Advertisement

Incremental Model Synchronization with Triple Graph Grammars

  • Holger Giese
  • Robert Wagner
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4199)

Abstract

The advent of model-driven software development has put model transformations into focus. In practice, model transformations are expected to be applicable in different stages of a development process and help to consistently propagate changes between the different involved models which we refer to as model synchronization. However, most approaches do not fully support the requirements for model synchronization today and focus only on classical one-way batch-oriented transformations. In this paper, we present our approach for an incremental model transformation which supports model synchronization. Our approach employs the visual, formal, and bidirectional transformation technique of triple graph grammars. Using this declarative specification formalism, we focus on the efficient execution of the transformation rules and present our approach to achieve an incremental model transformation for synchronization purposes. We present an evaluation of our approach and demonstrate that due to the speedup for the incremental processing in the average case even larger models can be tackled.

Keywords

Model Transformation Class Diagram Graph Grammar Incremental Model Model Synchronization 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    OMG: MDA Guide Version 1.0.1. Document – omg/03-06-01 (2003)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Wagner, R., Giese, H., Nickel, U.: A Plug-In for Flexible and Incremental Consistency Management. In: Proceedings of the Workshop on Consistency Problems in UML-based Software Development II (UML 2003, Workshop 7), Blekinge Institute of Technology, pp. 78–85 (2003)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gardner, T., Griffin, C., Koehler, J., Hauser, R.: Review of OMG MOF 2.0 Query/Views/Transformations Submissions and Recommendations towards final Standard. OMG, 250 First Avenue, Needham, MA 02494, USA (2003)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Schürr, A.: Specification of graph translators with triple graph grammars. In: Mayr, E.W., Schmidt, G., Tinhofer, G. (eds.) WG 1994. LNCS, vol. 903, pp. 151–163. Springer, Heidelberg (1995)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Schäfer, W., Wagner, R., Gausemeier, J., Eckes, R.: An Engineer’s Workstation to support Integrated Development of Flexible Production Control Systems. In: Ehrig, H., Damm, W., Desel, J., Große-Rhode, M., Reif, W., Schnieder, E., Westkämper, E. (eds.) INT 2004. LNCS, vol. 3147, pp. 48–68. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    International Telecommunication Union (ITU), Geneva: ITU-T Recommendation Z.100: Specification and Description Language (SDL) (1994 + Addendum 1996)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    OMG 250 First Avenue, Needham, MA 02494, USA: (Unified Modeling Language Specification Version 1.5)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    OMG: OMG/RFP/QVT MOF 2.0 Query/Views/Transformations RFP (2003), http://www.omg.org/mda/
  9. 9.
    OMG: MOF QVT Final Adopted Specification, OMG Document ptc/05-11-01, http://www.omg.org/
  10. 10.
    Griffin, C.: Eclipse Model Transformatioin Framework (MTF), available at IBM (2006), http://www.alphaworks.ibm.com/tech/mtf
  11. 11.
    Czarnecki, K., Helsen, S.: Classification of Model Transformation Approaches. In: Proceedings of the 2nd OOPSLA Workshop on Generative Techniques in the Context of the Model Driven Architecture, USA (2003)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lefering, M., Schürr, A.: Specification of Integration Tools. In: Nagl, M. (ed.) IPSEN 1996. LNCS, vol. 1170, pp. 324–334. Springer, Heidelberg (1996)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Becker, S., Lohmann, S., Westfechtel, B.: Rule Execution in Graph-Based Incremental Interactive Integration Tools. In: Ehrig, H., Engels, G., Parisi-Presicce, F., Rozenberg, G. (eds.) ICGT 2004. LNCS, vol. 3256, pp. 22–38. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Königs, A., Schürr, A.: Tool Integration with Triple Graph Grammars - A Survey. In: Heckel, R. (ed.) Proceedings of the SegraVis School on Foundations of Visual Modelling Techniques. Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science, vol. 148, pp. 113–150. Elsevier Science Publ., Amsterdam (2006)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Guerra, E., de Lara, J.: Event-Driven Grammars: Towards the Integration of Meta-Modelling and Graph Transformation. In: Ehrig, H., Engels, G., Parisi-Presicce, F., Rozenberg, G. (eds.) ICGT 2004. LNCS, vol. 3256, pp. 54–69. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Holger Giese
    • 1
  • Robert Wagner
    • 1
  1. 1.Software Engineering Group, Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of PaderbornPaderbornGermany

Personalised recommendations