Model Transformations? Transformation Models!

  • Jean Bézivin
  • Fabian Büttner
  • Martin Gogolla
  • Frederic Jouault
  • Ivan Kurtev
  • Arne Lindow
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4199)


Much of the current work on model transformations seems essentially operational and executable in nature. Executable descriptions are necessary from the point of view of implementation. But from a conceptual point of view, transformations can also be viewed as descriptive models by stating only the properties a transformation has to fulfill and by omitting execution details. This contribution discusses the view that model transformations can be abstracted as being transformation models. As a simple example for a transformation model, the well-known transformation from the Entity-Relationship model to the Relational model is shown. A transformation model in this contribution is nothing more than an ordinary, simple model, i.e., a UML/MOF class diagram together with OCL constraints. A transformation model may transport syntax and semantics of the described domain. The contribution thus covers two views on transformations: An operational model transformation view and a descriptive transformation model view.


Transformation Model Class Diagram Database Schema Object Diagram Triple Graph 
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. [ABB+00]
    Ahrendt, W., Baar, T., Beckert, B., Giese, M., Habermalz, E., Hähnle, R., Menzel, W., Schmitt, P.H.: The KeY approach: Integrating object oriented design and formal verification. In: Brewka, G., Moniz Pereira, L., Ojeda-Aciego, M., de Guzmán, I.P. (eds.) JELIA 2000. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 1919, pp. 21–36. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. [Bez05]
    Bezivin, J.: On the Unification Power of Models. Software and System Modeling 4(2), 171–188 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. [BSF02]
    Boger, M., Sturm, T., Fragemann, P.: Refactoring browser for uml. In: Aksit, M., Mezini, M., Unland, R. (eds.) NODe 2002. LNCS, vol. 2591, pp. 366–377. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. [CESW04]
    Clark, T., Evans, A., Sammut, P., Willans, J.S.: Transformation language design: A metamodelling foundation. In: Ehrig, H., Engels, G., Parisi-Presicce, F., Rozenberg, G. (eds.) ICGT 2004. LNCS, vol. 3256, pp. 13–21. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. [Chi01]
    Chiorean, D.: Using OCL Beyond Specifications. In: Evans, A., France, R., Moreira, A., Rumpe, B. (eds.) Proc. UML 2001 Workshop Rigorous Development, LNI, GI, Bonn, pp. 57–68 (2001)Google Scholar
  6. [CW04]
    Correa, A.L., Werner, C.M.L.: Applying refactoring techniques to uml/ocl models. In: Baar, T., Strohmeier, A., Moreira, A., Mellor, S.J. (eds.) UML 2004. LNCS, vol. 3273, pp. 173–187. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)Google Scholar
  7. [GBR05]
    Gogolla, M., Bohling, J., Richters, M.: Validating UML and OCL Models in USE by Automatic Snapshot Generation. Journal on Software and System Modeling 4(4), 386–398 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. [Gog06]
    Gogolla, M.: Tales of ER and RE Syntax and Semantics. In: Cordy, J.R., Lämmel, R., Winter, A. (eds.) Transformation Techniques in Software Engineering, vol. 05161, Dagstuhl Seminar Proceedings, IBFI, Schloss Dagstuhl (2006)Google Scholar
  9. [GSMD03]
    Van Gorp, P., Stenten, H., Mens, T., Demeyer, S.: Towards automating source-consistent uml refactorings. In: Stevens, P., Whittle, J., Booch, G. (eds.) UML 2003. LNCS, vol. 2863, pp. 144–158. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. [JSS00]
    Jackson, D., Schechter, I., Shlyakhter, I.: Alcoa: The Alloy constraint analyzer. In: Proc. Int. Conf. Software Engineering (ICSE 2000), pp. 730–733. ACM, New York (2000)Google Scholar
  11. [KFdB+05]
    Kyas, M., Fecher, H., de Boer, F.S., Jacob, J., Hooman, J., van der Zwaag, M., Arons, T., Kugler, H.: Formalizing UML models and OCL constraints in PVS. Electr. Notes Theor. Comput. Sci. 115, 39–47 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. [KS06]
    Königs, A., Schürr, A.: Tool Integration with Triple Graph Grammars - A Survey. In: Heckel, R. (ed.) Proc. SegraVis School Foundations of Visual Modelling Techniques. ENTCS, vol. 148, pp. 113–150. Elsevier, Amsterdam (2006)Google Scholar
  13. [OMG05]
    OMG (ed.): MOF QVT Final Adopted Specification. OMG (2005)Google Scholar
  14. [RBJ05]
    Rumbaugh, J., Booch, G., Jacobson, I.: The Unified Modeling Language Reference Manual, 2nd edn. Addison-Wesley, Reading (2005)Google Scholar
  15. [RG01]
    Richters, M., Gogolla, M.: OCL - Syntax, Semantics and Tools. In: Clark, A., Warmer, J. (eds.) Object Modeling with the OCL. LNCS, vol. 2263, pp. 43–69. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. [SGJ04]
    Schippers, H., Van Gorp, P., Janssens, D.: Leveraging UML Profiles to generate Plugins from Visual Model Transformations. In: Proc. ICGT Workshop Software Evolution through Transformations (2004)Google Scholar
  17. [SPTJ01]
    Sunyé, G., Pollet, D., Le Traon, Y., Jézéquel, J.-M.: Refactoring uml models. In: Gogolla, M., Kobryn, C. (eds.) UML 2001. LNCS, vol. 2185, pp. 134–148. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. [Wan05]
    Wang, W.: Evaluation of UML Model Transformation Tools. Technical University of Vienna, Business Informatics Group, Master Thesis (2005)Google Scholar
  19. [ZLG05]
    Zhang, J., Lin, Y., Gray, J.: Generic and Domain-Specific Model Refactoring using a Model Transformation Engine. In: Beydeda, S., Book, M., Gruhn, V. (eds.) Model-Driven Software Development, pp. 199–218. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jean Bézivin
    • 1
  • Fabian Büttner
    • 2
  • Martin Gogolla
    • 2
  • Frederic Jouault
    • 1
  • Ivan Kurtev
    • 1
  • Arne Lindow
    • 2
  1. 1.Computer Science Department & INRIAUniversity of Nantes 
  2. 2.Computer Science Department & TZIUniversity of Bremen 

Personalised recommendations