Automatability of Coupled Evolution of Metamodels and Models in Practice

  • Markus Herrmannsdoerfer
  • Sebastian Benz
  • Elmar Juergens
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5301)


Model-based software development promises to increase productivity by offering modeling languages tailored to a problem domain. Such modeling languages are often defined by a metamodel. In consequence of changing requirements and technological progress, these modeling languages and thus their metamodels are subject to change. Manually migrating models to a new version of their metamodel is tedious, error-prone and heavily hampers cost-efficient model-based development practice. Automating model migration in response to metamodel adaptation promises to substantially reduce effort. Unfortunately, little is known about the types of changes occurring during metamodel adaptation in practice and, consequently, to which degree reconciling model migration can be automated. We analyzed the changes that occurred during the evolution history of two industrial metamodels and classified them according to their level of potential automation. Based on the results, we present a list of requirements for effective tool support for coupled evolution of metamodels and models in practice.


Modeling Language Model Migration Human Machine Interface Language Change Couple Evolution 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Czarnecki, K., Eisenecker, U.W.: Generative programming: methods, tools, and applications. Addison-Wesley, New York (2000)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kleppe, A.G., Warmer, J., Bast, W.: MDA Explained: The Model Driven Architecture: Practice and Promise. Addison-Wesley, Boston (2003)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Greenfield, J., Short, K., Cook, S., Kent, S.: Software Factories: Assembling Applications with Patterns, Models, Frameworks, and Tools. Wiley, Chichester (2004)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hildisch, A., Steurer, J., Stolle, R.: HMI generation for plug-in services from semantic descriptions. In: Proceedings of the 4th International Workshop on Software Engineering for Automotive Systems (SEAS), Washington, DC, USA. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2007)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Benz, S.: Combining test case generation for component and integration testing. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Workshop on Advances in Model-based Testing (A-MOST), pp. 23–33. ACM Press, New York (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Favre, J.M.: Languages evolve too! changing the software time scale. In: Proceedings of the Eighth International Workshop on Principles of Software Evolution (IWPSE), pp. 33–44. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lämmel, R.: Coupled Software Transformations (Extended Abstract). In: First International Workshop on Software Evolution Transformations (2004)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wachsmuth, G.: Metamodel adaptation and model co-adaptation. In: Ernst, E. (ed.) ECOOP 2007. LNCS, vol. 4609, pp. 600–624. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Becker, S., Gruschko, B., Goldschmidt, T., Koziolek, H.: A Process Model and Classification Scheme for Semi-Automatic Meta-Model Evolution. In: Proc. 1st Workshop MDD, SOA und IT-Management (MSI), GI, pp. 35–46. GiTO-Verlag (2007)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gruschko, B., Kolovos, D., Paige, R.: Towards synchronizing models with evolving metamodels. In: Proceedings of the International Workshop on Model-Driven Software Evolution (2007)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Rahm, E., Bernstein, P.A.: An online bibliography on schema evolution. SIGMOD Rec. 35(4), 30–31 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Banerjee, J., Kim, W., Kim, H.J., Korth, H.F.: Semantics and implementation of schema evolution in object-oriented databases, vol. 16, pp. 311–322. ACM Press, New York (1987)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ferrandina, F., Meyer, T., Zicari, R., Ferran, G., Madec, J.: Schema and database evolution in the O2 object database system. In: Proceedings of the 21th International Conference on Very Large Data Bases (VLDB), pp. 170–181. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (1995)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Claypool, K.T., Jin, J., Rundensteiner, E.A.: SERF: schema evolution through an extensible, re-usable and flexible framework. In: Proceedings of the seventh international conference on Information and knowledge management (CIKM), pp. 314–321. ACM Press, New York (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Klint, P., Lämmel, R., Verhoef, C.: Toward an engineering discipline for grammarware. ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. 14(3), 331–380 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lämmel, R.: Grammar testing. In: Fundamental Approaches to Software Engineering, pp. 201–216 (2001)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Pizka, M., Juergens, E.: Automating language evolution. In: Proceedings of the First Joint IEEE/IFIP Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Software Engineering (TASE), Washington, DC, USA, pp. 305–315. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lämmel, R., Lohmann, W.: Format Evolution. In: Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Reverse Engineering for Information Systems (RETIS), vol. 155, pp. 113–134. OCG (2001)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Su, H., Kramer, D., Chen, L., Claypool, K., Rundensteiner, E.A.: XEM: Managing the Evolution of XML Documents. In: Proceedings of the 11th International Workshop on research Issues in Data Engineering (RIDE), p. 103. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos (2001)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Sprinkle, J., Karsai, G.: A domain-specific visual language for domain model evolution. Journal of Visual Languages and Computing 15, 291–307 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Robbes, R., Lanza, M.: A change-based approach to software evolution. Electron. Notes Theor. Comput. Sci. 166, 93–109 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Markus Herrmannsdoerfer
    • 1
  • Sebastian Benz
    • 2
  • Elmar Juergens
    • 1
  1. 1.Institut für Informatik TechnischeUniversität MünchenMünchenGermany
  2. 2.BMW Car IT GmbHMünchenGermany

Personalised recommendations