scholarly journals On the difference between analysis and design, and why it is relevant for the interpretation of models in Model Driven Engineering.

2009 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 107 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gonzalo Génova ◽  
María Cruz Valiente ◽  
Mónica Marrero
Keyword(s):  
Model Driven Engineering ◽  
Analysis And Design ◽  
Model Driven ◽  
The Difference

scholarly journals Labeled UML model fragments composition by the SPL strategy

2013 ◽  
Vol 10 (10) ◽  
pp. 2049-2056
Author(s):  
Rim Bouhaouel ◽  
Naoufel Kraïem ◽  
Zuhoor Al-Khanjari
Keyword(s):  
Ad Hoc ◽  
Unified Modeling Language ◽  
Software Product Line ◽  
Product Line ◽  
Model Driven Engineering ◽  
Analysis And Design ◽  
Model Driven ◽  
Whole Process ◽  
Software Product ◽  
Two Stages

The software community intends to make use of a standard approach for the software development to not build software product from scratch. This approach ensures a high quality of software with a controllable cost. It affects the whole process of the software  development, especially in the  early phases e.g. analysis and design. One of the most widespread language to modulate and document those two stages is UML (Unified Modeling Language), but the reuse of the UML model is used in ad-hoc method so why do not build a systematic method for reusing some fragments of UML? To realize it, we need to adopt a reuse approach, so we choose the software product line (SPL), based in collecting variability of the domain (in our case is UML). In fact, UML and SPL have a common issue is the model driven engineering, since both of them based on the modeling approach. This paper overviews the different areas of UML and explains the process of software Product line with its born issues to wit: MDE (Model Driven Engineering) and MDA (Model Driven Architect).

Quality in Model Driven Engineering

2009 ◽  
pp. 37-56 ◽  
Author(s):  
Teade Punter ◽  
Jeroen Voeten
Keyword(s):  
Quality Assurance ◽  
Embedded Systems ◽  
Conceptual Framework ◽  
Systems Design ◽  
Design Flow ◽  
Model Driven Engineering ◽  
New Approach ◽  
Model Driven ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Near Future

This chapter argues that embedded systems design faces several challenges of which late integration and the difference in development productivity between disciplines are major ones. Model driven engineering (MDE) looks a promising approach to address these challenges. However, MDE is a new approach which has to be defined and implemented in close interaction by academia and industry the near future. We therefore provide a conceptual framework to understand the possibilities and the flaws in quality assurance in the MDE design flow.

scholarly journals A Survey of Model Comparison Strategies and Techniques in Model Driven Engineering

2016 ◽  
Vol 1 (3) ◽  
pp. 165
Author(s):  
Junaid Rashid ◽  
Waqar Mehmood ◽  
Muhammad Wasif Nisar
Keyword(s):  
Model Comparison ◽  
Model Matching ◽  
Model Driven Engineering ◽  
Meta Model ◽  
Model Comparisons ◽  
Model Driven ◽  
Survey Paper ◽  
Model Differencing ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Future Direction

This Survey paper shows the recent state of model comparison as it’s applies to Model Driven engineering. In Model Driven Engineering to calculate the difference between the models is a very important and challenging task. There are number of tasks involved in Model differencing that firstly starts with identifying and matching the elements of the model. In this paper we discuss how model matching is accomplished, the strategies, techniques and the types of the model. In this paper we also discuss the future direction. We find out that many of the latest model comparison strategies are geared near enabling Meta model and similarity based matching. Therefore model versioning is the most dominant application of the model comparison. Recently to work on comparison for versioning has begun to deteriorate, giving way to different applications. Ultimately there is wide change among the tools in the measure of client exertion needed to perform model comparisons, as some require more push to encourage more sweeping statement and expressive force.

Model-driven engineering and run-time model-usage in service robotics

2012 ◽  
Vol 47 (3) ◽  
pp. 73-82 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andreas Steck ◽  
Alex Lotz ◽  
Christian Schlegel
Keyword(s):  
Model Driven Engineering ◽  
Service Robotics ◽  
Time Model ◽  
Model Driven ◽  
Run Time

Schema Compliant Consistency Management via Triple Graph Grammars and Integer Linear Programming

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nils Weidmann ◽  
Anthony Anjorin
Keyword(s):  
Linear Programming ◽  
Integer Linear Programming ◽  
Experimental Evaluation ◽  
Graph Grammars ◽  
Model Driven Engineering ◽  
Rule Based ◽  
Consistency Management ◽  
Model Driven ◽  
Triple Graph Grammars ◽  
Domain Constraints

AbstractIn the field of Model-Driven Engineering, Triple Graph Grammars (TGGs) play an important role as a rule-based means of implementing consistency management. From a declarative specification of a consistency relation, several operations including forward and backward transformations, (concurrent) synchronisation, and consistency checks can be automatically derived. For TGGs to be applicable in realistic application scenarios, expressiveness in terms of supported language features is very important. A TGG tool is schema compliant if it can take domain constraints, such as multiplicity constraints in a meta-model, into account when performing consistency management tasks. To guarantee schema compliance, most TGG tools allow application conditions to be attached as necessary to relevant rules. This strategy is problematic for at least two reasons: First, ensuring compliance to a sufficiently expressive schema for all previously mentioned derived operations is still an open challenge; to the best of our knowledge, all existing TGG tools only support a very restricted subset of application conditions. Second, it is conceptually demanding for the user to indirectly specify domain constraints as application conditions, especially because this has to be completely revisited every time the TGG or domain constraint is changed. While domain constraints can in theory be automatically transformed to obtain the required set of application conditions, this has only been successfully transferred to TGGs for a very limited subset of domain constraints. To address these limitations, this paper proposes a search-based strategy for achieving schema compliance. We show that all correctness and completeness properties, previously proven in a setting without domain constraints, still hold when schema compliance is to be additionally guaranteed. An implementation and experimental evaluation are provided to support our claim of practical applicability.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document