A formal framework for model management

El Desarrollo de Software Dirigido por Modelos es una rama de la Ingeniería del Software en la que los artefactos software se representan como modelos para incrementar la productividad, calidady eficiencia económica en el proceso de desarrollo de software, donde un modelo proporciona una representación abstracta del código final de una aplicación. En este campo, la iniciativa Model-Driven Architecture (MDA), patrocinada por la OMG, está constituida por una familia de estándares industriales, entre los que se destacan: Meta-Object Facility (MOF), Unified Modeling Language (UML), Object Constraint Language (OCL), XML Metadata Interchange (XMI), y Query/Views/Transformations (QVT). Estos estándares proporcionan unas directrices comunes para herramientas basadas en modelos y para procesos de desarrollo de software dirigidos por modelos. Su objetivo consiste en mejorar la interoperabilidad entre marcos de trabajo ejecutables, en automatizar el proceso desarrollo de software de software y en proporcionar técnicas que eviten errores durante ese proceso. El estándar MOF describe un marco de trabajo genérico que permite definir la sintaxis abstracta de lenguajes de modelado. Este estándar persigue la definición de los conceptos básicos que son utilizados en procesos de desarrollo de software dirigidos por modelos: que es un modelo, que es un metamodelo, qué es reflexión en un marco de trabajo basado en MOF, etc. Sin embargo, la mayoría de estos conceptos carecen de una semántica formal en la versión actual del estándar MOF. Además, OCL se utiliza como un lenguage de definición de restricciones que permite añadir semántica a un metamodelo MOF. Desafortunadamente, la relación entre un metamodelo y sus restricciones OCL también carece de una semántica formal. Este hecho es debido, en parte, a que los metamodelos solo pueden ser definidos como dato en un marco de trabajo basado en MOF. El estándar MOF también proporciona las llamadas facilidades de reflexión de MOF (MOF ReflectiBoronat Moll, A. (2007). A formal framework for model management [Tesis doctoral no publicada]. Universitat Politècnica de València. https://doi.org/10.4995/Thesis/10251/1964Palanci

Konsistente Feature Modell gesteuerte Softwareproduktlinien Evolution

SPLs are an approach to manage families of closely related software systems in terms of configurable functionality. A feature model captures common and variable functionalities of an SPL on a conceptual level in terms of features. Reusable artifacts, such as code, documentation, or tests are related to features using a feature-artifact mapping. A product of an SPL can be derived by selecting features in a configuration. Over the course of time, SPLs and their artifacts are subject to change. As SPLs are particularly complex, their evolution is a challenging task. Consequently, SPL evolution must be thoroughly planned well in advance. However, plans typically do not turn out as expected and, thus, replanning is required. Feature models lean themselves for driving SPL evolution. However, replanning of feature-model evolution can lead to inconsistencies and feature-model anomalies may be introduced during evolution. Along with feature-model evolution, other SPL artifacts, especially configurations, need to consistently evolve. The work of this thesis provides remedy to the aforementioned challenges by presenting an approach for consistent evolution of SPLs. The main contributions of this thesis can be distinguished into three key areas: planning and replanning feature-model evolution, analyzing feature-model evolution, and consistent SPL artifact evolution. As a starting point for SPL evolution, we introduce Temporal Feature Models (TFMs) that allow capturing the entire evolution timeline of a feature model in one artifact, i.e., past history, present changes, and planned evolution steps. We provide an execution semantics of feature-model evolution operations that guarantees consistency of feature-model evolution timelines. To keep feature models free from anomalies, we introduce analyses to detect anomalies in feature-model evolution timelines and explain these anomalies in terms of their causing evolution operations. To enable consistent SPL artifact evolution, we generalize the concept of modeling evolution timelines in TFMs to be applicable for any modeling language. Moreover, we provide a methodology that enables involved engineers to define and use guidance for configuration evolution.Softwareproduktlinien (SPLs) ermöglichen es, konfigurierbare Funktionalität von eng verwandten Softwaresystemen zu verwalten. In einem Feature Modell werden gemeinsame und variable Funktionalitäten einer SPL auf Basis abstrakter Features modelliert. Wiederverwendbare Artefakte werden in einem Feature-Artefakt Mapping Features zugeordnet. Ein Produkt einer SPL kann abgeleitet werden, indem Features in einer Konfiguration ausgewählt werden. Im Laufe der Zeit müssen sich SPLs und deren Artefakte verändern. Da SPLs ganze Softwarefamilien modellieren, ist deren Evolution eine besonders herausfordernde Aufgabe, die gründlich im Voraus geplant werden muss. Feature Modelle eignen sich besonders als Planungsmittel einer SPL. Umplanung von Feature Modell Evolution kann jedoch zu Inkonsistenzen führen und Feature Modell Anomalien können im Zuge der Evolution eingeführt werden. Im Anschluss an die Feature Modell Evolution muss die Evolution anderer SPL Artefakte, insbesondere Konfigurationen, konsistent modelliert werden. In dieser Arbeit wird ein Ansatz zur konsistenten Evolution von SPLs vorgestellt, der die zuvor genannten Herausforderungen adressiert. Die Beiträge dieser Arbeit lassen sich in drei Kernbereiche aufteilen: Planung und Umplanung von Feature Modell Evolution, Analyse von Feature Modell Evolution und konsistente Evolution von SPL Artefakten. Temporal Feature Models (TFMs) werden als Startpunkt für SPL Evolution eingeführt. In einem TFM wird die gesamte Evolutionszeitlinie eines Feature Modells in einem Artefakt abgebildet, was sowohl vergangene Änderungen, den aktuellen Zustand, als auch geplante Änderungen beinhaltet. Auf Basis einer Ausführungssemantik wird die Konsistenz von Feature Modell Evolutionszeitlinien sichergestellt. Um Feature Modelle frei von Anomalien zu halten, werden Analysen eingeführt, welche die gesamte Evolutionszeitlinie eines Feature Modells auf Anomalien untersucht und diese mit verursachenden Evolutionsoperationen erklärt. Das Konzept zur Modellierung von Feature Modell Evolutionszeitlinien aus TFMs wird verallgemeinert, um die gesamte Evolution von Modellen beliebiger Modellierungssprachen spezifizieren zu können. Des Weiteren wird eine Methodik vorgestellt, die beteiligten Ingenieuren eine geführte Evolution von Konfigurationen ermöglicht

Action semantics of unified modeling language

The Uni ed Modeling Language or UML, as a visual and general purpose modeling language, has been around for more than a decade, gaining increasingly wide application and becoming the de-facto industrial standard for modeling software systems. However, the dynamic semantics of UML behaviours are only described in natural languages. Speci cation in natural languages inevitably involves vagueness, lacks reasonability and discourages mechanical language implementation. Such semi-formality of UML causes wide concern for researchers, including us. The formal semantics of UML demands more readability and extensibility due to its fast evolution and a wider range of users. Therefore we adopt Action Semantics (AS), mainly created by Peter Mosses, to formalize the dynamic semantics of UML, because AS can satisfy these needs advantageously compared to other frameworks. Instead of de ning UML directly, we design an action language, called ALx, and use it as the intermediary between a typical executable UML and its action semantics. ALx is highly heterogeneous, combining the features of Object Oriented Programming Languages, Object Query Languages, Model Description Languages and more complex behaviours like state machines. Adopting AS to formalize such a heterogeneous language is in turn of signi cance in exploring the adequacy and applicability of AS. In order to give assurance of the validity of the action semantics of ALx, a prototype ALx-to-Java translator is implemented, underpinned by our formal semantic description of the action language and using the Model Driven Approach (MDA). We argue that MDA is a feasible way of implementing this source-to-source language translator because the cornerstone of MDA, UML, is adequate to specify the static aspect of programming languages, and MDA provides executable transformation languages to model mapping rules between languages. We also construct a translator using a commonly-used conventional approach, in i which a tool is employed to generate the lexical scanner and the parser, and then other components including the type checker, symbol table constructor, intermediate representation producer and code generator, are coded manually. Then we compare the conventional approach with the MDA. The result shows that MDA has advantages over the conventional method in the aspect of code quality but is inferior to the latter in terms of system performance

Metamodel-based model conformance and multiview consistency checking

Model-driven development, using languages such as UML and BON, often makes use of multiple diagrams (e.g., class and sequence diagrams) when modeling systems. These diagrams, presenting different views of a system of interest, may be inconsistent. A metamodel provides a unifying framework in which to ensure and check consistency, while at the same time providing the means to distinguish between valid and invalid models, that is, conformance. Two formal specifications of the metamodel for an object-oriented modeling language are presented, and it is shown how to use these specifications for model conformance and multiview consistency checking. Comparisons are made in terms of completeness and the level of automation each provide for checking multiview consistency and model conformance. The lessons learned from applying formal techniques to the problems of metamodeling, model conformance, and multiview consistency checking are summarized

Using Ontologies for the Design of Data Warehouses

Obtaining an implementation of a data warehouse is a complex task that forces designers to acquire wide knowledge of the domain, thus requiring a high level of expertise and becoming it a prone-to-fail task. Based on our experience, we have detected a set of situations we have faced up with in real-world projects in which we believe that the use of ontologies will improve several aspects of the design of data warehouses. The aim of this article is to describe several shortcomings of current data warehouse design approaches and discuss the benefit of using ontologies to overcome them. This work is a starting point for discussing the convenience of using ontologies in data warehouse design.Comment: 15 pages, 2 figure

A Formal Transformation Method for Automated Fault Tree Generation from a UML Activity Model

Fault analysis and resolution of faults should be part of any end-to-end system development process. This paper is concerned with developing a formal transformation method that maps control flows modeled in UML Activities to semantically equivalent Fault Trees. The transformation method developed features the use of propositional calculus and probability theory. Fault Propagation Chains are introduced to facilitate the transformation method. An overarching metamodel comprised of transformations between models is developed and is applied to an understood Traffic Management System of Systems problem to demonstrate the approach. In this way, the relational structure of the system behavior model is reflected in the structure of the Fault Tree. The paper concludes with a discussion of limitations of the transformation method and proposes approaches to extend it to object flows, State Machines and functional allocations.Comment: 1st submission made to IEEE Transactions on Reliability on 27-Nov-2017; 2nd submission (revision) made on 27-Apr-2018. This version is the 2nd submission. 20 pages, 11 figure