MCTest: towards an improvement of match algorithms for models
MCTest: towards an improvement of match algorithms for models
- Author(s): V. García-Díaz ; B.C. Pelayo G-Bustelo ; O. Sanjuán-Martínez ; E.R. Núñez Valdez ; J.M. Cueva Lovelle
- DOI: 10.1049/iet-sen.2011.0040
For access to this article, please select a purchase option:
Buy article PDF
Buy Knowledge Pack
IET members benefit from discounts to all IET publications and free access to E&T Magazine. If you are an IET member, log in to your account and the discounts will automatically be applied.
Thank you
Your recommendation has been sent to your librarian.
- Author(s): V. García-Díaz 1 ; B.C. Pelayo G-Bustelo 1 ; O. Sanjuán-Martínez 1 ; E.R. Núñez Valdez 1 ; J.M. Cueva Lovelle 1
-
-
View affiliations
-
Affiliations:
1: Department of Computer Science, University of Oviedo, Oviedo, Spain
-
Affiliations:
1: Department of Computer Science, University of Oviedo, Oviedo, Spain
- Source:
Volume 6, Issue 2,
April 2012,
p.
127 – 139
DOI: 10.1049/iet-sen.2011.0040 , Print ISSN 1751-8806, Online ISSN 1751-8814
Owing to the increasing importance of model-driven engineering (MDE) and the changes experienced by software systems over their life cycle, the calculation, representation and visualisation of matches and differences between two different versions of the same model are becoming more necessary and useful. This study shows the need for improvement in the algorithms for calculating the relationships between models and presents a tool to test different implementations, thus reducing the effort required to measure, compare or create new algorithms. To demonstrate the need for improvement and the framework developed, the authors have created different models that conform to the metamodel of a domain-specific language. Subsequently, the authors compared these models using the algorithms of the eclipse modelling framework (EMF) Compare tool, part of the eclipse modeling project, which is the framework of reference for MDE. Thus, in the case study, the authors tool is used to measure the quality of the comparisons performed by EMF Compare.
Inspec keywords: data visualisation; software engineering; data structures; specification languages
Other keywords:
Subjects: Graphics techniques; Software engineering techniques
References
-
-
1)
- K.C. Tai . The tree-to-tree correction problem. J. ACM , 3 , 422 - 433
-
2)
- Ledeczi, A., Maroti, M., Bakay, A.: `The generic modeling environment', Workshop on Intelligent Signal Processing, 2001, Budapest, Hungary, 17.
-
3)
- D. Steinberg , F. Budinsky , M. Paternostro , E. Merks . (2009) EMF: eclipse modeling framework 2.0.
-
4)
- Hunt, J.W., Mcllroy, M.D.: `An algorithm for differential file comparison', Computing Science Technical Report No. 41,, 1977.
-
5)
- P. Farail , P. Gaufillet , A. Canals . (2006) The TOPCASED project: a toolkit in OPen source for Critical Aeronautic SystEms Design.
-
6)
- R.C. Gronback . (2009) Eclipse modeling project: a domain-specific language toolkit: a Domain-Specific Language (DSL) toolkit.
-
7)
- Gronback, R.C.: `Eclipse modeling project and OMG standard', Eclipse Modeling Symp., 2006.
-
8)
- Cobena, G., Abiteboul, S., Marian, A.: `Detecting changes in XML documents', ICDE, 2001, p. 41–52.
-
9)
- Kolovos, D.S., Di Ruscio, D., Pierantonio, A., Paige, R.F.: `Different models for model matching: an analysis of approaches to support model differencing', CVSM ’09: Proc. 2009 ICSE Workshop on Comparison and Versioning of Software Models, 2009, p. 1–6.
-
10)
- Selonen, P.: `A review of UML model comparison approaches', Proc. Nordic Workshop on Model Driven Engineering, 2007.
-
11)
- Mandelin, D., Kimelman, D., Yellin, D.: `A Bayesian approach to diagram matching with application to architectural models', ICSE ’06: Proc. 28th Int. Conf. on Software Engineering, 2006, p. 222–231.
-
12)
- K. Beck . Simple smalltalk testing: with patterns. Smalltalk Rep. , 2 , 16 - 18
-
13)
- E. Gamma , R. Helm , R. Johnson , J.M. Vlissides . (1994) Design patterns: elements of reusable object-oriented software.
-
14)
- D.C. Kung , J. Gao , P.H. Toyoshima , C. Chen . On regression testing of object-oriented programs. J. Syst. Softw. , 1 , 21 - 40
-
15)
- E.W. Myers . An O(ND) difference algorithm and its variations. Algorithmica , 251 - 266
-
16)
- Alanen, M., Porres, I.: `Difference and union of models', Proc. UML 2003, 2003, p. 2–17.
-
17)
- C. Fellbaum . (1998) WordNet. An electronic lexical database.
-
18)
- S. Khuller , B. Raghavachari . Graph and network algorithms. ACM Comput. Surv. , 1 , 43 - 45
-
19)
- Melnik, S., Garcia-molina, H., Rahm, E.: `Similarity flooding: a versatile graph matching algorithm', 18thInt. Conf. on Data Engineering, 2002, p. 117–128.
-
20)
- Ohst, D., Welle, M., Kelter, U.: `Differences between versions of UML diagrams', ESEC/FSE, 2003, 28, p. 227–236.
-
21)
- Selonen, P., Kettunen, M.: `Metamodel-based inference of inter-model correspondence', CSMR ’07: Proc. 11th European Conf. on Software Maintenance and Reengineering, 2007, p. 71–80.
-
22)
- Treude, C., Berlik, S., Wenzel, S., Kelter, U.: `Difference computation of large models', ESEC-FSE ’07: Proc. Sixth Joint Meeting of the European Software Engineering Conf. and the ACM SIGSOFT Symp. Foundations of Software Engineering, 2007, p. 295–304.
-
23)
- W. Wang . (2005) Evaluation of UML model transformation tools.
-
24)
- J. Bézivin . (2005) On the unification power of models, ‘Software and system modeling’.
-
25)
- Rivera, J.E., Vallecillo, A.: `Representing and operating with model differences', TOOLS EUROPE 2008, 2008, (LNBIP, 11), p. 141–160, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-69824-1_9.
-
26)
- D.C. Howe . A WordNet library for Java/Processing.
-
27)
- D. Frankel . (2003) Model driven architecture: applying MDA to enterprise computing.
-
28)
- J. Miller , J. Mukerji , M. Belaunde . (2003) MDA guide, v1.0.1.
-
29)
- Y. Lin , J. Gray , F. Jouault . DSMDiff: a differentiation tool for domain-specific models. Eur. J. Inf. Syst. , 349 - 361
-
30)
- D.S. Hirschberg . Algorithms for the longest common subsequence problem. J. ACM , 4 , 664 - 675
-
31)
- Kent, S.: `Model driven engineering', IFM ’02: Proc. Third Int. Conf. on Integrated Formal Methods, 2002, p. 286–298.
-
32)
- K. Zhang , S. Dennis . Simple fast algorithms for the editing distance between trees and related problems. SIAM J. Comput. , 6 , 1245 - 1262
-
33)
- H.L.R. Oliveira , L.G.P. Murta , C. Werner . (2005) Odyssey-VCS: a flexible version control system for UML model elements, Proc. 12th Int. Workshop on Software Configuration Management.
-
34)
- S. Efftinge , M. Völter . oAW xText: a framework for textual DSLs.
-
35)
- A. Toulmé . Presentation of EMF compare utility.
-
36)
- Xing, Z., Stroulia, E.: `UMLDiff: an algorithm for object-oriented design differencing', ASE '05: Proc. 20th IEEE/ACM Int. Conf. on Automated Software Engineering, 2005, p. 54–65.
-
37)
- (2005) Meta object facility 2.0.
-
38)
- Gruschko, B., Kolovos, D.S., Paige, R.F.: `Towards synchronizing models with evolving metamodels', Proc. Int. Workshop on Model-Driven Software Evolution Held with the ECSMR, 2007.
-
39)
- Reddy, R., France, R.: `Model composition – a signature-based approach', Aspect Oriented Modeling (AOM) Workshop, 2005, Montego.
-
40)
- (2005) Ontology definition metamodel.
-
41)
- N. Maiden , A. Sutcliffe . Exploiting reusable specifications through analogy. Commun. ACM , 4 , 55 - 64
-
42)
- Y. Lin , J. Zhang , J. Gray . (2004) Model comparison: a key challenge for transformation testing and version control in model driven software development, ‘Control in model driven software development. OOPSLA/GPCE: best practices for model-driven software development’.
-
43)
- Nejati, S., Sabetzadeh, M., Chechik, M., Easterbrook, S., Zave, P.: `Matching and merging of statecharts specifications', ‘ICSE '07: Proc. 29th Int. Conf. on Software Engineering, 2007, p. 54–64.
-
44)
- C. Brun , A. Pierantonio . Model differences in the eclipse modeling framework. UPGRADE, Eur. J. Inf. Prof. , 2 , 29 - 34
-
1)