iBet uBet web content aggregator. Adding the entire web to your favor.
iBet uBet web content aggregator. Adding the entire web to your favor.



Link to original content: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-74730-9_19
Toward Product Lines of Mathematical Models for Software Model Management | SpringerLink
Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Toward Product Lines of Mathematical Models for Software Model Management

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Software Technologies: Applications and Foundations (STAF 2017)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNPSE,volume 10748))

Abstract

We present a general view on theoretical aspects of model synchronization and consistency management, and discuss technical challenges in making it sound, and cultural challenges in bringing it to practice.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1.

    For example, category theory seen as a discipline of mathematical modelling of mathematics itself, was very successful in packing the diversity of mathematical structures and operations over them into a product line of categories and categorical constructs.

  2. 2.

    As per personal communication with Nate Foster.

  3. 3.

    The notion of an organized lens was introduced in [11], although the very name od-lens is new.

  4. 4.

    https://github.com/ekmett/lens.

  5. 5.

    Even though FP proponents are familiar with monads and other categorical constructs employed in FP.

  6. 6.

    Indeed, even quantum phenomena can be specified in a picturesque way as demonstrated in Coecke and Kissinger’s book [7].

References

  1. Anjorin, A., Diskin, Z., Jouault, F., Ko, H., Leblebici, E., Westfechtel, B.: Benchmarx reloaded: a practical benchmark framework for bidirectional transformations. In: Eramo and Johnson [15], pp. 15–30

    Google Scholar 

  2. Anjorin, A., Gibbons, J., (eds.) Proceedings of the 5th International Workshop on Bidirectional Transformations, BX 2016, Co-located with the European Joint Conferences on Theory and Practice of Software, ETAPS 2016, Eindhoven, The Netherlands, 8 April 2016, CEUR Workshop Proceedings, vol. 1571. CEUR-WS.org (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Barbosa, D.M.J., Cretin, J., Foster, N., Greenberg, M., Pierce, B.C.: Matching lenses: alignment and view update. In: ICFP 2010, pp. 193–204 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bohannon, A., Foster, J.N., Pierce, B.C., Pilkiewicz, A., Schmitt, A.: Boomerang: resourceful lenses for string data. In: POPL 2008, pp. 407–419 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Bohannon, A., Pierce, B.C., Vaughan, J.A.: Relational lenses: a language for updatable views. In: PODS 2006, pp. 338–347 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Cheney, J., Gibbons, J., McKinna, J., Stevens, P.: On principles of least change and least surprise for bidirectional transformations. J. Object Technol. 16(1), 3:1–31 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Coecke, B., Kissinger, A.: Picturing Quantum Processes. A First Course in Quantum Theory and Diagrammatic Reasoning. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2017)

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  8. Diskin, Z.: An algebraic semantics for bidirectional model synchornization. University of Waterloo, Technical report GSDLab-TR 2014–04-01 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Diskin, Z.: Compositionality of update propagation: lax putput. In: Eramo and Johnson [15], pp. 74–89

    Google Scholar 

  10. Diskin, Z., Eramo, R., Pierantonio, A., Czarnecki, K.: Incorporating uncertainty into bidirectional model transformations and their delta-lens formalization. In: Anjorin and Gibbons [2], pp. 15–31

    Google Scholar 

  11. Diskin, Z., Gholizadeh, H., Wider, A., Czarnecki, K.: A three-dimensional taxonomy for bidirectional model synchronization. J. Syst. Softw. 111, 298–322 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Diskin, Z., Xiong, Y., Czarnecki, K.: From state- to delta-based bidirectional model transformations: the asymmetric case. J. Object Technol. 10(6), 1–25 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Diskin, Z., Xiong, Y., Czarnecki, K., Ehrig, H., Hermann, F., Orejas, F.: From state-to delta-based bidirectional model transformations: the symmetric case. In: Whittle, J., Clark, T., Kühne, T. (eds.) MODELS 2011. LNCS, vol. 6981, pp. 304–318. Springer, Heidelberg (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-24485-8_22

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  14. Egyed, A.: Fixing inconsistencies in UML design models. In: ICSE 2007, pp. 292–301 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Eramo, R., Johnson, M., (eds.) Proceedings of the 6th International Workshop on Bidirectional Transformations co-located with the European Joint Conferences on Theory and Practice of Software, BX@ETAPS 2017, Uppsala, Sweden, 29 April 2017, CEUR Workshop Proceedings, vol. 1827. CEUR-WS.org (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Eramo, R., Pierantonio, A., Rosa, G.: Managing uncertainty in bidirectional model transformations. In: SLE 2015, pp. 49–58 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Foster, J.N., Greenwald, M.B., Moore, J.T., Pierce, B.C., Schmitt, A.: Combinators for bi-directional tree transformations: a linguistic approach to the view update problem. In: POPL 2005, pp. 233–246 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Foster, J.N., Pilkiewicz, A., Pierce, B.C.: Quotient lenses. In: ICFP 2008, pp. 383–396 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Haeberer, A.M., Maibaum, T.S.E.: Scientific rigour, an answer to a pragmatic question: a linguistic framework for software engineering. In: ICSE 2001, pp. 463–472 (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Hermann, F., Ehrig, H., Orejas, F., Czarnecki, K., Diskin, Z., Xiong, Y., Gottmann, S., Engel, T.: Model synchronization based on triple graph grammars: correctness, completeness and invertibility. Softw. Syst. Model. 14(1), 241–269 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Hofmann, M., Pierce, B.C., Wagner, D.: Symmetric lenses. In: POPL 2011, pp. 371–384 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Hofmann, M., Pierce, B.C., Wagner, D.: Edit lenses. In: POPL 2012, pp. 495–508 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Hutchinson, J., Rouncefield, M., Whittle, J.: Model-driven engineering practices in industry. In: ICSE 2011, pp. 633–642. IEEE, ACM (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Hutchinson, J., Whittle, J., Rouncefield, M., Kristoffersen, S.: Empirical assessment of MDE in industry. In: ICSE 2011, pp. 471–480. IEEE, ACM (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Johnson, M., Rosebrugh, R.D.: View updatability based on the models of a formal specification. In: FME 2001: Formal Methods for Increasing Software Productivity, pp. 534–549 (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Johnson, M., Rosebrugh, R.D.: Fibrations and universal view updatability. Theor. Comput. Sci. 388(1–3), 109–129 (2007)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  27. Johnson, M., Rosebrugh, R.D.: Lens put-put laws: monotonic and mixed. ECEASST, 49 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  28. Johnson, M., Rosebrugh, R.D.: Delta lenses and opfibrations. ECEASST, 57 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Johnson, M., Rosebrugh, R.D.: Unifying set-based, delta-based and edit-based lenses. In: Anjorin and Gibbons [2], pp. 1–13

    Google Scholar 

  30. Königs, A., Schürr, A.: MDI: a rule-based multi-document and tool integration approach. Softw. Syst. Model. 5(4), 349–368 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Libkin, L.: Certain answers as objects and knowledge. Artif. Intell. 232, 1–19 (2016)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  32. Maibaum, T.S.E.: What we teach software engineers in the university: do we take engineering seriously? In: ESEC/FSE, pp. 40–50 (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  33. Orejas, F., Boronat, A., Ehrig, H., Hermann, F., Schölzel, H.: On propagation-based concurrent model synchronization. ECEASST, 57 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  34. Salay, R., Famelis, M., Rubin, J., Sandro, A.D., Chechik, M.: Lifting model transformations to product lines. In: ICSE 2014 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  35. Stevens, P.: Bidirectional model transformations in QVT: semantic issues and open questions. Softw. Syst. Model. 9(1), 7–20 (2010)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  36. Stevens, P.: Bidirectional transformations in the large. In: MODELS (2017 to appear)

    Google Scholar 

  37. Taentzer, G., Ohrndorf, M., Lamo, Y., Rutle, A.: Change-preserving model repair. In: FASE 2017, pp. 283–299 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  38. Vincenti, W.: What engineers know and how they know it: analytical studies from aeronautical history. Johns Hopkins Studies in the History of Technology (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  39. Whittle, J., Hutchinson, J., Rouncefield, M., Burden, H., Heldal, R.: Industrial adoption of model-driven engineering: are the tools really the problem? In: Moreira, A., Schätz, B., Gray, J., Vallecillo, A., Clarke, P. (eds.) MODELS 2013. LNCS, vol. 8107, pp. 1–17. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-41533-3_1

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgement

The idea to write the paper in its current form emerged at the Grand Workshop that provided a full day of provocative presentations, stimulating discussions, and creative overall atmosphere. We are grateful to all participants and the organizers for creating this inspiring event.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada

    Zinovy Diskin, Mark Lawford & Tom Maibaum

  2. University of Applied Sciences FHDW Hannover, Hannover, Germany

    Harald König

Authors
  1. Zinovy Diskin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Harald König
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mark Lawford
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Tom Maibaum
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Zinovy Diskin .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Johannes Kepler University of Linz, Linz, Austria

    Martina Seidl

  2. Department of Informatics, King’s College London, London, United Kingdom

    Steffen Zschaler

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Diskin, Z., König, H., Lawford, M., Maibaum, T. (2018). Toward Product Lines of Mathematical Models for Software Model Management. In: Seidl, M., Zschaler, S. (eds) Software Technologies: Applications and Foundations. STAF 2017. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 10748. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-74730-9_19

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-74730-9_19

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-74729-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-74730-9

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation