define and compute views over models are highly needed. Several approaches have already been proposed to provide (semi)automated support for dealing with such model views. This paper provides a detailed overview of the current state of the art in this area. To achieve this, we relied on our own experiences of designing and applying such solutions in order to conduct a literature review on this topic. As a result, we discuss the main capabilities of existing approaches and propose a corresponding research agenda. We notably contribute a feature model describing what we believe to be the most important characteristics of the support for views on models. We expect this work to be helpful to both current and potential future users and developers of model view techniques, as well as to any person generally interested in model-based software and systems engineering.

Keywords

Modeling Viewpoint View Model Survey 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. 1.
    ISO/IEC/IEEE Std 42010:2011: Systems and Software Engineering: Architecture Description. IEEE, Los Alamitos (2011)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Alanen, M., Porres, I.: A metamodeling language supporting subset and union properties. Softw. Syst. Model. 7(1), 103–124 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Altmanninger, K., Seidl, M., Wimmer, M.: A survey on model versioning approaches. Int. J. Web Inf. Syst. 5(3), 271–304 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Anjorin, A., Rose, S., Deckwerth, F., Schürr, A.: Efficient model synchronization with view triple graph grammars. In: Proceedings of the 10th European Conference on Modelling Foundations and Applications (ECMFA), pp. 1–17. Springer, Berlin (2014)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Anwar, A., Ebersold, S., Coulette, B., Nassar, M., Kriouile, A.: A rule-driven approach for composing viewpoint-oriented models. J. Object Technol. 9(2), 89–114 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Atkinson, C., Bostan, P., Brenner, D., Falcone, G., Gutheil, M., Hummel, O., Juhasz, M., Stoll, D.: Modeling components and component-based systems in KobrA. In: Rausch, A., Reussner, R., Mirandola, R., Plášil, F. (eds.) The Common Component Modeling Example, pp. 54–84. Springer, Berlin (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Atkinson, C., Stoll, D., Bostan, P.: Orthographic software modeling: a practical approach to view-based development. In: Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Evaluation of Novel Approaches to Software Engineering (ENASE), pp. 206–219. Springer, Berlin (2010)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bergmann, G., Ráth, I., Varró, G., Varró, D.: Change-driven model transformations: change (in) the rule to rule the change. Softw. Syst. Model. 11(3), 431–461 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bernstein, P.A., Melnik, S.: Model management 2.0: manipulating richer mappings. In: Proceedings of the 2007 ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data (SIGMOD), pp. 1–12. ACM, London (2007)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Beyhl, T., Blouin, D., Giese, H., Lambers, L.: On the operationalization of graph queries with generalized discrimination networks. In: Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Graph Transformation (ICGT), pp. 170–186. Springer, Berlin (2016)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bézivin, J., Bouzitouna, S., Del Fabro, M.D., Gervais, M.P., Jouault, F., Kolovos, D., Kurtev, I., Paige, R.F.: A canonical scheme for model composition. In: Proceedings of the Second European Conference on Model Driven Architecture: Foundations and Applications (ECMDA-FA), pp. 346–360. Springer, Berlin (2006)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Breu, R., Grosu, R., Huber, F., Rumpe, B., Schwerin, W.: Systems, views and models of UML. In: UML Workshop, pp. 93–108 (1997)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bruneliere, H., Cabot, J., Dupé, G., Madiot, F.: MoDisco: a model driven reverse engineering framework. Inf. Softw. Technol. 56(8), 1012–1032 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bruneliere, H., Garcia, J., Desfray, P., Khelladi, D.E., Hebig, R., Bendraou, R., Cabot, J.: On lightweight metamodel extension to support modeling tools agility. In: Proceedings of the 11th European Conference on Modelling Foundations and Applications (ECMFA), pp. 62–74. Springer, Berlin (2015)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bruneliere, H., Perez, J.G., Wimmer, M., Cabot, J.: EMF views: a view mechanism for integrating heterogeneous models. In: Proceedings of the 34th International Conference on Conceptual Modeling (ER), pp. 317–325. Springer, Berlin (2015)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Burger, E., Henß, J., Kruse, S., Küster, M., Rentschler, A., Happe, L.: ModelJoin. A textual domain-specific language for the combination of heterogeneous models. Tech. Rep. 1, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Faculty of Informatics (2014). http://digbib.ubka.uni-karlsruhe.de/volltexte/1000037908
  17. 17.
    Burger, E., Henß, J., Küster, M., Kruse, S., Happe, L.: View-based model-driven software development with ModelJoin. Softw. Syst. Model. 15(2), 472–496 (2014)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Burger, E., Schneider, O.: Translatability and Translation of Updated Views in ModelJoin. In: P. van Gorp, G. Engels (eds.) Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on the Theory and Practice of Model Transformations (ICMT), pp. 55–69. Springer, Berlin (2016)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Chechik, M., Nejati, S., Sabetzadeh, M.: A relationship-based approach to model integration. Innov. Syst. Softw. Eng. 8(1), 3–18 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Cicchetti, A., Ciccozzi, F., Leveque, T.: A hybrid approach for multi-view modeling. ECEASST 50 (2011). doi: 10.14279/tuj.eceasst.50.738
  21. 21.
    Combemale, B., DeAntoni, J., Baudry, B., France, R.B., Jézéquel, J., Gray, J.: Globalizing modeling languages. IEEE Comput. 47(6), 68–71 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Czarnecki, K., Helsen, S.: Feature-based survey of model transformation approaches. IBM Syst. J. 45(3), 621–646 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Debreceni, C., Horváth, A., Hegedüs, A., Ujhelyi, Z., Ráth, I., Varró, D.: Query-driven incremental synchronization of view models. In: Proceedings of the 2nd Workshop on View-Based, Aspect-Oriented and Orthographic Software Modelling (VAO), pp. 31:31–31:38. ACM, London (2014)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Derler, P., Lee, E.A., Vincentelli, A.S.: Modeling cyber-physical systems. Proc. IEEE 100(1), 13–28 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Eclipse EMF Facet project. http://www.eclipse.org/facet/
  26. 26.
    Engels, G., Heckel, R., Taentzer, G., Ehrig, H.: A combined reference model- and view-based approach to system specification. Int. J. Softw. Eng. Knowl. Eng. 7(4), 457–477 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Etzlstorfer, J., Kusel, A., Kapsammer, E., Langer, P., Retschitzegger, W., Schoenboeck, J., Schwinger, W., Wimmer, M.: A survey on incremental model transformation approaches. In: Proceedings of the Workshop on Models and Evolution (ME) Co-located with MoDELS, pp. 4–13 (2013)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Feldmann, S., Wimmer, M., Kernschmidt, K., Vogel-Heuser, B.: A comprehensive approach for managing inter-model inconsistencies in automated production systems engineering. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Automation Science and Engineering (CASE), pp. 1120–1127 (2016)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Finkelstein, A., Kramer, J., Nuseibeh, B., Finkelstein, L., Goedicke, M.: Viewpoints: a framework for integrating multiple perspectives in system development. Int. J. Softw. Eng. Knowl. Eng. 2(1), 31–57 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Goldschmidt, T., Becker, S., Burger, E.: Towards a tool-oriented taxonomy of view-based modelling. In: Proceedings of the Modellierung 2012. GI (2012)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Golra, F.R., Beugnard, A., Dagnat, F., Guérin, S., Guychard, C.: Addressing modularity for heterogeneous multi-model systems using model federation. In: Companion Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Modularity, pp. 206–211. ACM, London (2016)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Hidaka, S., Tisi, M., Cabot, J., Hu, Z.: Feature-based classification of bidirectional transformation approaches. Softw. Syst. Model. 15(3), 907–928 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Hildebrandt, S., Lambers, L., Holger, G., Rieke, J., Greenyer, J., Schäfer, W., Lauder, M., Anjorin, A., Schürr, A.: A survey of triple graph grammar tools. In: Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on Bidirectional Transformations (BX), pp. 1–18. EC-EASST (2013)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
  35. 35.
    Hudak, P.: Building domain-specific embedded languages. ACM Comput. Surv. 28(4), 196 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Jakob, J., Königs, A., Schürr, A.: Non-materialized model view specification with triple graph grammars. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Graph Transformations (ICGT), pp. 321–335. Springer, Berlin (2006)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Jakob, J., Schürr, A.: View creation of meta models by using modified triple graph grammars. Electr. Notes Theor. Comput. Sci. 211, 181–190 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Jalali, A., Ghamarian, M.A.H., Rensink, D.A.: Incremental pattern matching for regular expressions. In: Fish, A., Lambers, L. (eds.) Proceedings of the 11th International Workshop on Graph Transformation and Visual Modeling Techniques (GTVMT), pp. 736:1–736:12. EC-EASST, Berlin (2012)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Jouault, F., Tisi, M.: Towards incremental execution of ATL transformations. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on the Theory and Practice of Model Transformations (ICMT), pp. 123–137. Springer, Berlin (2010)Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Kitchenham, B., Charters, S.: Guidelines for performing systematic literature reviews in software engineering. Tech. Rep. EBSE 2007-001, Keele University and Durham University Joint Report (2007)Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Kolovos, D.S., Paige, R.F., Polack, F.A.: Merging models with the epsilon merging language (EML). In: Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems (MoDELS), pp. 215–229. Springer, Berlin (2006)Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Kolovos, D.S., Rose, L.M., Matragkas, N.D., Paige, R.F., Polack, F.A., Fernandes, K.J.: Constructing and navigating non-invasive model decorations. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Theory and Practice of Model Transformations (ICMT), pp. 138–152. Springer, Berlin (2010)Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Krahn, H., Rumpe, B., Völkel, S.: MontiCore: a framework for compositional development of domain specific languages. Int. J. Softw. Tools Technol. Transf. 12(5), 353–372 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Langer, P., Wieland, K., Wimmer, M., Cabot, J.: EMF profiles: a lightweight extension approach for EMF models. J. Object Technol. 11(1), 1–29 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Langlois, B., Exertier, D., Zendagui, B.: Development of modelling frameworks and viewpoints with Kitalpha. In: Proceedings of the 14th Workshop on Domain-Specific Modeling (DSM), pp. 19–22. ACM, London (2014)Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Leblebici, E., Anjorin, A., Schürr, A.: Developing eMoflon with eMoflon. In: Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on the Theory and Practice of Model Transformations (ICMT), pp. 138–145. Springer, Berlin (2014)Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Linington, P.F.: RM-ODP: the architecture. In: Raymond, K., Armstrong, L. (eds.) Open Distributed Processing, pp. 15–33. Springer, Berlin (1995)Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Linnington, P., Milosevic, Z., Tanaka, A., Vallecillo, A.: Building Enterprise Systems with ODP: An Introduction to Open Distributed Processing. CRC Press, Boca Raton (2011)Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Maoz, S., Ringert, J.O., Rumpe, B.: Synthesis of Component and Connector Models from Crosscutting Structural Views. In: Joint Meeting of the European Software Engineering Conference and the ACM SIGSOFT Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering (ESEC/FSE), pp. 444–454. ACM (2013)Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Martinez, S., Garcia-Alfaro, J., Cuppens, F., Cuppens-Boulahia, N., Cabot, J.: Model-driven extraction and analysis of network security policies. In: Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems (MoDELS), pp. 52–68. Springer, Berlin (2013)Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Mayol, E., Teniente, E.: A survey of current methods for integrity constraint maintenance and view updating. In: Proceedings of Advances in Conceptual Modeling (ER’99): Workshops on Evolution and Change in Data Management, Reverse Engineering in Information Systems, and the World Wide Web and Conceptual Modeling, pp. 62–73. Springer, Berlin (1999)Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    OMG Model Driven Architecture. http://www.omg.org/mda/
  53. 53.
    Melnik, S., Bernstein, P.A., Halevy, A., Rahm, E.: Supporting executable mappings in model management. In: Proceedings of the ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data (SIGMOD), pp. 167–178. ACM, London (2005)Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Mens, T., Van Gorp, P.: A taxonomy of model transformation. Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science 152, 125–142 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Moreno, N., Romero, J.R., Vallecillo, A.: An overview of model-driven web engineering and the MDA. In: Rossi, G., Pastor, O., Schwabe, D., Olsina, L. (eds.) Web Engineering: Modelling and Implementing Web Applications, Human–Computer Interaction Series, pp. 353–382. Springer, Berlin (2008)Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Nassar, M.: VUML: a viewpoint oriented UML extension. In: Proceedings of the 18th IEEE International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASE), pp. 373–376 (2003)Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Noyrit, F., Gérard, S., Selic, B.: FacadeMetamodel: Masking UML. In: Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems (MoDELS), pp. 20–35. Springer, Berlin (2012)Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Palpanas, T., Sidle, R., Cochrane, R., Pirahesh, H.: Incremental maintenance for non-distributive aggregate functions. In: Proceedings of 28th International Conference on Very Large Data Bases (VLDB), pp. 802–813. Morgan Kaufmann (2002)Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Rubin, J., Chechik, M., Easterbrook, S.M.: Declarative approach for model composition. In: Proceedings of the 2008 International Workshop on Models in Software Engineering (MiSE), pp. 7–14. ACM, New York (2008)Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Sabetzadeh, M., Easterbrook, S.: View merging in the presence of incompleteness and inconsistency. Requir. Eng. 11(3), 174–193 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Schürr, A.: Specification of graph translators with triple graph grammars. In: Proceedings of the 20th International Workshop on Graph-Theoretic Concepts in Computer Science (WG), pp. 151–163. Springer, Berlin (1994)Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Semeráth, O., Debreceni, C., Horváth, Á., Varró, D.: Incremental backward change propagation of view models by logic solvers. In: Proceedings of the ACM/IEEE 19th International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems, pp. 306–316. ACM, New York (2016)Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Eclipse Sirius project. https://eclipse.org/sirius/
  64. 64.
    Troya, J., Brunelière, H., Fleck, M., Wimmer, M., Orue-Echevarria, L., Gorroñogoitia, J.: ARTIST: model-based stairway to the cloud. In: Proceedings of the Projects Showcase, part of the Software Technologies: Applications and Foundations 2015 Federation of Conferences (STAF), pp. 1–8 (2015)Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    Ujhelyi, Z., Bergmann, G., Hegedüs, Á., Horváth, Á., Izsó, B., Ráth, I., Szatmári, Z., Varró, D.: EMF-IncQuery: an integrated development environment for live model queries. Sci. Comput. Program. 98, 80–99 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Vallecillo, A.: On the combination of domain specific modeling languages. In: Proceedings of the 6th European Conference on Modelling Foundations and Applications (ECMFA), pp. 305–320. Springer, Berlin (2010)Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Vangheluwe, H., Amaral, V., Giese, H., Broenink, J., Schätz, B., Norta, A., Carreira, P., Lukovic, I., Mayerhofer, T., Wimmer, M., Vallecillo, A.: MPM4CPS: Multi-paradigm modelling for cyber-physical systems. In: Joint Proceedings of the Doctoral Symposium and Projects Showcase Held as Part of STAF 2016 Co-located with Software Technologies: Applications and Foundations (STAF 2016), pp. 40–47 (2016)Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Wohlin, C.: Guidelines for snowballing in systematic literature studies and a replication in software engineering. In: Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering (EASE), pp. 38:1–38:10. ACM, London (2014)Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Wood-Harper, A., Antill, L., Avison, D.: Information Systems Definition: The Multiview Approach, Computer Science Texts. Blackwell Scientific, London (1985)Google Scholar
  70. 70.
    Zachman, J.A.: A framework for information systems architecture. IBM Syst. J. 26(3), 276–292 (1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Zito, A., Diskin, Z., Dingel, J.: Package merge in UML 2: practice vs. theory? In: Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems (MoDELS), pp. 185–199. Springer, Berlin (2006)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hugo Bruneliere
    • 1
    Email author
  • Erik Burger
    • 2
  • Jordi Cabot
    • 3
  • Manuel Wimmer
    • 4
  1. 1.AtlanModels Team (IMT Atlantique, Inria & LS2N)IMT Atlantique Bretagne-Pays de la LoireNantesFrance
  2. 2.Institute for Program Structures and Data OrganizationKarlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT)KarlsruheGermany
  3. 3.ICREAOpen University of CataloniaBarcelonaSpain
  4. 4.CDL-MINTTU WienViennaAustria

Personalised recommendations

Cite article

Buy options