Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Validation and verification in domain-specific modeling method engineering: an integrated life-cycle view

  • Special Section Paper
  • Published:
Software and Systems Modeling Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Enterprise models have the potential to constitute a valuable asset for organizations, e.g., in terms of enabling a variety of analyses or by fostering cross-organizational communication. Therefore, while designing an enterprise modeling method one needs to ensure that created enterprise models are of good quality in terms of: (1)  syntactic validity, which entails that a model adheres to syntactic rules encoded in the underlying modeling language, (2) semantic validity, i.e., that the model should make sense in its context of use, and (3) pragmatic validity, i.e., that the model should effectively and efficiently serve the intended purpose. To ensure these three validity types, verification and validation (V &V) techniques need to be exploited while designing the enterprise modeling method, e.g., to check created enterprise models against syntactic rules, or to ensure intra- and inter-model consistency. This paper targets the systematic embedding of V &V techniques into the engineering of (enterprise) domain-specific modeling methods (DSMMs). Specifically, after identifying and analyzing existing DSMM engineering approaches, we synthesize their elements (such as typical phases and steps) and enrich them with V &V techniques. This paper is an extension of our previous work and additionally contributes (1) a systematic analysis of a wider set of existing approaches to DSMM engineering, (2) an extended background that covers information on models, modeling languages and modeling methods, (3) additional details regarding selected validation and verification techniques for each phase, and finally (4) a road-map encompassing desiderata for further advances in V &V in domain-specific modeling method engineering, from the perspectives of practice, research and education.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. For instance, compare the foundational ontologies discussed in [129], which strongly rests on the assumption that an information system represents some “real-world” phenomena, with [55], who in their foundational ontology place primacy on the linguistic and cognitive faculties of human users. Thus, also the modeling language aspects assessed differ between [55] and [129].

References

  1. Ahrendt, W., Beckert, B., Bubel, R., Hähnle, R., Schmitt, P.H., Ulbrich, M. (eds.): Deductive Software Verification - The KeY Book - From Theory to Practice, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 10001. Springer (2016)

  2. Alaca, O.F., Tezel, B.T., Challenger, M., Goulão, M., Amaral, V., Kardas, G.: AgentDSM-Eval: A framework for the evaluation of domain-specific modeling languages for multi-agent systems. Computer Standards & Interfaces 76, 103–513 (2021)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Almonte, L., Guerra, E., Cantador, I., De Lara, J.: Recommender systems in model-driven engineering. Software and Systems Modeling pp. 1–32 (2021)

  4. Ammann, P., Offutt, J.: Introduction to Software Testing. Cambridge University Press (2016)

  5. Antunes, G., Barateiro, J., Caetano, A., Borbinha, J.: Analysis of federated enterprise architecture models. In: ECIS 2015 Completed Research Papers (2015)

  6. Asici, T.Z., Tezel, B.T., Kardas, G.: On the use of the analytic hierarchy process in the evaluation of domain-specific modeling languages for multi-agent systems. Journal of Computer Languages 62, 101–020 (2021)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Azevedo, C.L., Almeida, J.P.A., van Sinderen, M., Quartel, D., Guizzardi, G.: An ontology-based semantics for the motivation extension to Archimate. In: Proceedings of 2011 IEEE 15th International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference, pp. 25–34. IEEE (2011)

  8. Azevedo, C.L., Iacob, M.E., Almeida, J.P.A., van Sinderen, M., Pires, L.F., Guizzardi, G.: Modeling resources and capabilities in enterprise architecture: A well-founded ontology-based proposal for archimate. Inf. Syst. 54, 235–262 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Baier, C., Katoen, J.P.: Principles of Model Checking. MIT press (2008)

  10. Barash, M.: Enabling language engineering for the masses. In: Companion Proceedings of the 23rd ACM/IEEE International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems (2020)

  11. Barjis, J.: Collaborative, participative and interactive enterprise modeling. In: International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems, pp. 651–662. Springer (2009)

  12. Barriga, A., Rutle, A., Heldal, R.: AI-powered model repair: an experience report-lessons learned, challenges, and opportunities. Software and Systems Modeling pp. 1–23 (2022)

  13. Bézivin, J., Bruneliere, H., Jouault, F., Kurtev, I.: Model engineering support for tool interoperability. In: Proceedings of Workshop in Software Model Engineering (WiSME’2005) - MODELS 2005 Satellite Event (2005)

  14. Bibel, W.: Automated Theorem Proving. Springer Science & Business Media (2013)

  15. Bork, D.: A development method for the conceptual design of multi-view modeling tools with an emphasis on consistency requirements. Ph.D. thesis, University of Bamberg (2015)

  16. Bork, D.: Metamodel-based analysis of domain-specific conceptual modeling methods. In: Buchmann, R.A., Karagiannis, D., Kirikova, M. (eds.) The Practice of Enterprise Modeling, pp. 172–187. Springer International Publishing, Cham (2018)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  17. Bork, D., Roelens, B.: A technique for evaluating and improving the semantic transparency of modeling language notations. Software and Systems Modeling pp. 1–25 (2021)

  18. Braga, B.F., Almeida, J.P.A., Guizzardi, G., Benevides, A.B.: Transforming OntoUML into Alloy: towards conceptual model validation using a lightweight formal method. Innovations Syst. Softw. Eng. 6(1), 55–63 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Brat, G.: V & V of flight-critical systems. In: Proceedings of 2nd NASA Formal Methods Symposium (NFM 2010) (2010)

  20. Brinkkemper, S.: Method engineering: engineering of information systems development methods and tools. Inf. Softw. Technol. 38(4), 275–280 (1996)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Caire, P., Genon, N., Heymans, P., Moody, D.L.: Visual notation design 2.0: Towards user comprehensible requirements engineering notations. In: Proceedings of the 21st IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE 2013), pp. 115–124. IEEE (2013)

  22. Chapurlat, V., Braesch, C.: Verification, validation, qualification and certification of enterprise models: Statements and opportunities. Comput. Ind. 59(7), 711–721 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Chapurlat, V., Kamsu-Foguem, B., Prunet, F.: A formal verification framework and associated tools for enterprise modeling: Application to ueml. Comput. Ind. 57(2), 153–166 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Clarke, E.M., Henzinger, T.A., Veith, H., Bloem, R., et al.: Handbook of Model Checking, vol. 10. Springer (2018)

  25. Cunha, A., Garis, A.G., Riesco, D.: Translating between alloy specifications and UML class diagrams annotated with OCL. Software & Systems Modeling 14(1), 5–25 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. De Kinderen, S., Kaczmarek-Heß, M., Rosenthal, K.: Towards an empirical perspective on multi-level modeling and a comparison with conventional meta modeling. In: Companion Proceedings of 2021 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems, pp. 531–535 (2021)

  27. De Kinderen, S., Ma, Q.: Requirements engineering for the design of conceptual modeling languages. Appl. Ontol. 10(1), 7–24 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Department of Defense: Instruction 5000.61: DoD Modeling and Simulation (M &S) Verification, Validation and Accreditation (VV &A). Tech. rep., Department of Defense (2003)

  29. Dijkstra, E.W.: A Discipline of Programming. Pearson (1976)

  30. Dijkstra, E.W., Feijen, W.: A Method of Programming. Addison Wesley Longman (1988)

  31. Duffy, D.A.: Principles of Automated Theorem Proving. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. (1991)

  32. Efendioglu, N., Woitsch, R.: Modelling method design: An adoxx realisation. In: 2016 IEEE 20th International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Workshop (EDOCW), pp. 1–8. IEEE Computer Society (2016)

  33. Efendioglu, N., Woitsch, R., Karagiannis, D.: Modelling method design: a model-driven approach. In: Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Information Integration and Web-based Applications & Services, iiWAS 2015, Brussels, Belgium, December 11-13, 2015, pp. 59:1–59:10. ACM (2015)

  34. Erdweg, S., van der Storm, T., Völter, M., Tratt, L., Bosman, R., Cook, W.R., Gerritsen, A., Hulshout, A., Kelly, S., Loh, A., Konat, G., Molina, P.J., Palatnik, M., Pohjonen, R., Schindler, E., Schindler, K., Solmi, R., Vergu, V., Visser, E., van der Vlist, K., Wachsmuth, G., van der Woning, J.: Evaluating and comparing language workbenches: Existing results and benchmarks for the future. Computer Languages, Systems & Structures 44, 24–47 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Feltus, C., Ma, Q., Proper, H.A., Kelsen, P.: Towards AI assisted domain modeling. In: Proceedings of ER 2021 Workshop Advances in Conceptual Modeling, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 12584, pp. 75–89. Springer (2021)

  36. Fill, H., Karagiannis, D.: On the Conceptualisation of Modelling Methods Using the ADOxx Meta Modelling Platform. EMISA 8(1), 4–25 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  37. Fill, H.G., Redmond, T., Karagiannis, D.: Formalizing meta models with FDMM: The ADOxx case. In: Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems (ICEIS 2012), LNBIP, vol. 141, pp. 429–451 (2013)

  38. Filliâtre, J.C.: Deductive software verification. Int. J. Softw. Tools Technol. Transfer 13(5), 397–403 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Frank, U.: Outline of a method for designing domain-specific modelling languages. ICB Research Report 42, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen (2010)

  40. Frank, U.: Multi-perspective enterprise modelling: background and terminological foundation. ICB-Research Report 46, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen (2011)

  41. Frank, U.: Multi-perspective enterprise modeling: foundational concepts, prospects and future research challenges. Softw. Syst. Model. 13(3), 941–962 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Frank, U.: Domain-specific modeling languages: Requirements analysis and design guidelines. In: Reinhartz-Berger, I., Sturm, A., Clark, T., Cohen, S., Bettin, J. (eds.) Domain Engineering, pp. 133–157. Springer, Berlin (2013)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  43. Frank, U.: Multi-perspective enterprise modeling: Foundational concepts, prospects and future research challenges. Softw. Syst. Model. 13(3), 941–962 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-012-0273-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Fumagalli, M., Sales, T.P., Guizzardi, G.: Towards automated support for conceptual model diagnosis and repair. In: Proceedings of ER 2020 Workshop Advances in Conceptual Modeling, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 12584, pp. 15–25. Springer (2020)

  45. Gammaitoni, L.: On the use of Alloy in engineering domain specific modeling languages. Phd thesis, University of Luxembourg (2017)

  46. Gammaitoni, L., Kelsen, P.: Domain-specific visualization of alloy instances. In: Proceedings of the 4th International ABZ Conference, ABZ 2014, LNCS, vol. 8477, pp. 324–327 (2014)

  47. Gammaitoni, L., Kelsen, P.: F-Alloy: a relational model transformation language based on alloy. Softw. Syst. Model. 18(1), 213–247 (2019)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Gammaitoni, L., Kelsen, P., Glodt, C.: Designing languages using Lightning. In: Proceedings of the 2015 ACM SIGPLAN International Conference on Software Language Engineering (SLE 2015), p. 77-82 (2015)

  49. Gammaitoni, L., Kelsen, P., Ma, Q.: Agile validation of model transformations using compound F-Alloy specifications. Sci. Comput. Program. 162, 55–75 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Geeraerts, D.: Theories of lexical semantics. Oxford University Press (2010)

  51. Ghiran, A.M., Osman, C.C., Buchmann, R.A.: Advancing conceptual modeling education towards a generalized model value proposition. In: Siarheyeva, A., Barry, C., Lang, M., Linger, H., Schneider, C. (eds.) Advances in Information Systems Development, pp. 1–18. Springer International Publishing, Cham (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  52. Golas, U., Ehrig, H., Herrmann, F.: Formal specification of model transformations by triple graph grammars with application conditions. Electronic Communications of the EASST 39 (2011)

  53. González, C.A., Cabot, J.: Formal verification of static software models in MDE: A systematic review. Inf. Softw. Technol. 56(8), 821–838 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Gries, D.: The Science of Programming. Springer (1981)

  55. Guizzardi, G., Wagner, G., Almeida, J.P.A., Guizzardi, R.S.: Towards ontological foundations for conceptual modeling: The unified foundational ontology (UFO) story. Appl. Ontol. 10(3–4), 259–271 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Gupta, R., Kranz, S., Regnat, N., Rumpe, B., Wortmann, A.: Towards a systematic engineering of industrial domain-specific languages. In: Proceedings of 2021 IEEE/ACM 8th International Workshop on Software Engineering Research and Industrial Practice (SER IP), pp. 49–56 (2021)

  57. Hadar, I.: When intuition and logic clash: The case of the object-oriented paradigm. Sci. Comput. Program. 78(9), 1407–1426 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Hajibayova, L.: Basic-level categories: A review. J. Inf. Sci. 39(5), 676–687 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Hall, T., Stacey, J.: Python 3 for Absolute Beginners, 1st edn. Apress, USA (2009)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  60. Henderson-Sellers, B., Ralyté, J.: Situational method engineering: state-of-the-art review. Journal of Universal Computer Science (2010)

  61. Hornung, T., Koschmider, A., Lausen, G.: Recommendation based process modeling support: Method and user experience. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Conceptual Modeling (ER 2008), pp. 265–278. Springer (2008)

  62. Iung, A., Carbonell, J., Marchezan, L., Rodrigues, E., Bernardino, M., Basso, F.P., Medeiros, B.: Systematic mapping study on domain-specific language development tools. Empir. Softw. Eng. 25(5), 4205–4249 (2020)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Jackson, D.: Software Abstractions: Logic, Language, and Analysis. The MIT Press (2012). Revised edition

  64. Jackson, D.: Alloy: A language and tool for exploring software designs. Commun. ACM 62(9), 66–76 (2019)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Jannaber, S., Riehle, D.M., Delfmann, P., Thomas, O., Becker, J.: Designing a framework for the development of domain-specific process modelling languages. In: A. Maedche, J. vom Brocke, A. Hevner (eds.) Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Designing the Digital Transformation (DESRIST 2017), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 10243, pp. 39–54. Springer (2017)

  66. Jeusfeld, M.A.: Semcheck: Checking constraints for multi-perspective modeling languages. In: D. Karagiannis, H.C. Mayr, J. Mylopoulos (eds.) Domain-Specific Conceptual Modeling: Concepts, Methods and Tools, pp. 31–53. Springer International Publishing (2016)

  67. Jeusfeld, M.A., Neumayr, B.: DeepTelos: Multi-level modeling with most general instances. In: Proceedings of the 35th International Conference on Conceptual Modeling (ER 2016), pp. 198–211. Springer (2016)

  68. Johnson, P., Lagerström, R., Närman, P., Simonsson, M.: Enterprise architecture analysis with extended influence diagrams. Inf. Syst. Front. 9(2–3), 163–180 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. Kahraman, G., Bilgen, S.: A framework for qualitative assessment of domain-specific languages. Software & Systems Modeling 14(4), 1505–1526 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. Kaner, C., Falk, J.L., Nguyen, H.Q.: Testing Computer Software, 2nd edn. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. (1999)

  71. Karagiannis, D.: Agile modeling method engineering. In: Proceedings of the 19th Panhellenic Conference on Informatics, PCI 2015, pp. 5–10. ACM (2015)

  72. Karagiannis, D.: Conceptual modelling methods: The AMME agile engineering approach. In: Informatics in Economy, pp. 3–19. Springer International Publishing (2018)

  73. Karagiannis, D., Buchmann, R.A., Boucher, X., Cavalieri, S., Florea, A., Kiritsis, D., Lee, M.: Omilab: A smart innovation environment for digital engineers. In: L.M. Camarinha-Matos, H. Afsarmanesh, A. Ortiz (eds.) Boosting Collaborative Networks 4.0, pp. 273–282. Springer International Publishing, Cham (2020)

  74. Karagiannis, D., Burzynski, P., Utz, W., Buchmann, R.A.: A metamodeling approach to support the engineering of modeling method requirements. In: Proceedings of the 27th IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference, RE 2019, pp. 199–210. IEEE (2019)

  75. Karagiannis, D., Kühn, H.: Metamodelling platforms. In: Proceedings of the third International Conference on E-Commerce and Web Technologies (EC-Web 2002), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 2455, p. 182. Springer (2002)

  76. Karsai, G., Krahn, H., Pinkernell, C., Rumpe, B., Schindler, M., Völkel, S.: Design guidelines for domain specific languages. CoRR abs/1409.2378 (2014). http://arxiv.org/abs/1409.2378

  77. Kharbili, M.E.: Enterprise management of regulatory compliance : a model-driven framework for policy-based regulatory compliance management in business process-centered enterprise models. Ph.D. thesis, University of Luxembourg (2013)

  78. Kharbili, M.E., Ma, Q., Kelsen, P., Pulvermüller, E.: CoReL: Policy-based and model-driven regulatory compliance management. In: Proceedings of the 15th IEEE International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference, EDOC 2011, pp. 247–256. IEEE Computer Society (2011)

  79. Kharbili, M.E., Ma, Q., Kelsen, P., Pulvermüller, E.: Enterprise regulatory compliance modeling using corel: An illustrative example. In: Proceedings of the 13th IEEE Conference on Commerce and Enterprise Computing, CEC 2011, pp. 185–190. IEEE Computer Society (2011)

  80. de Kinderen, S., Ma, Q., Kaczmarek-Heß, M.: Towards extending the validation possibilities of ADOxx with Alloy. In: Proceedings of the 13th IFIP Working Conference on the Practice of Enterprise Modeling, pp. 138–152. Springer (2020)

  81. 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). http://www.dur.ac.uk/ebse/resources/Systematic-reviews-5-8.pdf

  82. Kitchenham, B., Pretorius, R., Budgen, D., Pearl Brereton, O., Turner, M., Niazi, M., Linkman, S.: Systematic literature reviews in software engineering - a tertiary study. Inf. Softw. Technol. 52(8), 792–805 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  83. Krogstie, J.: Evaluating UML Using a Generic Quality Framework, p. 1-22. IGI Global, USA (2003)

  84. Krogstie, J., Sindre, G., Jørgensen, H.: Process models representing knowledge for action: a revised quality framework. Eur. J. Inf. Syst. 15(1), 91–102 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  85. Krogstie, J., Sindre, G., Lindland, O.I.: 20 years of quality of models. In: Seminal Contributions to Information Systems Engineering, 25 Years of CAiSE, pp. 103–107. Springer (2013)

  86. Op ’t Land, M., Dietz, J.L.G.: Benefits of enterprise ontology in governing complex enterprise transformations. In: Proceedings of the 2nd Enterprise Engineering Working Conference on Advances in Enterprise Engineering EEWC 2012, Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol. 110, pp. 77–92. Springer (2012)

  87. Op ’t Land, M., Proper, E., Waage, M., Cloo, J., Steghuis, C.: The Results of Enterprise Architecting, pp. 49–83. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg (2009)

  88. Lankhorst, M.M., Proper, H.A., Jonkers, H.: The anatomy of the ArchiMate language. International Journal of Information System Modeling and Design (IJISMD) 1(1), 1–32 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  89. Lano, K., Clark, D.: Model transformation specification and verification. In: Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Quality Software, pp. 45–54. IEEE (2008)

  90. Lano, K., Clark, T., Kolahdouz-Rahimi, S.: A framework for model transformation verification. Formal Aspects Comput. 27(1), 193–235 (2015)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  91. van der Linden, D., Hoppenbrouwers, S., Lartseva, A., Molnar, W.: Beyond terminologies: Using psychometrics to validate shared ontologies. Appl. Ontol. 7(4), 471–487 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  92. Lindland, O.I., Sindre, G., Sølvberg, A.: Understanding quality in conceptual modeling. IEEE Softw. 11(2), 42–49 (1994)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  93. Loveland, D.W.: Automated Theorem Proving: A Logical Basis. Elsevier (2016)

  94. Ma, Q., Kaczmarek-Heß, M., de Kinderen, S.: Validation and verification in domain-specific modeling method engineering. In: Proceedings of the 14th IFIP Working Conference on the Practice of Enterprise Modeling, Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol. 432, pp. 119–133. Springer (2021)

  95. Ma, Q., Kelsen, P., Glodt, C.: A generic model decomposition technique and its application to the eclipse modeling framework. Software & Systems Modeling 14(2), 921–952 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  96. Malavolta, I., Lago, P., Muccini, H., Pelliccione, P., Tang, A.: What industry needs from architectural languages: A survey. Software Engineering, IEEE Transactions on 39(6), 869–891 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  97. Michael, J., Mayr, H.C.: Creating a domain specific modelling method for ambient assistance. In: Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Advances in ICT for Emerging Regions (ICTer 2015), pp. 119–124 (2015)

  98. Moody, D.L.: The physics of notations: Toward a scientific basis for constructing visual notations in software engineering. IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 35(6), 756–779 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  99. Myers, G.J., Sandler, C., Badgett, T.: The Art of Software Testing, 3rd edn. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. (2012)

  100. Negm, E., Makady, S., Salah, A.: Survey on domain specific languages implementation aspects. International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications 10(11) (2019)

  101. Nickerson, R.C., Varshney, U., Muntermann, J.: A method for taxonomy development and its application in information systems. Eur. J. Inf. Syst. 22(3), 336–359 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  102. Niemann, K.D.: From enterprise architecture to IT governance, vol. 1. Springer (2006)

  103. Okoli, C.: A guide to conducting a standalone systematic literature review. Communications of the Association for Information Systems p. 37 (2015)

  104. OMG: OMG meta object facility (MOF) core specification, version 2.5.1. Tech. rep

  105. Ozkaya, M., Akdur, D.: What do practitioners expect from the meta-modeling tools? A survey. Journal of Computer Languages 63, 101–030 (2021)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  106. Persson, A., Stirna, J.: Towards defining a competence profile for the enterprise modeling practitioner. In: Proceedings of the 3rd IFIP Working Conference on the Practice of Enterprise Modeling, pp. 232–245. Springer (2010)

  107. Pohl, K.: Requirements engineering: fundamentals, principles, and techniques. Springer Publishing Company, Incorporated (2010)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  108. Poletaeva, T., Guizzardi, G., Almeida, J.P.A., Abdulrab, H.: Revisiting the DEMO transaction pattern with the unified foundational ontology (UFO). In: Proceedings of the 7th Enterprise Engineering Working Conference on Advances in Enterprise Engineering EEWC 2017, pp. 181–195. Springer (2017)

  109. Poltronieri, I., Pedroso, A.C., Zorzo, A.F., Bernardino, M., de Borba Campos, M.: Is usability evaluation of DSL still a trending topic? In: Proceeding of the International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction. Theory, Methods and Tools (HCI 2021), pp. 299–317. Springer (2021)

  110. Poltronieri Rodrigues, I., de Borba Campos, M., Zorzo, A.F.: Usability evaluation of domain-specific languages: A systematic literature review. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction. User Interface Design, Development and Multimodality (HCI 2017), pp. 522–534. Springer (2017)

  111. Proper, H.A., Bjeković, M., van Gils, B., de Kinderen, S.: Enterprise architecture modelling: purpose, requirements and language. In: Proceedings of the 22nd IEEE International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Workshop (EDOCW 2018), pp. 162–169. IEEE (2018)

  112. Razo-Zapata, I.S., Chew, E., Ma, Q., Gammaitoni, L., Proper, H.A.: Enabling value co-creation in customer journeys with VIVA. In: Proceedings of Joint International Conference of Service Science and Innovation and Serviceology (2018)

  113. Savary-Leblanc, M., Le-Pallec, X., Gérard, S.: A modeling assistant for cognifying MBSE tools. In: Companion Proceedings of ACM/IEEE International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems, pp. 630–634 (2021)

  114. Schumann, J.M.: Automated Theorem Proving in Software Engineering. Springer Science & Business Media (2001)

  115. Seligman, E., Schubert, T., Kumar, M.V.A.K.: Formal Verification: An Essential Toolkit for Modern VLSI Design, 1st Edition. Morgan Kaufmann (2015)

  116. da Silva Teixeira, M.d.G., Quirino, G.K., Gailly, F., Almeida Falbo, R.d., Guizzardi, G., Perini Barcellos, M.: PoN-S: a systematic approach for applying the physics of notation (PoN). In: Enterprise, Business-Process and Information Systems Modeling, pp. 432–447. Springer (2016)

  117. Sobernig, S.: Variability support in DSL development. In: Variable Domain-specific Software Languages with DjDSL, pp. 33–72. Springer (2020)

  118. Speel, P., Schreiber, A.T., Van Joolingen, W., Van Heijst, G., Beijer, G., et al.: Conceptual modelling for knowledge-based systems. Encyclopedia of Computer Science and Technology 44, 107–132 (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  119. Spencer, D.: Card sorting: Designing usable categories. Rosenfeld Media (2009)

  120. Steinberg, D., Budinsky, F., Merks, E., Paternostro, M.: EMF: Eclipse Modeling Framework. Pearson Education (2008)

  121. Stirna, J., Persson, A.: Roles and Competences in an Enterprise Modeling Project, pp. 93–111. Springer (2018)

  122. Stoklasa, J., Talášek, T., Stoklasová, J.: Semantic differential for the twenty-first century: scale relevance and uncertainty entering the semantic space. Quality & Quantity 53(1), 435–448 (2019)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  123. Strembeck, M., Zdun, U.: An approach for the systematic development of domain-specific languages. Softw. Pract. Exper. 39(15), 1253–1292 (2009)

  124. Tolvanen, J.P., Kelly, S.: MetaEdit+ defining and using integrated domain-specific modeling languages. In: Proceedings of the 24th ACM SIGPLAN conference companion on object oriented programming systems languages and applications, pp. 819–820 (2009)

  125. Tuggy, D.: Schematicity. In: The Oxford handbook of cognitive linguistics (2007)

  126. Vallecillo, A., Gogolla, M., Burgueno, L., Wimmer, M., Hamann, L.: Formal specification and testing of model transformations. In: Formal Methods for Model-Driven Engineering - Proceedings of the 12th International School on Formal Methods for the Design of Computer, Communication, and Software Systems (SFM 2012), pp. 399–437. Springer (2012)

  127. Van Der Linden, D., Hadar, I.: A systematic literature review of applications of the physics of notations. IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 45(8), 736–759 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  128. Viho, C., Barbin, S., Tanguy, L.: Towards a formal framework for interoperability testing. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Formal Techniques for Networked and Distributed Systems, pp. 53–68. Springer (2001)

  129. Weber, R.: Conceptual modelling and ontology: Possibilities and pitfalls. Journal of Database Management (JDM) 14(3), 1–20 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  130. Weidmann, N., Kannan, S., Anjorin, A.: Tolerance in model-driven engineering: A systematic literature review with model-driven tool support. CoRR abs/2106.01063 (2021). https://arxiv.org/abs/2106.01063

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computer Science, Faculty of Science, Technology and Medicine, University of Luxembourg, Esch-sur-Alzette, Luxembourg

    Qin Ma

  2. Information Systems and Enterprise Modeling Research Group, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany

    Monika Kaczmarek-Heß

  3. Information Systems Group IE  &  IS, Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven, The Netherlands

    Sybren de Kinderen

Authors
  1. Qin Ma
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Monika Kaczmarek-Heß
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Sybren de Kinderen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Qin Ma.

Additional information

Communicated by E. Serral Asensio, J. Stirna, J. Ralyté, and J. Grabis.

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ma, Q., Kaczmarek-Heß, M. & de Kinderen, S. Validation and verification in domain-specific modeling method engineering: an integrated life-cycle view. Softw Syst Model 22, 647–666 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-022-01056-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-022-01056-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation