A Model-Driven Measurement Approach

  • Martin Monperrus
  • Jean-Marc Jézéquel
  • Joël Champeau
  • Brigitte Hoeltzener
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5301)


Companies using domain specific languages in a model-driven development process need to measure their models. However, developing and maintaining a measurement software for each domain specific modeling language is costly. Our contribution is a model-driven measurement approach. This measurement approach is model-driven from two viewpoints: 1) it measures models of a model-driven development process; 2) it uses models as unique and consistent metric specifications, w.r.t a metric specification metamodel. This declarative specification of metrics is then used to generate a fully fledged implementation. The benefit from applying the approach is evaluated by two applications. They indicate that this approach reduces the domain-specific measurement software development cost.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Schmidt, D.C.: Model-driven engineering. IEEE Computer 39(2), 25–31 (2006)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lédeczi, A., Bakay, A., Maroti, M., Vőlgyesi, P., Nordstrom, G., Sprinkle, J., Karsai, G.: Composing domain-specific design environments. IEEE Computer 34, 44–51 (2001)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Budinsky, F., Steinberg, D., Merks, E., Ellersick, R., Grose, T.J.: Eclipse Modeling Framework. Addison-Wesley, Reading (2004)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    NASA Software Program: Software measurement guidebook. Technical report, National Aeronautics and Space Administration (1995)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Marinescu, C., Marinescu, R., Gîrba, T.: Towards a simplified implementation of object-oriented design metrics. In: IEEE METRICS, vol. 11 (2005)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Monperrus, M., Champeau, J., Hoeltzener, B.: Counts count. In: Proceedings of the 2nd Workshop on Model Size Metrics (MSM 2007) co-located with MoDELS 2007 (2007)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Sztipanovits, J.: Advances in model-integrated computing. In: Proceedings of the 18th IEEE Instrumentation and Measurement Technology Conference (IMTC 2001), vol. 3, pp. 1660–1664 (2001)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    de Lara, J., Vangheluwe, H.: Atom3: A tool for multi-formalism and meta-modelling. In: Kutsche, R.-D., Weber, H. (eds.) FASE 2002. LNCS, vol. 2306, pp. 173–188. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Monperrus, M., Jézéquel, J.M., Champeau, J., Hoeltzener, B.: Measuring models. In: Rech, J., Bunse, C. (eds.) Model-Driven Software Development: Integrating Quality Assurance. IDEA Group (2008)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Chidamber, S.R., Kemerer, C.F.: Towards a metrics suite for object-oriented design. In: Proceedings of OOPSLA 1991, pp. 197–211 (1991)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Pawlak, R., Noguera, C., Petitprez, N.: Spoon: Program analysis and transformation in java. Technical Report 5901, INRIA (2006)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Basili, V.R., Briand, L.C., Melo, W.L.: A validation of object-oriented design metrics as quality indicators. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 22(10), 751–761 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Monperrus, M., Jaozafy, F., Marchalot, G., Champeau, J., Hoeltzener, B., Jézéquel, J.M.: Model-driven simulation of a maritime surveillance system. In: Schieferdecker, I., Hartman, A. (eds.) ECMDA-FA 2008. LNCS, vol. 5095, pp. 361–368. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Basili, V.R., Caldiera, G., Rombach, H.D.: The goal question metric approach. Encyclopedia of Software Engineering. Wiley, Chichester (1994)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Misic, V.B., Moser, S.: From formal metamodels to metrics: An object-oriented approach. In: Proceedings of the Technology of Object-Oriented Languages and Systems Conference (TOOLS 1997), p. 330 (1997)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Reissing, R.: Towards a model for object-oriented design measurement. In: ECOOP 2001 Workshop QAOOSE (2001)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Tang, M.H., Chen, M.H.: Measuring OO design metrics from UML. In: Proceedings of MODELS/UML 2002, UML 2002 (2002)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    El Wakil, M., El Bastawissi, A., Boshra, M., Fahmy, A.: A novel approach to formalize and collect object-oriented design-metrics. In: Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Empirical Assessment in Software Engineering (2005)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Harmer, T.J., Wilkie, F.G.: An extensible metrics extraction environment for object-oriented programming languages. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Software Maintenance (2002)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Baroni, A., Braz, S., Abreu, F.: Using OCL to formalize object-oriented design metrics definitions. In: ECOOP 2002 Workshop on Quantitative Approaches in OO Software Engineering (2002)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    McQuillan, J.A., Power, J.F.: Experiences of using the dagstuhl middle metamodel for defining software metrics. In: Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Principles and Practices of Programming in Java (2006)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    McQuillan, J., Power, J.: A definition of the chidamber and kemerer metrics suite for uml. Technical report, National University of Ireland (2006)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Mens, T., Lanza, M.: A graph-based metamodel for object-oriented software metrics. Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science 72, 57–68 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    García, F., Bertoa, M.F., Calero, C., Vallecillo, A., Ruiz, F., Piattini, M., Genero, M.: Towards a consistent terminology for software measurement. Information & Software Technology 48(8), 631–644 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Guerra, E., de Lara, J., Díaz, P.: Visual specification of measurements and redesigns for domain specific visual languages. Journal of Visual Languages and Computing, 1–27 (in press, 2007)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    OMG: MOF 2.0 specification. Technical report, Object Management Group (2004)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Martin Monperrus
    • 1
    • 2
  • Jean-Marc Jézéquel
    • 2
  • Joël Champeau
    • 1
  • Brigitte Hoeltzener
    • 1
  1. 1.ENSIETA - Brest (Fr) 
  2. 2.INRIA & University of Rennes (Fr) 

Personalised recommendations