Graph-transformation verification using monadic second-order logic

Inaba, Kazuhiro; Hidaka, Soichiro; Hu, Zhenjiang; Kato, Hirokazu; Nakano, Kazushi

doi:10.1145/2003476.2003482

Cited by 19 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Eg., nested collections cannot be represented. Translations from model transformation languages to different formalisms have also been used to perform termination analysis [50,46], proof of syntactic correctness [23], counterexample generation [13] and proof of semantic preservation [40]. Table 12 summarises such approaches.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

A framework for model transformation verification

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. A model transformation verification task may involve a number of different transformations, from one or more of a wide range of different model transformation languages, each transformation may have a particular transformation style, and there are a number of different verification properties which can be verified for each language and style of transformation. Transformations may operate upon many different modelling languages. This diversity of languages and properties indicates the need for a suitably generic framework for model transformation verification, independent of particular model transformation languages, and able to provide support for systematic procedures for verification across a range of languages, and for a range of properties. In this paper we describe the elements of such a framework, and apply this framework to a range of transformation verification problems. Our particular contributions are (i) languageindependent verification techniques based around the concepts of transformation invariants and variants; (ii) language-independent representation metamodels for transformation specifications and implementations, (iii) mappings from these representations to the B and Z3 formalisms, (iv) the use of transformation patterns to facilitate verification. The paper is novel in covering a wide range of different verification techniques for a wide range of MT languages, within an integrated framework.

show abstract

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

A framework for model transformation verification

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There are a couple of approaches that address partial, Hoare-style correctness of model transformation with respect to metamodel constraints as transformation pre-and postconditions. Inaba et al automatically infer schema (i.e., metamodel) conformance for transformations based on the UnCAL query language using the MONA solver [15]. The schema expressiveness in this approach is more restricted than OCL and describes only the typing of the graph.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Verification of ATL Transformations Using Transformation Models and Model Finders

Büttner

Egea

Cabot

et al. 2012

Formal Methods and Software Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. In model-driven engineering, models constitute pivotal elements of the software to be built. If models are specified well, transformations can be employed for different purposes, e.g., to produce final code. However, it is important that models produced by a transformation from valid input models are valid, too, where validity refers to the metamodel constraints, often written in OCL. Transformation models are a way to describe this Hoare-style notion of partial correctness of model transformations using only metamodels and constraints. In this paper, we provide an automatic translation of declarative, rule-based ATL transformations into such transformation models, providing an intuitive and versatile encoding of ATL into OCL that can be used for the analysis of various properties of transformations. We furthermore show how existing model verifiers (satisfiability checkers) for OCL-annotated metamodels can be applied for the verification of the translated ATL transformations, providing evidence for the effectiveness of our approach in practice.

show abstract

“…Anastasakis et al [3] and Baresi and Spoletini [5] use relational logic and the Alloy analyzer to check for inconsistencies in a transformation. Inaba et al [19] verify the typing of transformations with respect to a metamodel using second-order monadic logic and the MONA solver. Troya and Vallecillo [34] define an encoding of ATL in rewriting logic, that can be used to check the possible executions of a transformation in Maude.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Automated Verification of Model Transformations in the Automotive Industry

Selim

Büttner

Cordy

et al. 2013

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Many companies have adopted MDD for developing their software systems. Several studies have reported on such industrial experiences by discussing the effects of MDD and the issues that still need to be addressed. However, only a few studies have discussed using automated verification of industrial model transformations. We previously demonstrated how transformations can be used to migrate GM legacy models to AUTOSAR models. In this study, we investigate using automated verification for such industrial transformations. We report on applying an automated verification approach to the GM-to-AUTOSAR transformation that is based on checking the satisfiability of a relational transformation representation, or a transformation model, with respect to well-formedness OCL constraints. An implementation of this approach is available as a prototype for the ATL language. We present the verification results of this transformation and discuss the practicality of using such tools on industrial size problems.

show abstract

Graph-transformation verification using monadic second-order logic

Cited by 19 publications

References 32 publications

A framework for model transformation verification

A framework for model transformation verification

Verification of ATL Transformations Using Transformation Models and Model Finders

Automated Verification of Model Transformations in the Automotive Industry

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About