A Native Versioning Concept to Support Historized Models at Runtime

  • Thomas Hartmann
  • Francois Fouquet
  • Gregory Nain
  • Brice Morin
  • Jacques Klein
  • Olivier Barais
  • Yves Le Traon
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8767)


Models@run.time provides semantically rich reflection layers enabling intelligent systems to reason about themselves and their surrounding context. Most reasoning processes require not only to explore the current state, but also the past history to take sustainable decisions e.g. to avoid oscillating between states. Models@run.time and model-driven engineering in general lack native mechanisms to efficiently support the notion of history, and current approaches usually generate redundant data when versioning models, which reasoners need to navigate. Because of this limitation, models fail in providing suitable and sustainable abstractions to deal with domains relying on history-aware reasoning. This paper tackles this issue by considering history as a native concept for modeling foundations. Integrated, in conjunction with lazy load/storage techniques, into the Kevoree Modeling Framework, we demonstrate onto a smart grid case study, that this mechanisms enable a sustainable reasoning about massive historized models.


Models@run.time Model-driven engineering Model versioning Historized models 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    CDO eclipsedia, (accessed: February 01, 2014)
  2. 2.
  3. 3.
    HyperLevelDB Performance Benchmarks, (accessed: February 01, 2014)
  4. 4.
    KMF Samples, MoDELS14, (accessed: March 15, 2014)
  5. 5.
    leveldb a fast and lightweight key/value database library by google, (accessed: February 10, 2014)
  6. 6.
    Altmanninger, K., Kaufmann, P., Kappel, G., Langer, P., Seidl, M., Wieland, K., Wimmer, M.: Why model versioning research is needed!? An experience report. In: Proceedings of the Joint MoDSE-MC-CM 2009 Workshop (2009)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ariav, G.: A temporally oriented data model. ACM Trans. Database Syst. 11(4), 499–527 (1986)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Blair, G., Bencomo, N., France, R.B.: Models@ run.time. Computer 42(10), 22–27 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Blanc, X., Mounier, I., Mougenot, A., Mens, T.: Detecting model inconsistency through operation-based model construction. In: Proceedings of the 30th International Conference on Software Engineering, ICSE 2008, pp. 511–520. ACM, New York (2008)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Brosch, P., Kappel, G., Langer, P., Seidl, M., Wieland, K., Wimmer, M.: An introduction to model versioning. In: Bernardo, M., Cortellessa, V., Pierantonio, A. (eds.) SFM 2012. LNCS, vol. 7320, pp. 336–398. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Budinsky, F., Steinberg, D., Ellersick, R.: Eclipse Modeling Framework: A Developer’s Guide (2003)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Chang, F., Dean, J., Ghemawat, S., Hsieh, W.C., Wallach, D.A., Burrows, M., Chandra, T., Fikes, A., Gruber, R.E.: Bigtable: A distributed storage system for structured data. In: Proceedings of the 7th USENIX Symposium on Operating Systems Design and Implementation, OSDI 2006, vol. 7, p. 15. USENIX Association, Berkeley (2006)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Clifford, J., Warren, D.S.: Formal semantics for time in databases. In: XP2 Workshop on Relational Database Theory (1981)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    World Wide Web Consortium. Xml path language (xpath) 2.0. Technical report, World Wide Web Consortium, 2nd edn. (2010)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Douglas Crockford. The application/json media type for javascript object notation (json). RFC 4627, IETF, 7 (2006)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    ECMA International. Standard ECMA-262 - ECMAScript Language Specification, 5.1th edn. (June 2011)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Fouquet, F., Nain, G., Morin, B., Daubert, E., Barais, O., Plouzeau, N., Jézéquel, J.-M.: An eclipse modelling framework alternative to meet the models@runtime requirements. In: France, R.B., Kazmeier, J., Breu, R., Atkinson, C. (eds.) MODELS 2012. LNCS, vol. 7590, pp. 87–101. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Francois, F., Nain, G., Morin, B., Daubert, E., Barais, O., Plouzeau, N., Jézéquel, J.-M.: Kevoree Modeling Framework (KMF): Efficient modeling techniques for runtime use. Rapport de recherche TR-SnT-2014-11 (May 2014) ISBN 978-2-87971-131-7Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Gosling, J., Joy, B., Steele, G., Bracha, G., Buckley, A.: The Java Language Specification, java se 7th edn., California, USA (February 2012)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Hartmann, T., Fouquet, F., Klein, J., Nain, G., Le Traon, Y.: Reactive security for smart grids using models@run.time-based simulation and reasoning. In: Cuellar, J. (ed.) SmartGridSec 2014. LNCS, vol. 8448, pp. 139–153. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hartmann, T., Fouquet, F., Nain, G., Morin, B., Klein, J., Le Traon, Y.: Reasoning at runtime using time-distorted contexts: A models@run.time based approach. In: Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering, SEKE (2014)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Koegel, M., Helming, J.: Emfstore: A model repository for emf models. In: Kramer, J., Bishop, J., Devanbu, P.T., Uchitel, S. (eds.) ICSE, (2), pp. 307–308. ACM (2010)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kolovos, D.S., Di Ruscio, D., Pierantonio, A., Paige, R.F.: Different models for model matching: An analysis of approaches to support model differencing. In: Proceedings of the 2009 ICSE Workshop on Comparison and Versioning of Software Models, CVSM 2009, pp. 1–6. IEEE Computer Society (2009)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Lassila, O., Swick, R.R.: Resource Description Framework (RDF) Model and Syntax Specification. W3C Recommendation, W3C (February 1999)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Mahmood, N., Burney, A., Ahsan, K.: A logical temporal relational data model. CoRR (2010)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Morin, B., Barais, O., Jezequel, J., Fleurey, F., Solberg, A.: Models@ run.time to support dynamic adaptation. Computer 42(10), 44–51 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Motik, B.: Representing and querying validity time in rdf and owl: A logic-based approac. In: Patel-Schneider, P.F., Pan, Y., Hitzler, P., Mika, P., Zhang, L., Pan, J.Z., Horrocks, I., Glimm, B. (eds.) ISWC 2010, Part I. LNCS, vol. 6496, pp. 550–565. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    OMG. XML Metadata Interchange (XMI). OMG (2007)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    OMG. OMG Meta Object Facility (MOF) Core Specification, Version 2.4.1. Technical report, Object Management Group (August 2011)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Reddy, R., France, R., Ghosh, S., Fleurey, F., Baudry, B.: Model composition - a signature-based approach. In: Aspect Oriented Modeling (AOM) Workshop Held in Conjunction with MODELS/UML 2005 Conference, Montego Bay, Jamaica (2005)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Rose, E., Segev, A.: Toodm - a temporal object-oriented data model with temporal constraints. In: Teorey, T.J. (ed.) ER (1991)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Segev, A., Shoshani, A.: Logical modeling of temporal data. In: Proceedings of the 1987 ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data, SIGMOD 1987, New York, NY, USA (1987)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Segev, A., Shoshani, A.: The representation of a temporal data model in the relational environment. In: Rafanelli, M., Svensson, P., Klensin, J.C. (eds.) SSDBM 1988. LNCS, vol. 339, pp. 39–61. Springer, Heidelberg (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Taentzer, G., Ermel, C., Langer, P., Wimmer, M.: A fundamental approach to model versioning based on graph modifications: From theory to implementation. Software and System Modeling 13(1), 239–272 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    World Wide Web Consortium W3C. Owl 2 web ontology language. structural specification and functional-style syntax. Technical report (2009)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Thomas Hartmann
    • 1
  • Francois Fouquet
    • 1
  • Gregory Nain
    • 1
  • Brice Morin
    • 2
  • Jacques Klein
    • 1
  • Olivier Barais
    • 3
  • Yves Le Traon
    • 1
  1. 1.Interdisciplinary Centre for Security, Reliability and Trust (SnT)University of LuxembourgLuxembourg
  2. 2.SINTEF ICT NorwayNorway
  3. 3.IRISA / INRIA Centre Rennes Bretagne-AtlantiqueUniversité de Rennes 1France

Personalised recommendations