Advertisement

Automatically Searching for Metamodel Well-Formedness Rules in Examples and Counter-Examples

  • Martin Faunes
  • Juan Cadavid
  • Benoit Baudry
  • Houari Sahraoui
  • Benoit Combemale
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8107)

Abstract

Current metamodeling formalisms support the definition of a metamodel with two views: classes and relations, that form the core of the metamodel, and well-formedness rules, that constraints the set of valid models. While a safe application of automatic operations on models requires a precise definition of the domain using the two views, most metamodels currently present in repositories have only the first one part. In this paper, we propose to start from valid and invalid model examples in order to automatically retrieve well-formedness rules in OCL using Genetic Programming. The approach is evaluated on metamodels for state machines and features diagrams. The experiments aim at demonstrating the feasibility of the approach and at illustrating some important design decisions that must be considered when using this technique.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
  2. 2.
    Cadavid, J., Baudry, B., Sahraoui, H.: Searching the boundaries of a modeling space to test metamodels. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Software Testing, verification and validation (ICST) (April 2012)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cadavid, J., Combemale, B., Baudry, B.: Ten years of Meta-Object Facility: an Analysis of Metamodeling Practices. Tech. report RR-7882, INRIA (2012)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Dallmeier, V., Knopp, N., Mallon, C., Hack, S., Zeller, A.: Generating test cases for specification mining. In: Proceedings of the 19th International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis, pp. 85–96. ACM (2010)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dolques, X., Huchard, M., Nebut, C., Saada, H., et al.: Formal and relational concept analysis approaches in software engineering: an overview and an application to learn model transformation patterns in examples (2011)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ernst, M., Perkins, J., Guo, P., McCamant, S., Pacheco, C., Tschantz, M., Xiao, C.: The daikon system for dynamic detection of likely invariants. Science of Computer Programming 69(1-3), 35–45 (2007)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Faunes, M., Sahraoui, H., Boukadoum, M.: Generating model transformation rules from examples using an evolutionary algorithm. In: Proceedings of the 27th IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering, pp. 250–253. ACM (2012)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Favre, J.: Cacophony: Metamodel-driven software architecture reconstruction. In: Proceedings of the 11th Working Conference on Reverse Engineering, pp. 204–213. IEEE (2004)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Jackson, D.: Alloy: a lightweight object modelling notation. ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology (TOSEM) 11(2), 256–290 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Javed, F., Mernik, M., Gray, J., Bryant, B.: MARS: A metamodel recovery system using grammar inference. Information and Software Technology 50(9-10), 948–968 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kang, K.C., Cohen, S.G., Hess, J.A., Novak, W.E., Peterson, A.S.: Feature-oriented domain analysis (foda) feasibility study. Technical report, DTIC Document (1990)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Koza, J., Poli, R.: Genetic programming. In: Search Methodologies (2005)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ledeczi, A., Maroti, M., Bakay, A., Karsai, G., Garrett, J., Thomason, C., Nordstrom, G., Sprinkle, J., Volgyesi, P.: The generic modeling environment. In: Workshop on Intelligent Signal Processing, Budapest, Hungary, vol. 17 (2001)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ratcliff, S., White, D., Clark, J.A.: Searching for invariants using genetic programming and mutation testing (2011)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Sánchez-Cuadrado, J., de Lara, J., Guerra, E.: Bottom-up meta-modelling: An interactive approach. In: France, R.B., Kazmeier, J., Breu, R., Atkinson, C. (eds.) MODELS 2012. LNCS, vol. 7590, pp. 3–19. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Steinberg, D., Budinsky, F., Paternostro, M., Merks, E.: EMF: Eclipse Modeling Framework, 2nd edn. Addison-Wesley (2008)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Zeller, A.: Specifications for free. In: Bobaru, M., Havelund, K., Holzmann, G.J., Joshi, R. (eds.) NFM 2011. LNCS, vol. 6617, pp. 2–12. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Martin Faunes
    • 1
  • Juan Cadavid
    • 2
  • Benoit Baudry
    • 2
  • Houari Sahraoui
    • 1
  • Benoit Combemale
    • 2
  1. 1.Université de MontréalMontrealCanada
  2. 2.IRISA/INRIARennesFrance

Personalised recommendations