Checking and Enforcement of Modeling Guidelines with Graph Transformations

Amelunxen, Carsten; Legros, E.; Schürr, Andy; Stürmer, Ingo

doi:10.1007/978-3-540-89020-1_22

Cited by 21 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Therefore, the realization of really complex checks is almost infeasible as well as the development of even more complex model transformations that eliminate identified guideline violations automatically. Our experience showed us that graph transformations generally offer a significantly better support for the specification and implementation of modeling guidelines and refactorings [2]. Though, we are not completely satisfied by the current specification of some kinds of modeling guidelines and are convinced that it could be significantly improved if the currently used graph transformation language SDM was extended by some additional concepts we want to introduce in this paper.…”

Section: Figure 1 Matlab Simulink Modelmentioning

confidence: 91%

Generic and reflective graph transformations for the checking and enforcement of modeling guidelines

Amelunxen

Legros

Schürr

2008

2008 IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages and Human-Centric Computing

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the automotive industry, the model driven development of software, today considered as the standard paradigm, is generally based on the use of the tool MATLAB Simulink/Stateflow. To increase the quality, the reliability, and the efficiency of the models and the generated code, checking and elimination of detected guideline violations defined in huge catalogues has become an essential task in the development process. It represents such a tremendous amount of boring work that it must necessarily be automated. In the past we have shown that graph transformation tools like Fujaba/MOFLON allow for the specification of single modeling guidelines on a very high level of abstraction and that guideline checking tools can be generated from these specifications easily. Unfortunately, graph transformation languages do not offer appropriate concepts for reuse of specification fragments -a MUST, when we deal with hundreds of guidelines. As a consequence we present an extension of MOFLON that supports the definition of generic rewrite rules and combines them with the reflective programming mechanisms of Java and the model repository interface standard JMI.

show abstract

Section: Figure 1 Matlab Simulink Modelmentioning

confidence: 91%

Generic and reflective graph transformations for the checking and enforcement of modeling guidelines

Amelunxen

Legros

Schürr

2008

2008 IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages and Human-Centric Computing

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In contrast, we can specify rule-violating structural patterns as well as correction operations with the same declarative, model-based formalism. Furthermore, the specification of complex rules in terms of a metamodel with OCL is not well-suited, since path navigation expressions combined with set operations and operational if-then-elsestatements have to be formulated [2]. However, our approach provides purely declarative and visual patterns that can be combined with complex constraints.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…The technique based on graph transformation used in this paper was already successfully applied on the analysis and repair of MATLAB/Simulink models within the MATE project (e.g., [16,2]), in which some deficits of OCL were identified. The most important point is that OCL does not support correction operations [16] as provided by our approach.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Automatic Validation and Correction of Formalized, Textual Requirements

Holtmann

Meyer

Detten

2011

2011 IEEE Fourth International Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation Workshops

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nowadays requirements are mostly specified in unrestricted natural language so that each stakeholder understands them. To ensure high quality and to avoid misunderstandings, the requirements have to be validated. Because of the ambiguity of natural language and the resulting absence of an automatic mechanism, this has to be done manually. Such manual validation techniques are timeconsuming, error-prone, and repetitive because hundreds or thousands of requirements must be checked. With an automatic validation the requirements engineering process can be faster and can produce requirements of higher quality. To realize an automatism, we propose a controlled natural language (CNL) for the documentation of requirements. On basis of the CNL, a concept for an automatic requirements validation is developed for the identification of inconsistencies and incomplete requirements. Additionally, automated correction operations for such defective requirements are presented. The approach improves the quality of the requirements and therefore the quality of the whole development process.

show abstract

“…Because of this, the applicability to the model-based development of automotive embedded software product lines remains uncertain. Using MATLAB/Simulink has become state of the art for software development in the embedded automotive domain as mentioned in several literature like [11], [12]. Hence, such a framework should (1) consider the elements of Simulink models, e. g. blocks and subsystems as traceable elements and (2) be seamlessly integrable into MATLAB/Simulink.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Integration and Analysis of Design Artefacts in Embedded Software Development

Merschen

Pott

Kowalewski

2012

2012 IEEE 36th Annual Computer Software and Applications Conference Workshops

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In model-based development of embedded software product lines, artefacts, i. e. the requirements document, implementation model, and tests, often become extremely complex w. r. t. size and dependencies. Moreover, the interrelationships among the artefacts are not obvious and information about development, design decisions as well as variability-related aspects are missing. Hence, engineers have to thoroughly analyse such dependencies to incorporate changes during evolution of the product (line) to assure quality. As this task is time-intensive and error-prone such analysis efforts have to be automated. This paper presents a comprehensive and extensible framework under development which provides (1) artefact integration and (2) analysis functionality to address these issues by following an approach based on a central database. Keywords-embedded software development, artefact analysis I. MOTIVATIONIn the automotive industry the development process for embedded software is highly driven by market demands. Since these demands are very dynamic concerning the need for innovation and rapidly evolving technology, the same holds for the embedded software development in this domain. Engineers need to react on frequent changes of requirements while keeping or even increasing software quality and decreasing time to market. To do so, they need to analyse the relationships among requirements, implementation and tests and to identify dependencies. In Section II the state of the art and the evolving challenges are substantiated in more detail from a technical point of view. Subsequently, we will present related work to tackle the challenges in Section III. Section IV will explain our approach before summarising the preliminary results in Section V. Finally, we will conclude the paper giving a short summary and describing the outstanding steps in Section VI. II. CHALLENGESMost of the challenges concerning quality assurance and decreasing time to market are related to the well-known problem of tool isolation described by Broy et al. [1] since the tools used for the different artefacts, i. e. here IBM Rational DOORS [2] and MATLAB/Simulink [3], unfortunately cannot interact deeply enough. Although links among requirements in IBM Rational DOORS and blocks in MATLAB/Simulink can be created it is not possible to automatically identify them. Moreover, inconsistency among the artefacts can occur in the sense that requirements are not fully implemented or tests are not adapted to changed requirements.A further aspect, which complicates further development and evolution, is missing or scattered meta information about the development process and evolutionary or variability aspects. In the context of software product lines, for example, parts of the implementation model, i. e. subsystems of the Simulink model, should be annotated with information about which production series they are relevant for, which change request affected them and which release they belong to. As [4] points out, 50% of development costs are needed just to understand l...

show abstract

Checking and Enforcement of Modeling Guidelines with Graph Transformations

Cited by 21 publications

References 2 publications

Generic and reflective graph transformations for the checking and enforcement of modeling guidelines

Generic and reflective graph transformations for the checking and enforcement of modeling guidelines

Automatic Validation and Correction of Formalized, Textual Requirements

Integration and Analysis of Design Artefacts in Embedded Software Development

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About