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
ATZ-Fachkongress

Chassis.tech plus 2024


4 Kongresse in einer Veranstaltung

Treffen Sie in München die Fachleute von Chassis, Lenkung, Bremsen sowie Reifen/Räder.
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
Software and Systems Modeling
Erschienen in: Software and Systems Modeling 4/2019

12.03.2018 | Regular Paper

Survey and classification of model transformation tools

verfasst von: Nafiseh Kahani, Mojtaba Bagherzadeh, James R. Cordy, Juergen Dingel, Daniel Varró

Erschienen in: Software and Systems Modeling | Ausgabe 4/2019

Einloggen

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

search-config
loading …

Abstract

Model transformation lies at the very core of model-driven engineering, and a large number of model transformation languages and tools have been proposed over the last few years. These tools can be used to develop, transform, merge, exchange, compare, and verify models and metamodels. In this paper, we present a comprehensive catalog of existing metamodel-based transformation tools and compare them using a qualitative framework. We begin by organizing the 60 tools we identified into a general classification based on the transformation approach used. We then compare these tools using a number of particular facets, where each facet belongs to one of six different categories and may contain several attributes. The results of the study are discussed in detail and made publicly available in a companion website with a capability to search for tools using the specified facets as search criteria. Our study provides a thorough picture of the state-of-the-art in model transformation techniques and tools. Our results are potentially beneficial to many stakeholders in the modeling community, including practitioners, researchers, and transformation tool developers.
Nächster Artikel BPMN-E2: a BPMN extension for an enhanced workflow description

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
Anhänge
Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich
Fußnoten
Literatur
1.
Kahani, N., Cordy, J.: Comparison and evaluation of model transformation tools. In: Technical Report 2015-627, Queen’s University, pp. 1–42 (2015)
2.
Bagherzadeh, M., Hili, N., Dingel, J.: Model-level, platform-independent debugging in the context of the model-driven development of real-time systems. In: Proceedings of the 2017 11th Joint Meeting on Foundations of Software Engineering, pp. 419–430 (2017)
3.
Lúcio, L., Amrani, M., Dingel, J., Lambers, L., Salay, R., Selim, G., Syriani, E., Wimmer, M.: Model transformation intents and their properties. In: Software and Systems Modeling, pp. 1–38 (2014)
4.
Czarnecki, K., Helsen, S.: Feature-based survey of model transformation approaches. IBM Syst. J. 45(3), 621–645 (2006)CrossRef
5.
Mens, T., Gorp, P.V.: A taxonomy of model transformation. Electron. Notes Theor. Comput. Sci. 152, 125–142 (2006)CrossRef
6.
Salem, R.B., Grangel, R., Bourey, J.: A comparison of model transformation tools: Application for transforming GRAI extended Actigrams into UML activity diagrams. In: Computers in Industry, pp. 682–693 (2008)
7.
Macedo, N., Jorge, T., Cunha, A.: A feature-based classification of model repair approaches. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 43(7), 615–640 (2017)CrossRef
8.
Jakumeit, E., Buchwald, S., Wagelaar, D., Dan, L., Hegedüs, Á., Herrmannsdörfer, M., Horn, T., Kalnina, E., Krause, C., Lano, K., Lepper, M., Rensink, A., Rose, L., Wätzoldt, S., Mazanek, S.: A survey and comparison of transformation tools based on the transformation tool contest. Sci. Comput. Program. 85, 41–99 (2014)CrossRef
9.
Taentzer, G., Ehrig, K., Guerra, E., Lara, J., Lengyel, L., Levendovszky, T., Prange, U., Varro, D., Varró-Gyapay, S.: Model transformation by graph transformation: A comparative study. In: Proceedings Workshop Model Transformation in Practice, Montego Bay, Jamaica, pp. 1–48 (2005)
10.
Hidaka, S., Tisi, M., Cabot, J., Hu, Z.: Feature-based classification of bidirectional transformation approaches. Softw. Syst. Model. 15(3), 1–22 (2015)
11.
Gomes, C., Barroca, B., Amaral, V.: Classification of model transformation tools: pattern matching techniques, pp. 619–635 (2014)
12.
Biehl, M.: Literature study on model transformations. In: Royal Institute of Technology, pp. 1–24 (2010)
13.
Mesa, J. M. V.: M2DAT: A technical solution for model-driven development of web information systems.Ph.D. thesis, University of Rey Juan Carlos (2009)
14.
Uhl, A.: Model-driven development in the enterprise. IEEE Softw. 1, 46–49 (2008)CrossRef
15.
Huber, P.: The model transformation language jungle: An evaluation and extension of existing approaches. In: Master thesis, University of Vienna (2008)
16.
Rothenberg, J., Widman, L., Loparo, K., Nielsen, N.: The nature of modeling, pp. 1–18 (1989)
17.
Brambilla, M., Cabot, J., Wimmer, M.: Model-driven software engineering in practice. Synth. Lect. Softw. Eng. 1(1), 1–182 (2012)CrossRef
18.
19.
Aers, K.: Graphiti and GMF compared: revisiting the graph editor. In: EclipseCon 2011, Santa Clara, California (2011)
20.
Viyović, V., Maksimović, M., Perisić, B.: Sirius: A rapid development of DSM graphical editor. In: IEEE 18th International Conference on Intelligent Engineering Systems, pp. 233–238 (2014)
21.
Efftinge, S., Völter, M.: oAW xText: A framework for textual DSLs. In: Workshop on Modeling Symposium at Eclipse Summit, pp. 118–121 (2006)
22.
Henriksson, J., Johannes, J., Zschaler, S., Asmann, U.: Reuseware-adding modularity to your language of choice. J. Object Technol. 6(9), 127–146 (2007)CrossRef
23.
Kleppe, A.: A language description is more than a metamodel. In: Fourth International Workshop on Software Language Engineering, pp. 1–9 (2007)
24.
25.
Patrascoiu, O.: YATL: yet another transformation language-reference manual version 1.0. In: Technical Report No. 2-04 (2004)
26.
27.
28.
Biermann, E., Ehrig, K., Köhler, C., Kuhns, G., Taentzer, G., Weiss, E.: Graphical definition of in-place transformations in the eclipse modeling framework. In: Proceeding of the International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems (MoDELS06) 425439 (2006)
29.
30.
Boronat, A.: MOMENT: a formal framework for MOdel manageMENT, In: Ph.D. thesis in Computer Science, University of Politécnica de Valéncia, pp. 1–287 (2007)
31.
Sánchez-Barbudo, A., Sánchez, E., Roldán, V., Estévez, A., Roda, J.: Providing an open virtual-machine-based QVT implementation. In: Proceedings of the V Workshop on Model-Driven Software Development, pp. 42–51 (2008)
32.
33.
Gerber, A., Lawley, M., Raymond, K., Steel, J., Wood, A.: Transformation: the missing link of MDA. In: Graph Transformation, pp. 90–105 (2002)
34.
35.
Vlad, A., Störrle, H., Strüber, D.: VMTL: A language for end-user model transformation. In: Software and Systems Modeling, pp. 1–29 (2016)
36.
Acerbis, R., Bongio, A., Brambilla, M., Butti, S.: Webratio 5: An Eclipse-based case tool for engineering web applications, pp. 501–505. In. In Web, Engineering (2007)
37.
38.
Roy, C., Cordy, J., Koschke, R.: Comparison and evaluation of code clone detection techniques and tools: a qualitative approach. Sci. Comput. Program. 74(7), 470–495 (2009)MathSciNetMATHCrossRef
39.
Kastenberg, H., Rensink, A.: Model checking dynamic states in GROOVE. In: International SPIN Workshop on Model Checking of Software, McGill University, pp. 299–305 (2006)
40.
Bruneliere, H., Cabot, J., Jouault, F., Madiot, F.: MoDisco: A generic and extensible framework for model driven reverse engineering. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated software engineering, pp. 173–174 (2010)
41.
Lano, K., Kolahdouz-Rahimi, S.: Specification and verification of model transformations using UML-RSDS, pp. 199–214 (2010)
42.
Lawley, M., Steel, J.: Practical declarative model transformation with Tefkat, pp. 139–150 (2006)
43.
Romina, E., Pierantonio, A., Rosa, G.: Managing uncertainty in bidirectional model transformations, in: Proceedings of the 2015 ACM SIGPLAN International Conference on Software Language Engineering, pp. 49–58 (2015)
44.
Almendros-Jiménez, J. M., Iribarne, L., López-Fernández, J., Mora-Segura, A.: PTL: A model transformation language based on logic programming. In: Journal of Logical and Algebraic Methods in Programming, pp. 89–105 (2015)
45.
Bonde, L., Dumoulin, C., Dekeyser, J.: Metamodels and MDA transformations for embedded systems. In: Advances in Design and Specification Languages for SoCs, pp. 89–105 (2005)
46.
Macedo, N., Cunha, A.: Implementing QVT-R bidirectional model transformations using Alloy. In: Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Fundamental Approaches to Software Engineering, pp. 297–311 (2013)
47.
Li, D., Li, X., Stolz, V.: QVT-based model transformation using XSLT. In: SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes, pp. 1–8 (2011)
48.
Reddy, S., Venkatesh, R., Ansari, Z.: A relational approach to model transformation using QVT relations. In: TATA Research Development and Design Centre, pp. 1–15 (2006)
49.
50.
Schätz, B.: Formalization and rule-based transformation of EMF Ecore-based models, pp. 227–244 (2009)
51.
Paige, R., Radjenovic, A.: Towards model transformation with TXL. In: Metamodelling for MDA, pp. 162–177 (2003)
52.
53.
54.
Kelly, S., Lyytinen, K., Rossi, M.: Metaedit+ a fully configurable multi-user and multi-tool case and came environment. Adv. Inf. Syst. Eng. 1080, 1–21 (1996)
55.
Gerking, C., Heinzemann, C.: Solving the movie database case with QVTo. In: TTC, pp. 98–102 (2014)
56.
Drey, Z., Faucher, C., Fleurey, F., Mahé, V., Vojtisek, D.: Kermeta language reference manual, pp. 1–84 (2010)
57.
58.
Forward, A., Lethbridge, T., Brestovansky, D.: Improving program comprehension by enhancing program constructs: An analysis of the Umple language. In: ICPC, pp. 311–312 (2009)
59.
Degueule, T., Combemale, B., Blouin, A., Barais, O., Jézéquel, J.: Melange: A meta-language for modular and reusable development of DSLs. In: 8th International Conference on Software Language Engineering (SLE), pp. 65–75 (2015)
60.
61.
62.
63.
64.
Pilgrim, J.V.: Computerunterstützte Modelltransformationen. Ph.D. thesis in Computer Science, Fernuniversität Hagen (2010)
65.
66.
67.
68.
69.
Rensink, A.: The GROOVE simulator: a tool for state space generation. In: Applications of Graph Transformations with Industrial Relevance, pp. 479–485 (2004)
70.
Willink, E. D.: UMLX: A graphical transformation language for MDA. In: Proceedings of the Workshop on Model Driven Architecture: Foundations and Applications, pp. 13–24 (2003)
71.
Lara, J., Vangheluwe, H.: AToM3: A tool for multi-formalism and meta-modelling. In: FASE, pp. 174–188 (2002)
72.
Syriani, E., Vangheluwe, H., Mannadiar, R., Hansen, C., Mierlo, S. V., Ergin, H.: AToMPM: A web-based modeling environment. In: Demos/Posters/Student Research MoDELS, pp. 21–25 (2013)
73.
Ermel, C., Rudolf, M., Taentzer, G.: The AGG approach: Language and environment. Appl. Lang. Tools. 2, 551–603 (1999)
74.
Braun, P., Marschall, F.: Transforming object oriented models with BOTL. In: Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science, pp. 103–117 (2003)
75.
Hidaka, S., Hu, Z., Inaba, K., Kato, H., Nakano, K.: GRoundTram: An integrated framework for developing well-behaved bidirectional model transformations. In: 26th IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASE), pp. 480–483 (2011)
76.
Lauder, M., Anjorin, A., Varró, G., Schürr, A.: Bidirectional model transformation with precedence triple graph grammars, pp. 287–302 (2012)
77.
Giese, H., Hildebrandt, S., Lambers, L.: Bridging the gap between formal semantics and implementation of triple graph grammars. Softw. Syst. Model. 13(1), 273–299 (2014)CrossRef
78.
79.
Greenyer, J., Kindler, E.: Reconciling TGGs with QVT. In: Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems, pp. 16–30 (2007)
80.
Fleck, M., Troya, J., Wimmer, M.: Marrying search-based optimization and model transformation technology. In: Proceedings of the First North American Search Based Software Engineering Symposium, pp. 1–16 (2015)
81.
Klassen, L., Wagner, R.: EMorF-A tool for model transformations. In: Electronic Communications of the EASST, pp. 1–6 (2012)
82.
Barroca, B., Lúcio, L., Amaral, V., Félix, R., Sou, V.: Dsltrans: A Turing incomplete transformation language. In: Software Language Engineering, 29630 (2011)
83.
Gorp, G. V.: Model-driven development of model transformations. Ph.D. thesis, University of Antwerp (2008)
84.
Varró, D., Balogh, A.: The model transformation language of the VIATRA2 framework. Sci. Comput. Program. 68(3), 214–234 (2007)MathSciNetMATHCrossRef
85.
Cuadrado, J.: Towards a family of model transformation languages, pp. 176–191 (2012)
86.
Kolovos, D., Paige, R., Polack, F.: The Epsilon transformation language. In: Theory and Practice of Model Transformations, pp. 46–60 (2008)
87.
Cuadrado, J., Molina, J., Tortosa, M.: Rubytl: A practical, extensible transformation language. In: Model Driven Architecture-Foundations and Application, pp. 158–172 (2006)
88.
Levendovszky, T., Lengyel, L., Mezei, G., Charaf, H.: A systematic approach to metamodeling environments and model transformation systems in VMTS. In: Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science, pp. 65–75 (2005)
89.
Jouault, F., Allilaire, F., Bézivin, J., Kurtev, I.: ATL: A model transformation tool. In: Science of Computer Programming, pp. 31–39 (2008)
90.
Nickel, U., Niere, J., Zündorf, A.: The FUJABA environment. In: Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on Software Engineering, pp. 742–745 (2000)
91.
Jakumeit, E., Buchwald, S., Kroll, M.: Grgen.net: The expressive, convenient and fast graph rewrite system. In: International Journal on Software Tools for Technology Transfer, pp. 263–271 (2010)
92.
Arendt, T., Biermann, E., Jurack, S., Krause, C., Taentzer, G.: Henshin: Advanced concepts and tools for in-place EMF model transformations. In: Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems, pp. 121–135 (2010)
93.
94.
Kalnins, A., Barzdins, J., Celms, E.: Model transformation language MOLA. In: Model Driven Architecture, pp. 62–76 (2005)
95.
96.
97.
Brun, C., Pierantonio, A.: Model differences in the Eclipse modeling framework. In: The European Journal for the Informatics Professional, pp. 29–34 (2008)
98.
99.
100.
Varró, D., Hegedüs, G.B.A., Horváth, A., Ráth, I., Ujhelyi, Z.: Road to a reactive and incremental model transformation platform: three generations of the VIATRA framework. Softw. Syst. Model. 15(9), 609–629 (2016)CrossRef
101.
102.
103.
Andries, M., Engels, G., Habel, A., Hoffmann, B., Kreowski, H.J., Kuske, S., Plump, D., Schürr, A., Taentzer, G.: Graph transformation for specification and programming. Sci. Comput. Program. 31(1), 1–54 (1999)MathSciNetMATHCrossRef
104.
Schürr, A.: Specification of graph translators with triple graph grammars. In: Graph-Theoretic Concepts in Computer Science, pp. 151–163 (1995)
105.
Roser, S., Lautenbacher, F., Bauer, B.: Generation of workflow code from DSMs. In: Proceedings of the 7th OOPSLA Workshop on Domain-Specific Modeling, pp. 1–11 (2007)
106.
Pearson, H.: Open source licences: open source–the death of proprietary systems? Comput. Law Secur. Rev. 16, 151–156 (2000)CrossRef
107.
Eramo, R., Marinelli, R., Pierantonio, A.: Towards a taxonomy for bidirectional transformation. In: SATToSE, pp. 122–131 (2014)
108.
Kahani, N., Bagherzadeh, M., Dingel, J., Cordy, J.: The problems with Eclipse modeling tools: a topic analysis of eclipse forums. In: Proceedings of the ACM/IEEE 19th International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems, pp. 227–237 (2016)
109.
Ahmad, M., Bruel, J., Laleau, R., Gnaho, C.: Using RELAX SysML and KAOS for ambient systems requirements modeling. In: Procedia Computer Science, pp. 474–481 (2012)
110.
111.
Kahani, N., Hili, N., Cordy, J., Dingel, J.: Evaluation of UML-RT and Papyrus-RT for modelling self-adaptive systems. In: Proceedings of the 9th International Workshop on Modelling in Software Engineering, pp. 12–18 (2017)
112.
Peterson, J.: Petri Net theory and the modeling of systems. In: Prentice Hall PTR (1981)
113.
114.
115.
116.
117.
Stephan, M., Cordy, J.: A survey of model comparison approaches and applications. In: Modelsward, pp. 265–277 (2013)
118.
Bergmann, G.: Translating ocl to graph patterns, pp. 670–686 (2014)
119.
Cetinkaya, D., Verbraeck, A.: Metamodeling and model transformations in modeling and simulation. In: Proceedings of the Winter Simulation Conference, pp. 3048–3058 (2011)
120.
121.
Blanc, X., Gervais, M., Sriplakich, P.: Model bus: Towards the interoperability of modelling tools. In: Model Driven Architecture, pp. 17–32 (2005)
122.
123.
Benelallam, A., Gómez, A., Sunyé, G., Tisi, M., Launay, D.: Neo4EMF, a scalable persistence layer for EMF models. In: European Conference on Modelling Foundations and Applications, pp. 230–241 (2014)
124.
125.
126.
127.
128.
129.
130.
131.
132.
Sendall, S., Küster, J.: Taming model round-trip engineering. In: Proceedings of Workshop on Best Practices for Model-Driven Software Development, pp. 1–13 (2004)
133.
Hettel, T., Lawley, M., Raymond, K.: Model synchronisation: Definitions for round-trip engineering, in: International Conference on Theory and Practice of Model Transformations, pp. 31–45 (2008)
134.
Syriani, E.: A multi-paradigm foundation for model transformation language engineering. Ph.D. thesis in Computer Science, McGill University, pp. 1–291 (2011)
135.
Cuadrado, J. S., Molina, J. G.: A phasing mechanism for model transformation languages. In: Proceedings of the 2007 ACM Symposium on Applied Computing, SAC ’07 (2007)
136.
Jilani, A., Usman, M., Halim, Z.: Model transformations in model driven architecture. In: Universal Journal of Computer Science and Engineering Technology, pp. 50–54 (2010)
137.
Hildebrandt, S., Lambers, L., Giese, H., Rieke, J., Greenyer, J., Schäfer, W., Lauder, M., Anjorin, A., Schürr, A.: A survey of triple graph grammar tools. In: International Workshop on Bidirectional Transformations (Bx), pp. 1–17 (2013)
138.
Stevens, P.: A landscape of bidirectional model transformations. Gener. Transform. Tech. Softw. Eng. II, 408–424 (2008)
139.
Macedo, N., Cunha, A., Pacheco, H.: Towards a framework for multidirectional model transformations. In: EDBT/ICDT Workshops, pp. 71–74 (2014)
140.
Czarnecki, K., Foster, J.N., Hu, Z., Lämmel, Schürr, A., Terwilliger, J.F.: Bidirectional transformations: a cross-discipline perspective, pp. 260–283 (2009)
141.
Leblebici, E., Anjorin, A., Schürr, A., Hildebrandt, S., Rieke, J., Greenyer, J.: A comparison of incremental triple graph grammar tools. In: Electronic Communications of the EASST, pp. 1–15 (2014)
142.
Amrani, M., Combemale, B., Lúcio, L., Selim, G.M.K., Dingel, J., Traon, Y.L., Vangheluwe, H., Cordy, J.R.: Formal verification techniques for model transformations: a tridimensional classification. J. Object Technol. 14(3), 921–928 (2015)CrossRef
143.
Varró, D., Pataricza, A.: Automated formal verification of model transformations. In: CSDUML, pp. 63–78 (2003)
144.
Asztalos, M., Lengyel, L., Levendovszky, T.: Towards automated, formal verification of model transformations. In: Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation, ICST ’10, pp. 15–24 (2010)
145.
Lano, K., Kolahdouz-Rahimi, S., Poernomo, I.: Comparative evaluation of model transformation specification approaches. Int. J. Softw. Inform. 6(2), 233–269 (2012)
146.
147.
Assmann, U.: Graph rewrite systems for program optimization. ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst. (TOPLAS) 22(4), 583–637 (2000)CrossRef
148.
Varró, D., Varró-Gyapay, S., Ehrig, H., Prange, U., Taentzer, G.: Termination analysis of model transformations by Petri Nets. In: Graph Transformations, pp. 260–274 (2006)
149.
Ehrig, H., Ehrig, K., Lara, J., Taentzer, G., Varró, D., Varró-Gyapay, S.: Termination criteria for model transformation. In: International Conference on Fundamental Approaches to Software Engineering, pp. 49–63 (2005)
150.
Jouault, F., Kurtev, I.: Transforming models with ATL. In: International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems, Springer, pp. 128–138 (2005)
151.
Rahim, L., Whittle, J.: A survey of approaches for verifying model transformations. Softw. Syst. Model. 14(2), 1003–1028 (2015)CrossRef
152.
Rensink, A., Schmidt, Á., Varró, D.: Model checking graph transformations: a comparison of two approaches. In: ICGT, pp. 226–241 (2004)
153.
Kastenberg, H., Rensink, A.: Model checking dynamic states in GROOVE. In: Model Checking Software, pp. 299–305 (2006)
154.
Fleurey, F., Steel, J., Baudry, B.: Validation in model-driven engineering: Testing model transformations. In: First International Workshop on Model, Design and Validation, pp. 29–40 (2004)
155.
Auziņš, A., Bãrzdiņš, J., Bičevskis, J., Čerãns, K., Kalniņš, A.: Automatic construction of test sets: theoretical approach. In: Baltic Computer Science, pp. 286–359 (1991)
156.
Schätz, B.: Verification of model transformations. In: Electronic Communications of the EASST, pp. 1–14 (2010)
157.
France, R., Bruel, J., LarrondoPetrie, M.: An integrated object-oriented and formal modeling environment. Object-Oriented Program. 10(7), 25 (1997)
158.
Winkler, S., Pilgrim, J.: A survey of traceability in requirements engineering and model-driven development. Softw. Syst. Model. (SoSyM) 9(4), 529–565 (2010)CrossRef
159.
Bergmayr, A., Troya, J., Wimmer, M.: From out-place transformation evolution to in-place model patching. In: Proceedings of the 29th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Automated Software Engineering, 647pp. –652 (2014)
160.
Klatt, B.: Xpand: A closer look at the model2text transformation language. In: Language (2007)
161.
Ráth, I., Bergmann, G., Ökrös, A., Varró, D.: Live model transformations driven by incremental pattern matching. In: Theory and Practice of Model Transformations, pp. 107–121 (2008)
162.
Calisir, F., Calisir, F.: The relation of interface usability characteristics, perceived usefulness, and perceived ease of use to end-user satisfaction with enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems. Comput. Hum. Behav. 20(4), 505–515 (2004)CrossRef
163.
Cho, V., Cheng, T.E., Lai, W.J.: The role of perceived user-interface design in continued usage intention of self-paced e-learning tools. Comput. Educ. 53(2), 216–227 (2009)CrossRef
164.
Bastien, J.M.C., Scapin, D.L.: Evaluating a user interface with ergonomic criteria. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact. 7(2), 105–121 (1995)CrossRef
165.
Kusel, A., Schönböck, J., Wimmer, M., Retschitzegger, W., Schwinger, W., Kappel, G.: Reality check for model transformation reuse: The ATL transformation zoo case study. In: AMT@MoDELS, pp. 1–11 (2013)
166.
Louridas, P.: Version control software. In: IEEE Software, pp. 104–107 (2006)
167.
Giese, H., Wagner, R.: From model transformation to incremental bidirectional model synchronization. Softw. Syst. Model. 8(1), 21–43 (2009)CrossRef
168.
Gardner, T., Griffin, C., Koehler, J., Hauser, R.: A review of OMG MOF 2.0 query/views/transformations submissions and recommendations towards the final standard. In: MetaModelling for MDA Workshop, vol. 13, p. 41 (2003)
169.
Abelein, U., Sharp, H., Paech, B.: Does involving users in software development really influence system success? In: IEEE Software, pp. 17–23 (2013)
170.
Jackson, E. K., Schulte, W., Bjorner, N.: Detecting specification errors in declarative languages with constraints. In: International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems, pp. 399–414 (2012)
171.
Kainz, G. G., Buckl, C., Knoll, A.: A generic approach simplifying model-to-model transformation chains. In: International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems, pp. 579–594 (2012)
172.
Cuadrado, J. S., Guerra, E., de Lara, J.: Quick fixing ATL model transformations. In: International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems, pp .146–155 (2015)
173.
Dubois, C., Famelis, M., Gogolla, M., Nobrega, L., Ober, I., Seidl, M., Völter, M.: Research questions for validation and verification in the context of model-based engineering. In: International Workshop on Model Driven Engineering, Verification and Validation (MoDeVVA), pp. 67–77 (2013)
174.
Rivera, J. E., Guerra, E., de Lara, J., Vallecillo, A.: Analyzing rule-based behavioral semantics of visual modeling languages with Maude. In: Software Language Engineering, pp. 54–73 (2008)
175.
Taentzer, G.: AGG: A graph transformation environment for modeling and validation of software. In: Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 446–453 (2003)
176.
177.
178.
Diskin, Z., Gholizadeh, H., Wider, A., Czarnecki, K.: A three-dimensional taxonomy for bidirectional model synchronization. Syst. Softw. 111, 298–322 (2016)CrossRef
179.
Varró, D., Asztalos, M., Bisztray, D., Boronat, A., Dang, D., Geiß, R., Greenyer, J., Gorp, P., Kniemeyer, O., Narayanan, A., Rencis, E., Weinell, E.: Transformation of UML models to CSP: A case study for graph transformation tools. In: Applications of Graph Transformations with Industrial Relevance, pp. 540–565 (2008)
Metadaten
Titel
Survey and classification of model transformation tools
verfasst von
Nafiseh Kahani
Mojtaba Bagherzadeh
James R. Cordy
Juergen Dingel
Daniel Varró
Publikationsdatum
12.03.2018
Verlag
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in
Software and Systems Modeling / Ausgabe 4/2019
Print ISSN: 1619-1366
Elektronische ISSN: 1619-1374
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-018-0665-6

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 4/2019

Software and Systems Modeling 4/2019 Zur Ausgabe

Regular Paper

Use, potential, and showstoppers of models in automotive requirements engineering

Regular Paper

BPMN-E2: a BPMN extension for an enhanced workflow description

Regular Paper

Improving user productivity in modeling tools by explicitly modeling workflows

Regular Paper

: first-order expressive OCL constraints for efficient integrity checking

Regular Paper

Static slicing of Use Case Maps requirements models

Regular Paper

Model-integrating development of software systems: a flexible component-based approach

Premium Partner

    Bildnachweise