Skip to main content
Fachgebiete
Automobil + Motoren Bauwesen + Immobilien Business IT + Informatik Elektrotechnik + Elektronik Energie + Nachhaltigkeit Finance + Banking Management + Führung Marketing + Vertrieb Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe Versicherung + Risiko
DE
EN
Themenseiten
Organisationspsychologie Projektmanagement Marketing Smart Manufacturing
Bücher
Zeitschriften
Weitere Formate
Podcasts Webinare Technik Webinare Wirtschaft Kongresse Veranstaltungskalender Awards
Jetzt Einzelzugang starten
Zugang für Unternehmen
Referenzkunden
MTZ-Fachkongress

Antriebe und Energiesysteme von morgen


Austausch von Automobil- und Energiewirtschaft

Am 14./15. Mai geht es in Chemnitz um die Mobilitätswende durch Elektro- und Wasserstofffahrzeuge.
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
Software and Systems Modeling
Erschienen in: Software and Systems Modeling 4/2014

01.10.2014 | Theme Section Paper

Extraction and evolution of architectural variability models in plugin-based systems

verfasst von: Mathieu Acher, Anthony Cleve, Philippe Collet, Philippe Merle, Laurence Duchien, Philippe Lahire

Erschienen in: Software and Systems Modeling | Ausgabe 4/2014

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

Variability management is a key issue when building and evolving software-intensive systems, making it possible to extend, configure, customize and adapt such systems to customers’ needs and specific deployment contexts. A wide form of variability can be found in extensible software systems, typically built on top of plugin-based architectures that offer a (large) number of configuration options through plugins. In an ideal world, a software architect should be able to generate a system variant on-demand, corresponding to a particular assembly of plugins. To this end, the variation points and constraints between architectural elements should be properly modeled and maintained over time (i.e., for each version of an architecture). A crucial, yet error-prone and time-consuming, task for a software architect is to build an accurate representation of the variability of an architecture, in order to prevent unsafe architectural variants and reach the highest possible level of flexibility. In this article, we propose a reverse engineering process for producing a variability model (i.e., a feature model) of a plugin-based architecture. We develop automated techniques to extract and combine different variability descriptions, including a hierarchical software architecture model, a plugin dependency model and the software architect knowledge. By computing and reasoning about differences between versions of architectural feature models, software architect can control both the variability extraction and evolution processes. The proposed approach has been applied to a representative, large-scale plugin-based system (FraSCAti), considering different versions of its architecture. We report on our experience in this context.
Vorheriger Artikel Deriving performance-relevant infrastructure properties through model-based experiments with Ginpex
Nächster Artikel Evaluating probabilistic models with uncertain model parameters

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe




 

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren
Fußnoten
1
Maven (http://​maven.​apache.​org/​) is a software tool for managing a project’s build, reporting and documentation.
 
2
We use here the term variability as in the definition from  [67]: “software variability is the ability of a software system or artifact to be efficiently extended, changed, customized or configured for use in a particular context.”
 
3
The exploitation of the FM in a forward engineering process is out of the scope of this paper. Numerous generative techniques have been developed (see, e.g., [18, 30, 52]), and we plan to reuse them in our ongoing effort for reengineering FraSCAti.
 
4
It should be noted that the extraction only focuses on the first-level composites that include some variability. It ignores all the composites that do not contain any optional references.
 
5
Similarly, the constraint \(Ar4 \Rightarrow Ar6\) could be restituted in the model (using the information of the implication graph, see above). The slicing operator does not add this constraint because of the redundancy with \(Ar3 \Rightarrow Ar5\).
 
6
This assumption is also shared by [26, 63, 70].
 
7
Further details and material (including FMs and FAMILIAR scripts) about the experiment are available in [1].
 
8
A feature \(f\) of \(FM\) is a core feature if it is part of all valid configurations of \(FM\).
 
9
In [71], Thüm et al. define a feature as abstract, “if and only if it is not mapped to any implementation artifacts”. They “call all other features non-abstract or concrete, i.e., a concrete feature is mapped to at least one implementation artifact”. It corresponds to our case.
 
10
Many constraints of \(fm_{Arch}\) involve features tinfi_oo, osgi_provider, julia, thus confirming that their parent feature fractal_bootstrap_class_provider is needed in many configurations.
 
11
The information gained during the reverse engineering process for the version 1.3 of FraSCAti could have been used by the SA to modify the FraSCAti artifacts or refactor the architecture. Nevertheless, such changes have not been made in the project. Therefore, versions 1.4 and 1.5 share a lot of properties of version 1.3, including mandatory or obsolete features.
 
Literatur
1.
2.
Acher, M., Cleve, A., Collet, P., Merle, P., Duchien, L., Lahire, P.: Reverse engineering architectural feature models. In: Proceedings of the 5th European Conference on Software Architecture (ECSA 2011), LNCS, pp. 220–235. Springer (2011)
3.
Acher, M., Cleve, A., Perrouin, G., Heymans, P., Collet, P., Lahire, P., Vanbeneden, C.: On extracting feature models from product descriptions. In: Proceedings of the 6th International Workshop on Variability Modelling of Software-Intensive Systems (VaMoS 2012), pp. 45–54. ACM (2012)
4.
Acher, M., Collet, P., Lahire, P., France, R.: Comparing approaches to implement feature model composition. In: Proceedings of the 6th European Conference on Modelling Foundations and Applications (ECMFA 2010), vol. 6138 of LNCS, pp. 3–19 (2010)
5.
Acher, M., Collet, P., Lahire, P., France, R.: Separation of concerns in feature modeling: support and applications. In: Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Aspect-Oriented Software Development (AOSD 2012), pp. 1–12. ACM (2012)
6.
Acher, M., Collet, P., Lahire, P., France, R.: FAMILIAR: A domain-specific language for large scale management of feature models. Science of Computer Programming (SCP)—Special Issue on Programming Languages (to appear) (2013)
7.
Acher, M., Heymans, P., Quinton, C., Merle, P., Collet, P., Lahire, P.: Feature model differences. In: Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering (CAiSE’12), pp. 629–645. Springer (2012)
8.
Acher, M., Heymans, P., Cleve, A., Heymans J.-L., Baudry, B.: Support for reverse engineering and maintaining feature models. In: Proceedings of the 7th International Workshop on Variability Modelling of Software-Intensive Systems (VaMoS’13), Pisa, Italie. ACM (2013)
9.
Alves, V., Gheyi, R., Massoni, T., Kulesza, U., Borba, P., Lucena, C.: Refactoring product lines. In: Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Generative Programming and Component Engineering (GPCE 2006), pp. 201–210. ACM (2006)
10.
Alves, V., Schwanninger, C., Barbosa, L., Rashid, A., Sawyer, P., Rayson, P., Pohl, C., Rummler, A.: An exploratory study of information retrieval techniques in domain analysis. In: Proceedings of the 12th International Software Product Lines Conference (SPLC 2008), pp. 67–76. IEEE (2008)
11.
Andersen, N., Czarnecki, K., She, S., Wasowski, A.: Efficient synthesis of feature models. In: Proceedings of SPLC’12, pp. 97–106. ACM Press (2012)
12.
Apel, S., Kästner, C.: An overview of feature-oriented software development. J. Object Technol. (JOT) 8(5), 49–84 (2009)CrossRef
13.
Bachmann, F., Bass, L.: Managing variability in software architectures. SIGSOFT Softw. Eng. Notes 26, 126–132 (2001)CrossRef
14.
Benavides, D., Segura, S., Ruiz-Cortes, A.: Automated analysis of feature models 20 years later: a literature review. Inf. Syst. 35(6), 615–636 (2010)
15.
16.
Classen, A., Boucher, Q., Heymans, P.: A text-based approach to feature modelling: Syntax and semantics of TVL. Sci. Comput. Program 76(12), 1130–1143 (2010)
17.
Clements, P., Northrop, L.M.: Software Product Lines : Practices and Patterns. Addison-Wesley Professional, Reading (2001)
18.
Czarnecki, K., Eisenecker, U.: Generative Programming: Methods, Tools, and Applications. Addison-Wesley, Reading (2000)
19.
Czarnecki, K., Helsen, S., Eisenecker, U.: Staged configuration through specialization and multilevel configuration of feature models. Software Process: Improvement and Practice 10(2), 143–169 (2005)CrossRef
20.
Czarnecki, K., Pietroszek, K.: Verifying feature-based model templates against well-formedness OCL constraints. In: Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Generative Programming and Component Engineering (GPCE 2006), pp. 211–220. ACM (2006)
21.
Czarnecki, K., Wasowski, A.: Feature diagrams and logics: there and back again. In: Proceedings of 11th International Software Product Lines Conference (SPLC 2007), pp. 23–34 (2007)
22.
Dhungana, D., Grünbacher, P., Rabiser, R., Neumayer, T.: Structuring the modeling space and supporting evolution in software product line engineering. J. Sys. Softw. 83(7), 1108–1122 (2010)CrossRef
23.
Ducasse, S., Pollet, D.: Software architecture reconstruction: a process-oriented taxonomy. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 35(4), 573–591 (2009)CrossRef
24.
Duszynski, S.: A scalable goal-oriented approach to software variability recovery. In: Proceedings of the 15th International Software Product Line Conference, Vol. 2, SPLC ’11, pp. 42:1–42:8. ACM, New York (2011)
25.
Euzenat, J., Shvaiko, P.: Ontology Matching. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)MATH
26.
Fahrenberg, U., Legay, A., Wasowski, A.: Vision paper: make a difference! (semantically). In: Proceedings of the ACM/IEEE 14th International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems (MoDELS 2011), pp. 490–500 (2011)
27.
Grünbacher, P., Rabiser, R., Dhungana, D., Lehofer, M.: Model-based customization and deployment of eclipse-based tools: industrial experiences. In: Proceedings of the 2009 IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering, ASE ’09, pp. 247–256. IEEE Computer Society, Washington (2009)
28.
Hartmann, H., Trew, T.: Using feature diagrams with context variability to model multiple product lines for software supply chains. In: Proceedings of 12th International Software Product Lines Conference (SPLC 2008), pp. 12–21. IEEE (2008)
29.
Haslinger, E.N., Lopez-Herrejon, R.E., Egyed, A.: Reverse engineering feature models from programs’ feature sets. In: WCRE’11, pp. 308–312. IEEE CS (2011)
30.
Heidenreich, F., Sanchez, P., Santos, J., Zschaler, S., Alferez, M., Araujo, J., Fuentes, L., Uira K., Ana M., Rashid, A.: Relating feature models to other models of a software product line: a comparative study of featuremapper and vml*. Trans. Aspect-orient. Softw. Dev. VII, special issue on a common case study for aspect-oriented modeling 6210, 69–114 (2010)
31.
Henard, C., Papadakis, M., Perrouin, G., Klein, J., Le Traon, Y.: Towards automated testing and fixing of re-engineered feature models. In: Proceedings of ICSE’13, NIER track, pp. 1245–1248 (2013)
32.
Hubaux, A., Heymans, P., Schobbens, P.-Y., Deridder, D., Abbasi, E.K.: Supporting multiple perspectives in feature-based configuration. Softw. Syst. Model. (SoSyM) 12(3), 641–663 (2011)
33.
Janota, M., Botterweck, G.: Formal approach to integrating feature and architecture models. In: Proceedings of the Theory and Practice of Software, 11th International Conference on Fundamental Approaches to Software Engineering, FASE’08/ETAPS’08, pp. 31–45. Springer, Berlin (2008). http://​dl.​acm.​org/​citation.​cfm?​id=​1792838.​1792842. ISBN 3-540-78742-9, 978-3-540-78742-6
34.
John, I.: Capturing product line information from legacy user documentation. In: Käkölä, T., Dueńas, J.C. (eds.) Software Product Lines. Research Issues in Engineering and Management. pp. 127–159. Springer, Berlin (2006). http://​dblp.​uni-trier.​de. ISBN 978-3-540-33252-7
35.
Kang, K., Kim, S., Lee, J., Kim, K., Shin, E., Huh, M.: Form: a feature-oriented reuse method with domain-specific reference architectures. Ann. Softw. Eng. 5(1), 143–168 (1998)CrossRef
36.
Kästner, C., Thüm, T., Saake, G., Feigenspan, J., Leich, T., Wielgorz, F., Apel, S.: FeatureIDE: tool framework for feature-oriented software development. In: Proceedings of the 31st International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE 2009). Formal Demonstration paper (2009)
37.
Kolovos, D.S., Di Ruscio, D., Pierantonio, A., Paige, R.F.: Different models for model matching: an analysis of approaches to support model differencing. In: Proceedings of the International Workshop on Comparison and Versioning of Software Models (CVSM 2009), pp. 1–6 (2009)
38.
Loesch, F., Ploedereder, E.: Restructuring variability in software product lines using concept analysis of product configurations. In: Proceedings of the 11th European Conference on Software Maintenance and Reengineering, CSMR ’07, pp. 159–170. IEEE Computer Society, Washington (2007)
39.
Lopez-Herrejon, R.E., Egyed, A.: Detecting inconsistencies in multi-view models with variability. In: Proceedings of the 6th European Conference on Modelling Foundations and Applications (ECMFA 2010), pp. 217–232 (2010)
40.
Lopez-Herrejon, R.E., Egyed, A.: On the need of safe software product line architectures. In: Proceedings of the 4th European Conference on Software Architecture (ECSA 2010), vol. 6285 of LNCS, pp. 493–496. Springer (2010)
41.
Lotufo, R., She, S., Berger, T., Czarnecki, K., Wasowski, A.: Evolution of the linux kernel variability model. In: Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Software Product Lines (SPLC 2010), pp. 136–150 (2010)
42.
Maoz, S., Ringert, J.O., Rumpe, B.: Addiff: semantic differencing for activity diagrams. In: Proceedings of the 2011 Joint Meeting of the European Software Engineering Conference and the ACM SIGSOFT Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering (ESEC/FSE 2011), pp. 179–189. ACM (2011)
43.
Maoz, S., Ringert, J.O., Rumpe, B.: Cddiff: semantic differencing for class diagrams. In: Proceedings of the 25th European Conference on Object-oriented Programming (ECOOP 2011), pp. 230–254. Springer (2011)
44.
Maoz, S., Ringert, J.O., Rumpe, B.: A manifesto for semantic model differencing. In: Proceedings of MODELS’10, pp. 194–203. Springer (2011)
45.
Mendonca, M., Branco, M., Cowan, D.: S.P.L.O.T.: software product lines online tools. In: Proceedings of the 24th annual ACM SIGPLAN Conference on Object-Oriented Programming, Systems, Languages, and Applications (OOPSLA 2009), pp. 761–762. ACM (2009)
46.
Mendonca, M., Wasowski, A., Czarnecki, K., Cowan, D.: Efficient compilation techniques for large scale feature models. In: Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Generative Programming and Component Engineering (GPCE 2008), pp. 13–22. ACM (2008)
47.
48.
Metzger, A., Pohl, K., Heymans, P., Schobbens, P.-Y., Saval, G.: Disambiguating the documentation of variability in software product lines: a separation of concerns, formalization and automated analysis. In: Proceedings of the 15th IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE 2007), pp. 243–253 (2007)
49.
Murphy, G.C., Notkin, D., Sullivan, K.J.: Software reflexion models: Bridging the gap between design and implementation. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 27(4), 364–380 (2001)CrossRef
50.
51.
52.
Parra, C.A., Cleve, A., Blanc, X., Duchien, L.: Feature-based composition of software architectures. In: Proceedings of the 4th European Conference on software Architecture (ECSA 2010), vol. 6285 of LNCS, pp. 230–245. Springer (2010)
53.
Pleuss, A., Botterweck, G., Dhungana, D., Polzer, A., Kowalewski, S.: Model-driven support for product line evolution on feature level. J. Syst. Softw. 85(10), 2261–2274 (2011)
54.
Pleuss, A., Botterweck, G., Dhungana, D., Polzer, A., Kowalewski, S.: Model-driven support for product line evolution on feature level. J. Syst. Softw. (JSS) (available online, in press) (2011). doi:10.​1016/​j.​jss.​2011.​08.​008
55.
Rabkin, A., Katz, R.: Static extraction of program configuration options. In: Proceedings of the 33rd International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE’11), pp. 131–140. ACM (2011)
56.
Reiser, M.-O., Weber, M.: Multi-level feature trees: a pragmatic approach to managing highly complex product families. Requir. Eng. 12(2), 57–75 (2007)CrossRef
57.
58.
Rosenmüller, M., Siegmund, N., Thüm, T., Saake, G.: Multi-dimensional variability modeling. In: VaMoS’11, pp. 11–20. ACM (2011)
59.
Ryssel, U., Ploennigs, J., Kabitzsch, K.: Automatic variation-point identification in function-block-based models. In: Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Generative Programming and Component Engineering, GPCE ’10, pp. 23–32. ACM, New York (2010)
60.
Schneeweiss, D., Botterweck, G.: Using flow maps to visualize product attributes during feature configuration. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Workshop on Visualisation in Software Product Line Engineering (ViSPLE 2010) (2010)
61.
Schobbens, P.-Y., Heymans, P., Trigaux, J.-C., Bontemps, Y.: Generic semantics of feature diagrams. Comput. Netw. 51(2), 456–479 (2007)CrossRefMATH
62.
Schroeter, J., Lochau, M., Winkelmann, T.: Multi-perspectives on feature models. In: France, R. B., Kazmeier, J., Breu, R., Atkinson, C. (eds) MoDELS, vol. 7590 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 252–268. Springer (2012)
63.
Segura, S., Benavides, D., Ruiz-Cortes, A., Trinidad, P.: Automated merging of feature models using graph transformations. In: Post-proceedings of the Second Summer School on Generative and Transformational Techniques in Software Engineering (GTTSE 2007), Vol. 5235, pp. 489–505 (2008)
64.
Seinturier, L., Merle, P., Fournier, D., Dolet, N., Schiavoni, V., Stefani, J.-B.: Reconfigurable SCA Applications with the FraSCAti Platform. In: Proceedings of the 2009 IEEE International Conference on Services Computing (SCC 2009), pp. 268–275. IEEE (2009)
65.
Seinturier, L., Merle, P., Rouvoy, R., Romero, D., Schiavoni, V., Stefani, J.-B.: A Component-based middleware platform for reconfigurable service-oriented architectures. Softw. Pract. Exp. 42(5), 559–583 (2012)CrossRef
66.
She, S., Lotufo, R., Berger, T., Wasowski, A., Czarnecki, K.: Reverse engineering feature models. In: Proceedings of the 33rd International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE 2011), pp. 461–470. ACM (2011)
67.
Svahnberg, M., van Gurp, J., Bosch, J.: A taxonomy of variability realization techniques: research articles. Softw. Pract. Exp. 35(8), 705–754 (2005)CrossRef
68.
Thaker, S., Batory, D., Kitchin, D., Cook, W.: Safe composition of product lines. In: Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Generative Programming and Component Engineering (GPCE 2007), pp. 95–104. ACM (2007)
69.
Thompson, J.M., Heimdahl, M.P.E.: Structuring product family requirements for n-dimensional and hierarchical product lines. Requir. Eng. 8(1), 42–54 (2003)CrossRef
70.
Thüm, T., Batory, D., Kästner, C.: Reasoning about edits to feature models. In: Proceedings of the 31st International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE 2009), pp. 254–264. ACM/IEEE (2009)
71.
Thüm, T., Kästner, C., Erdweg, S., Siegmund, N.: Abstract features in feature modeling. In: de Almeida, S.E., Kishi, T., Schwanninger, C., John, I., Schmid, K. (eds), Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Software Product Lines (SPLC 2011), pp. 191–200 (2011)
72.
Tun, T.T., Boucher, Q., Classen, A., Hubaux, A., Heymans, P.: Relating requirements and feature configurations: A systematic approach. In: Proceedings of the 13th International Software Product Lines Conference (SPLC 2009), pp. 201–210. IEEE (2009)
73.
Weston, N., Chitchyan, R., Rashid, A.: A framework for constructing semantically composable feature models from natural language requirements. In: Proceedings of 13th International Software Product Lines Conference (SPLC’09), pp. 211–220. ACM (2009)
74.
Xue, Y.: Reengineering legacy software products into software product line based on automatic variability analysis. In: Taylor, R.N., Gall, H., Medvidovic, N. (eds) Proceedings of the 33rd International Conference on Software Engineering, ICSE 2011, pp. 1114–1117. ACM, Waikiki, Honolulu, 21–28 May 2011
75.
Yang, Y., Peng, X., Zhao, W.: Domain feature model recovery from multiple applications using data access semantics and formal concept analysis. In: Proceedings of the 2009 16th Working Conference on Reverse Engineering, WCRE ’09, pp. 215–224. IEEE Computer Society, Washington (2009)
76.
Zhang, X., Haugen, O., Moller-Pedersen, B.: Model comparison to synthesize a model-driven software product line. In: Proceedings of the 2011 15th International Software Product Line Conference, SPLC ’11, pp. 90–99. IEEE Computer Society, Washington (2011)
77.
Ziadi, T., Frias, L., Almeida da Silva, M.A., Ziane, M.: Feature identification from the source code of product variants. In: 16th European Conference on Software Maintenance and Reengineering, CSMR 2012, pp. 417–422. IEEE, Szeged, Hungary, 27–30 March 2012
Metadaten
Titel
Extraction and evolution of architectural variability models in plugin-based systems
verfasst von
Mathieu Acher
Anthony Cleve
Philippe Collet
Philippe Merle
Laurence Duchien
Philippe Lahire
Publikationsdatum
01.10.2014
Verlag
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in
Software and Systems Modeling / Ausgabe 4/2014
Print ISSN: 1619-1366
Elektronische ISSN: 1619-1374
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-013-0364-2

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 4/2014

Software and Systems Modeling 4/2014 Zur Ausgabe

Theme Section Paper

The KlaperSuite framework for model-driven reliability analysis of component-based systems

Theme Section Paper

An architecture framework for enterprise IT service availability analysis

Expert's Voice

“No shit” or “Oh, shit!”: responses to observations on the use of UML in professional practice

Regular Paper

Mapping feature models onto domain models: ensuring consistency of configured domain models

Special Section Paper

Reengineering component-based software systems with Archimetrix

Theme Section Paper

Evaluating probabilistic models with uncertain model parameters

Premium Partner

    Bildnachweise