Co-transformation of Graphs and Type Graphs with Application to Model Co-evolution

  • Gabriele Taentzer
  • Florian Mantz
  • Yngve Lamo
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7562)


Meta-modeling has become the key technology to define do–main-specific modeling languages in model-driven engineering. Since do–main-specific modeling languages often change quite frequently, concepts are needed for the coordinated evolution of their meta-models as well as of their models, and possibly other related artifacts. In this paper, we present a new approach to the co-transformation of graphs and type graphs and show how it can be applied to model co-evolution. This means that models are specified as graphs while model relations, especially type-instance relations, are defined by graph morphisms specifying type conformance of models to their meta-models. Hence, meta-model evolution and accompanying model migrations are formally defined by co-transformations of instance and type graphs. In our approach, we clarify the type conformance of co-transformations, the completeness of instance graph transformations wrt. their type graph modifications, and the reflection of type graph transformations by instance graph transformations. Finally, we discuss strategies for automatically deducing instance graph transformation rules from given type graph transformations.


meta-model evolution model migration graph transformation 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Bisztray, D., Heckel, R., Ehrig, H.: Verification of Architectural Refactorings: Rule Extraction and Tool Support. ECEASST 16 (2008)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cicchetti, A., Ruscio, D.D., Eramo, R., Pierantonio, A.: Automating Co-evolution in Model-Driven Engineering. In: ECOC 2008, pp. 222–231. IEEE Computer Society (2008)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ehrig, H., Ehrig, K., Prange, U., Taentzer, G.: Fundamentals of Algebraic Graph Transformation. Monographs in Theoretical Computer Science. Springer (2006)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ehrig, H., Ehrig, K., Prange, U., Taentzer, G.: Fundamental Theory for Typed Attributed Graphs and Graph Transformation based on Adhesive HLR Categories. Fundam. Inform. 74(1), 31–61 (2006)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ehrig, H., Hermann, F., Prange, U.: Cospan DPO Approach: An Alternative for DPO Graph Transformation. EATCS Bulletin 98, 139–149 (2009)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Habel, A., Pennemann, K.H.: Correctness of high-level transformation systems relative to nested conditions. Mathematical Structures in Computer Science 19(2), 245–296 (2009)MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hermann, F., Ehrig, H., Ermel, C.: Transformation of Type Graphs with Inheritance for Ensuring Security in E-Government Networks. In: Chechik, M., Wirsing, M. (eds.) FASE 2009. LNCS, vol. 5503, pp. 325–339. Springer, Heidelberg (2009); long version available as TR 2008-07 at TU Berlin, GermanyCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Herrmannsdoerfer, M., Benz, S., Juergens, E.: COPE - Automating Coupled Evolution of Metamodels and Models. In: Drossopoulou, S. (ed.) ECOOP 2009. LNCS, vol. 5653, pp. 52–76. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lack, S., Sobociński, P.: Adhesive Categories. In: Walukiewicz, I. (ed.) FOSSACS 2004. LNCS, vol. 2987, pp. 273–288. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lämmel, R.: Grammar Adaptation. In: Oliveira, J.N., Zave, P. (eds.) FME 2001. LNCS, vol. 2021, pp. 550–570. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Li, X.: A Survey of Schema Evolution in Object-Oriented Databases. In: TOOLS, pp. 362–371. IEEE Computer Society (1999)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Mantz, F., Jurack, S., Taentzer, G.: Graph Transformation Concepts for Meta-Model Evolution Guaranteeing Permanent Type conformance Throughout Model Migration. In: AGTIVE. LNCS, vol. 7233. Springer (2012)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Pizka, M., Juergens, E.: Automating Language Evolution. In: TASE 2007: Proceedings of the First Joint IEEE/IFIP Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Software Engineering, pp. 305–315. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Rose, L.M., Kolovos, D.S., Paige, R.F., Polack, F.A.C.: Model Migration with Epsilon Flock. In: Tratt, L., Gogolla, M. (eds.) ICMT 2010. LNCS, vol. 6142, pp. 184–198. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Rutle, A., Rossini, A., Lamo, Y., Wolter, U.: A Formal Approach to the Specification and Transformation of Constraints in MDE. JLAP 81(4), 422–457 (2012)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Schulz, C., Löwe, M., König, H.: A Categorical Framework for the Transformation of Object-Oriented Systems: Models and Data. J. Symb. Comput. 46(3) (2011)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sprinkle, J., Karsai, G.: A Domain-Specific Visual Language for Domain Model Evolution. J. Vis. Lang. Comput. 15(3-4), 291–307 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Sprinkle, J., Rumpe, B., Vangheluwe, H., Karsai, G.: Metamodelling - State of the Art and Research Challenges. In: Giese, H., Karsai, G., Lee, E., Rumpe, B., Schätz, B. (eds.) MBEERTS. LNCS, vol. 6100, pp. 57–76. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Taentzer, G., Mantz, F., Lamo, Y.: Co-Transformation of Graphs and Type Graphs with Application to Model Co-Evolution: Long Version. Tech. rep., Dep. of Mathematics and Computer Science, University of Marburg, Germany (2012),
  20. 20.
    Wachsmuth, G.: Metamodel Adaptation and Model Co-adaptation. In: Bateni, M. (ed.) ECOOP 2007. LNCS, vol. 4609, pp. 600–624. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gabriele Taentzer
    • 1
  • Florian Mantz
    • 2
  • Yngve Lamo
    • 2
  1. 1.Philipps-Universität MarburgGermany
  2. 2.Bergen University CollegeNorway

Personalised recommendations