Automatic Generation of Atomic Consistency Preserving Search Operators for Search-Based Model Engineering

Burdusel, Alexandru; Zschaler, Steffen; John, Stefan

doi:10.1109/models.2019.00-10

Cited by 19 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Recently, a number of works have addressed the CRA problem via a combination of graph transformation and meta-heuristic search techniques, specifically evolutionary algorithms [5,10,28]. An evolutionary algorithm uses genetic operators such as cross-over and mutation to find optimal solution candidates in an efficient way.…”

Section: Examplementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Such a rule may not make a graph completely consistent in one transformation step, but performing a sequence of such transformations will eventually produce a consistent graph (e.g., [12,21,22,25]). In the area of search-based model engineering (e.g., [5,9]), rules are required to be applicable to inconsistent graphs and, at least, not to produce new inconsistencies. In earlier work, we have shown how such rules can be generated at least with regard to multiplicity constraints [5].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the area of search-based model engineering (e.g., [5,9]), rules are required to be applicable to inconsistent graphs and, at least, not to produce new inconsistencies. In earlier work, we have shown how such rules can be generated at least with regard to multiplicity constraints [5]. However, in all of these works, the notion of "partial" graph consistency remains implicit.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Graph Consistency as a Graduated Property

Kosiol

Strüber

Taentzer

et al. 2020

Graph Transformation

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Where graphs are used for modelling and specifying systems, consistency is an important concern. To be a valid model of a system, the graph structure must satisfy a number of constraints. To date, consistency has primarily been viewed as a binary property: a graph either is or is not consistent with respect to a set of graph constraints. This has enabled the definition of notions such as constraint-preserving and constraint-guaranteeing graph transformations. Many practical applications-for example model repair or evolutionary search-implicitly assume a more graduated notion of consistency, but without an explicit formalisation only limited analysis of these applications is possible. In this paper, we introduce an explicit notion of consistency as a graduated property, depending on the number of constraint violations in a graph. We present two new characterisations of transformations (and transformation rules) enabling reasoning about the gradual introduction of consistency: while consistency-sustaining transformations do not decrease the consistency level, consistency-improving transformations strictly reduce the number of constraint violations. We show how these new definitions refine the existing concepts of constraint-preserving and constraint-guaranteeing transformations. To support a static analysis based on our characterisations, we present criteria for deciding which form of consistency ensuring transformations is induced by the application of a transformation rule. We illustrate our contributions in the context of an example from search-based model engineering.

show abstract

Section: Examplementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Graph Consistency as a Graduated Property

Kosiol

Strüber

Taentzer

et al. 2020

Graph Transformation

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The authors establish a criteria based on semantic faults in the navigation, the filtering, the output model creation, and the input model modification to create such set. Mutation operators have also been defined using Henshin in (Burdusel et al 2019), and ATL in (Troya et al 2015). Instead, WODEL is a DSL targeted to define mutation operators, giving support for specific mutation actions (e.g., retyping, cloning), the automatic initialization of object features and containers, and the configuration of the number of mutants to generate.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, it is not a fullfledged DSL, missing essential features like the possibility of selecting elements, and there is no tool support for execution. The approach in (Burdusel et al 2019) generates operators that guarantee the consistency of the mutated models with the metamodel multiplicity constraints. The methodology presented in (Kehrer et al 2016) automatically generates a set of mutation operators according to given patterns based on the meta-model types and relations.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Systematic Engineering of Mutation Operators.

Gómez‐Abajo¹,

Guerra²,

Lara³

et al. 2020

JOT

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the context of software engineering, mutation consists in injecting small changes in artefacts-like models, programs, or data-for purposes like (mutation) testing, test data generation, and all sorts of search-based methods. These tasks typically require defining sets of mutation operators, which are often built ad-hoc because there is currently poor support for their development and testing. To improve this situation, we propose a methodology and corresponding tool support for the proper engineering of mutation operators. Our proposal is model-based, representing the artefacts to be mutated as models. It includes a domain-specific language to describe the mutation operators, facilities to synthesize models that can be used to test the operators, different metrics to analyse operator coverage, and services to generate operators when the coverage is insufficient. We show automated support atop the WODEL tool, and illustrate its use by defining mutation operators for UML Class Diagrams.

show abstract