Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in
Menu
Find a journal Publish with us
Search
Cart
Book cover

International Conference on Foundations of Software Science and Computational Structures

FoSSaCS 2012: Foundations of Software Science and Computational Structures pp 1–25Cite as

  1. Home
  2. Foundations of Software Science and Computational Structures
  3. Conference paper
Querying UML Class Diagrams

Querying UML Class Diagrams

  • Andrea Calì18,19,
  • Georg Gottlob17,19,20,
  • Giorgio Orsi17,20 &
  • …
  • Andreas Pieris17 
  • Conference paper
  • 1108 Accesses

  • 8 Citations

Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNTCS,volume 7213)

Abstract

UML Class Diagrams (UCDs) are the best known class-based formalism for conceptual modeling. They are used by software engineers to model the intensional structure of a system in terms of classes, attributes and operations, and to express constraints that must hold for every instance of the system. Reasoning over UCDs is of paramount importance in design, validation, maintenance and system analysis; however, for medium and large software projects, reasoning over UCDs may be impractical. Query answering, in particular, can be used to verify whether a (possibly incomplete) instance of the system modeled by the UCD, i.e., a snapshot, enjoys a certain property. In this work, we study the problem of querying UCD instances, and we relate it to query answering under guarded Datalog±, that is, a powerful Datalog-based language for ontological modeling. We present an expressive and meaningful class of UCDs, named Lean UCD, under which conjunctive query answering is tractable in the size of the instances.

Keywords

  • Description Logic
  • Object Constraint Language
  • Conjunctive Query
  • Query Answering
  • Negative Constraint

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.

Download conference paper PDF

References

  1. Andréka, H., van Benthem, J., Németi, I.: Modal languages and bounded fragments of predicate logic. J. Philosophical Logic 27, 217–274 (1998)

    CrossRef  MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. Artale, A., Calvanese, D., Ibáñez-García, Y.A.: Full Satisfiability of UML Class Diagrams. In: Parsons, J., Saeki, M., Shoval, P., Woo, C., Wand, Y. (eds.) ER 2010. LNCS, vol. 6412, pp. 317–331. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  3. Artale, A., Calvanese, D., Kontchakov, R., Zakharyaschev, M.: The DL-Lite family and relations. J. Artificial Intelligence Res. 36, 1–69 (2009)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  4. Baget, J.-F., Leclère, M., Mugnier, M.-L., Salvat, E.: On rules with existential variables: Walking the decidability line. Artif. Intell. 175(9-10), 1620–1654 (2011)

    CrossRef  MATH  Google Scholar 

  5. Bárány, V., Gottlob, G., Otto, M.: Querying the guarded fragment. In: Proc. of LICS, pp. 1–10 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Beeri, C., Vardi, M.Y.: The Implication Problem for Data Dependencies. In: Even, S., Kariv, O. (eds.) ICALP 1981. LNCS, vol. 115, pp. 73–85. Springer, Heidelberg (1981)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  7. Berardi, D., Calvanese, D., De Giacomo, G.: Reasoning on UML class diagrams. Artif. Intell. 168(1-2), 70–118 (2005)

    CrossRef  MATH  Google Scholar 

  8. Cabot, J., Clariso, R., Riera, D.: Verification of UML/OCL class diagrams using constraint programming. In: Proc. of ICSTW, pp. 73–80 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Cadoli, M., Calvanese, D., De Giacomo, G., Mancini, T.: Finite Model Reasoning on UML Class Diagrams Via Constraint Programming. In: Basili, R., Pazienza, M.T. (eds.) AI*IA 2007. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 4733, pp. 36–47. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  10. Calì, A., Gottlob, G., Kifer, M.: Taming the infinite chase: Query answering under expressive relational constraints. In: Proc. of KR, pp. 70–80 (2008); Extended version available from the authors

    Google Scholar 

  11. Calì, A., Gottlob, G., Lukasiewicz, T.: A general datalog-based framework for tractable query answering over ontologies. In: Proc. of PODS, pp. 77–86 (2009); To appear in the J. of Web Semantics

    Google Scholar 

  12. Calì, A., Gottlob, G., Lukasiewicz, T., Marnette, B., Pieris, A.: Datalog+/-: A family of logical knowledge representation and query languages for new applications. In: Proc. of LICS, pp. 228–242 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Calì, A., Lembo, D., Rosati, R.: On the decidability and complexity of query answering over inconsistent and incomplete databases. In: Proc. of PODS, pp. 260–271 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Calvanese, D., De Giacomo, G., Lembo, D., Lenzerini, M., Rosati, R.: Tractable reasoning and efficient query answering in description logics: The DL-Lite family. J. Autom. Reasoning 39(3), 385–429 (2007)

    CrossRef  MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. Calvanese, D., De Giacomo, G., Lenzerini, M.: On the decidability of query containment under constraints. In: Proc. PODS, pp. 149–158 (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Calvanese, D., De Giacomo, G., Lenzerini, M.: Identification constraints and functional dependencies in description logics. In: Proc. of IJCAI, pp. 155–160 (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Calvanese, D., De Giacomo, G., Lembo, D., Lenzerini, M., Rosati, R.: Data complexity of query answering in description logics. In: Proc. of KR, pp. 260–270 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Calvanese, D., De Giacomo, G., Lembo, D., Lenzerini, M., Rosati, R.: Conceptual Modeling for Data Integration. In: Borgida, A.T., Chaudhri, V.K., Giorgini, P., Yu, E.S. (eds.) Conceptual Modeling: Foundations and Applications. LNCS, vol. 5600, pp. 173–197. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  19. Chandra, A.K., Merlin, P.M.: Optimal implementation of conjunctive queries in relational data bases. In: Proc. of STOCS, pp. 77–90 (1977)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Chikofsky, E.J., Cross II, J.H.: Reverse engineering and design recovery: a taxonomy. IEEE Software 7(1), 13–17 (1990)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  21. Chimia-Opoka, J., Felderer, M., Lenz, C., Lange, C.: Querying UML models using OCL and Prolog: A performance study. In: Proc. of ICSTW, pp. 81–88 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Deutsch, A., Nash, A., Remmel, J.B.: The chase revisisted. In: Proc. of PODS, pp. 149–158 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Donini, F.M., Massacci, F.: EXPTIME tableaux for \(\mathcal{ALC}\). Artif. Intell. 124, 87–138 (2000)

    CrossRef  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  24. Dupuy, S., Ledru, Y., Chabre-Peccoud, M.: An Overview of RoZ: A Tool for Integrating UML and Z Specifications. In: Wangler, B., Bergman, L.D. (eds.) CAiSE 2000. LNCS, vol. 1789, pp. 417–430. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  25. Fagin, R., Kolaitis, P.G., Miller, R.J., Popa, L.: Data exchange: Semantics and query answering. Theor. Comput. Sci. 336(1), 89–124 (2005)

    CrossRef  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  26. Fischer, M.J., Ladner, R.E.: Propositional dynamic logic of regular programs. J. Comput. System Sci. 18(2), 194–211 (1979)

    CrossRef  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  27. Garey, M.R., Johnson, D.S.: Computers and Intractability: A Guide to the Theory of NP-Completeness. W. H. Freeman (1979)

    Google Scholar 

  28. Gogolla, M., Büttner, F., Richters, M.: USE: A UML-based specification environment for validating UML and OCL. Sci. of Computer Progr. 69(1-3), 27–34 (2007)

    CrossRef  MATH  Google Scholar 

  29. Johnson, D.S., Klug, A.C.: Testing containment of conjunctive queries under functional and inclusion dependencies. J. Comput. Syst. Sci. 28(1), 167–189 (1984)

    CrossRef  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  30. Kaneiwa, K., Satoh, K.: On the complexities of consistency checking for restricted UML class diagrams. Theor. Comput. Sci. 411(2), 301–323 (2010)

    CrossRef  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  31. Krötzsch, M., Rudolph, S.: Extending decidable existential rules by joining acyclicity and guardedness. In: Proc. of IJCAI, pp. 963–968 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  32. Lenzerini, M., Nobili, P.: On the satisfiability of dependency constraints in entity-relationship schemata. Inf. Syst. 15(4), 453–461 (1990)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  33. Lutz, C.: The Complexity of Conjunctive Query Answering in Expressive Description Logics. In: Armando, A., Baumgartner, P., Dowek, G. (eds.) IJCAR 2008. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 5195, pp. 179–193. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  34. Maier, D., Mendelzon, A.O., Sagiv, Y.: Testing implications of data dependencies. ACM Trans. Database Syst. 4(4), 455–469 (1979)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  35. Maraee, A., Balaban, M.: Efficient Reasoning about Finite Satisfiability of UML Class Diagrams with Constrained Generalization Sets. In: Akehurst, D.H., Vogel, R., Paige, R.F. (eds.) ECMDA-FA. LNCS, vol. 4530, pp. 17–31. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  36. Queralt, A., Teniente, E.: Reasoning on UML Class Diagrams with OCL Constraints. In: Embley, D.W., Olivé, A., Ram, S. (eds.) ER 2006. LNCS, vol. 4215, pp. 497–512. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  37. Queralt, A., Teniente, E.: Verification and validation of UML conceptual schemas with OCL constraints. ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Meth. 21(2) (2011) (in press)

    Google Scholar 

  38. Queralt, A., Teniente, E., Artale, A., Calvanese, D.: OCL-Lite: Finite reasoning on UML/OCL conceptual schemas. Data and Know. Eng. (2011) (in press)

    Google Scholar 

  39. Richters, M., Gogolla, M.: OCL: Syntax, Semantics, and Tools. In: Clark, A., Warmer, J. (eds.) Object Modeling with the OCL. LNCS, vol. 2263, pp. 447–450. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  40. Snook, C., Butler, M.: UML-B: Formal modeling and design aided by UML. ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Meth. 15, 92–122 (2006)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  41. Störrle, H.: A PROLOG-based approach to representing and querying software engineering models. In: Proc. of VLL, pp. 71–83 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  42. Vardi, M.Y.: The complexity of relational query languages. In: Proc. of STOC, pp. 137–146 (1982)

    Google Scholar 

  43. Vardi, M.Y.: On the complexity of bounded-variable queries. In: Proc. of PODS, pp. 266–276 (1995)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computer Science, University of Oxford, UK

    Georg Gottlob, Giorgio Orsi & Andreas Pieris

  2. Dept. of Computer Science and Inf. Systems, Birkbeck University of London, UK

    Andrea Calì

  3. Oxford-Man Institute of Quantitative Finance, University of Oxford, UK

    Andrea Calì & Georg Gottlob

  4. Institute for the Future of Computing, Oxford Martin School, UK

    Georg Gottlob & Giorgio Orsi

Authors
  1. Andrea Calì
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Georg Gottlob
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Giorgio Orsi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Andreas Pieris
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. IT University of Copenhagen, Rued Langgaards Vej 7, 2300, Copenhagen, Denmark

    Lars Birkedal

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

Copyright information

© 2012 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Calì, A., Gottlob, G., Orsi, G., Pieris, A. (2012). Querying UML Class Diagrams. In: Birkedal, L. (eds) Foundations of Software Science and Computational Structures. FoSSaCS 2012. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 7213. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-28729-9_1

Download citation

  • .RIS
  • .ENW
  • .BIB
  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-28729-9_1

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-28728-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-28729-9

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Share this paper

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Search

Navigation

  • Find a journal
  • Publish with us

Discover content

  • Journals A-Z
  • Books A-Z

Publish with us

  • Publish your research
  • Open access publishing

Products and services

  • Our products
  • Librarians
  • Societies
  • Partners and advertisers

Our imprints

  • Springer
  • Nature Portfolio
  • BMC
  • Palgrave Macmillan
  • Apress
  • Your US state privacy rights
  • Accessibility statement
  • Terms and conditions
  • Privacy policy
  • Help and support

167.114.118.210

Not affiliated

Springer Nature

© 2023 Springer Nature