On evaluating multi-level modeling

Atkinson, C; Kuehne, Thomas

doi:10.26686/wgtn.13224761

Cited by 4 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…[46,94], reflect exactly what could be expected from multilevel modeling, cf. also [7]. On the other hand, related to that, multi-level modeling is likely to serve different groups of potential users.…”

Section: The Multi-faceted Conception Of Multi-level Modelingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multi-level modeling: cornerstones of a rationale

Frank

2022

Softw Syst Model

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This expert voice paper presents a comprehensive rationale of multi-level modeling. It aims not only at a systematic assessment of its prospects, but also at encouraging applications of multi-level modeling in business information systems and at providing a motivation for future research. The assessment is developed from a comparison of multi-level modeling with object-oriented, general-purpose modeling languages (GPMLs) and domain-specific modeling languages (DSMLs). To foster a differentiated evaluation, we propose a multi-perspective framework that accounts, among others, for essential design conflicts, different types of users, as well as economic aspects. Besides the assessment of the additional abstraction offered by multi-level modeling, the evaluation also identifies specific drawbacks and remaining challenges. Based on the results of the comparative assessment, in order to foster the adoption and further development of multi-level modeling, we discuss the prospects of supplementing multi-level modeling languages with multi-level programming languages and suggest possible dissemination strategies customized for different groups of users. The paper concludes with an outline of future research.

show abstract

Section: The Multi-faceted Conception Of Multi-level Modelingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multi-level modeling: cornerstones of a rationale

Frank

2022

Softw Syst Model

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Comparison with multi-level modelling approaches. Table VI compares some multi-level modelling approaches -including the native potency-based support of METADEPTHusing the general requirements of Section 2 and specific criteria related to the handling of the classification relation [Atkinson and Kühne 2017; Jácome-Guerrero and de Lara 2020]:…”

Section: Multi-level Modellingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Facet-oriented Modelling

Lara

Guerra

Kienzle

2021

ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Models are the central assets in model-driven engineering (MDE), as they are actively used in all phases of software development. Models are built using metamodel-based languages, and so objects in models are typed by a metamodel class. This typing is static, established at creation time, and cannot be changed later. Therefore, objects in MDE are closed and fixed with respect to the class they conform to, the fields they have, and the well-formedness constraints they must comply with. This hampers many MDE activities, like the reuse of model-related artefacts such as transformations, the opportunistic or dynamic combination of metamodels, or the dynamic reconfiguration of models. To alleviate this rigidity, we propose making model objects open so that they can acquire or drop so-called facets . These contribute with a type, fields and constraints to the objects holding them. Facets are defined by regular metamodels, hence being a lightweight extension of standard metamodelling. Facet metamodels may declare usage interfaces , as well as laws that govern the assignment of facets to objects (or classes). This article describes our proposal, reporting on a theory, analysis techniques, and an implementation. The benefits of the approach are validated on the basis of five case studies dealing with annotation models, transformation reuse, multi-view modelling, multi-level modelling, and language product lines.

show abstract

“…Some researchers have proposed guidelines for comparing and classifying multi-level modelling approaches (Atkinson, Gerbig, & Kühne, 2014;Atkinson & Kühne, 2017). However, no systematic analysis of design decisions for multi-level modelling frameworks has been proposed by the multi-level modelling community.…”

Section: The Design Space Of Multi-level Modelling Solutionsmentioning

confidence: 99%