Testing operational transformations in model-driven engineering

  • Andrea Ciancone
  • Antonio Filieri
  • Raffaela Mirandola


Model-driven development is gaining importance in software engineering practice. This increasing usage asks for a new generation of testing tools to verify correctness and suitability of model transformations. This paper presents a novel approach to unit testing QVT operational (QVTO) transformations, which overcomes limitations of currently available tools. Our proposal, called MANTra (Model trANsformation Testing), allows software developers to design test cases directly within the QVTO language and verify them without moving from the transformation environment. MANTra is also available as an eclipse feature that can be easily integrated into established development practice.


Model-driven transformation Testing  QVT QVTO MANTra MDE MDA  Transformation testing 



Work partially supported by the European Union projects Q-ImPrESS (FP7 215013) and SMScom (IDEAS 227077).


  1. 1.
    Baudry B, Dinh-Trong T, Mottu J, Simmonds D, France R, Ghosh S, Fleurey F, Le Traon Y (2006) Model transformation testing challenges. In: Proceedings of IMDT workshop in conjunction with ECMDA’06.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Becker S, Koziolek H, Reussner R (2009) The palladio component model for model-driven performance prediction. J Syst Softw 82(1):3–22 (special issue: Software performance—modeling and analysis)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ciancone A (2010) jomot frameworkGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ciancone A, Filieri A (2010) Mantra website. Accessed 30 June 2011
  5. 5.
    Community A (1997) The alloy analyzer. Accessed 30 June 2011
  6. 6.
    Consortium QI (2009) Project website. Accessed 30 June 2011
  7. 7.
    EMF (2009) Eclipse modeling framework, 2nd edn. Addison-Wesley Longman, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fleurey F, Steel J, Baudry B (2004) Validation in model-driven engineering: testing model transformations. In: First international workshop on model design and validation, pp 29–40Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    The Eclipse Foundation (2004) Project website. Accessed 30 June 2011
  10. 10.
    France R, Rumpe B (2007) Model-driven development of complex software: A research roadmap. In: Proceedings of future of software engineering FOSE ’07, pp 37–54. doi: 10.1109/FOSE.2007.14
  11. 11.
    Grassi V, Mirandola R, Randazzo E, Sabetta A (2007) Klaper: an intermediate language for model-driven predictive analysis of performance and reliability. The common component modeling example, pp 327–356Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    The OMG (2008) Qvt 1.0 specification. Accessed 30 June 2011
  13. 13.
    Harrold MJ (2000) Testing: a roadmap. In: In the future of software engineering. ACM Press, New York, pp 61–72Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lin Y, Zhang J, Gray J (2004) Model comparison: a key challenge for transformation testing and version control in model driven software development. In: Control in model driven software development. OOPSLA/GPCE: best practices for model-driven software development. Springer, Berlin, pp 219–236Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lin Y, Zhang J, Gray J (2005) A testing framework for model transformations. In: Model-driven software development—research and practice in software engineering. Springer, New York, pp 219–236Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Martens A, Koziolek H, Becker S, Reussner R (2010) Automatically improve software architecture models for performance, reliability, and cost using evolutionary algorithms. In: Proceedings of 1st joint WOSP/SIPEW international conference on performance engineering (WOSP/SIPEW’10). ACM, New York, pp 105–116. doi: 10.1145/1712605.1712624
  17. 17.
    Mcgill MJ, Cheng BHC (2007) Test-driven development of a model transformation with jemtteGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Sen S, Baudry B, Mottu JM (2008) On combining multi-formalism knowledge to select models for model transformation testing. In: 1st international conference on software testing, verification, and validation, pp 328–337Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Wang J, Kim SK, Carrington D (2008) Automatic generation of test models for model transformations. In: ASWEC ’08: Proceedings of the 19th Australian conference on software engineering. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, pp 432–440Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Zhang M, Hall T, Baddoo N (2011) Code bad smells: a review of current knowledge. J Softw Maint Evol Res Pract 23(3):179–202CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Andrea Ciancone
    • 1
  • Antonio Filieri
    • 1
  • Raffaela Mirandola
    • 1
  1. 1.Dipartimento di Elettronica e InformazionePolitecnico di MilanoMilanItaly

Personalised recommendations