Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Consistency Recovery in Interactive Modeling

69 views

Published on

MDE projects contain different kinds of artifacts such as models, metamodels, model transformations, and deltas. These artifacts are related in terms of relationships such as transformation or conformance. In this presentation, we capture the types of artifacts and the relevant relationships in a megamodeling-based manner for the purpose of monitoring and recovering project consistency in response to changes that users may apply to the project within an interactive modeling platform. The approach supports users in experimenting with MDE projects and receiving feedback upon changes on the grounds of a specific execution semantics for megamodels. The approach is validated within the web-based modeling platform MDEFORGE.

Published in: Software
  • Be the first to comment

Consistency Recovery in Interactive Modeling

  1. 1. http://www.di.univaq.it/diruscio/ davide.diruscio@univaq.it @ddiruscio Consistency Recovery in Interactive Modeling Davide Di Ruscio Joint work with Juri Di Rocco, Marcel Heinz, Ludovico Iovino, Ralf Laemmel, Alfonso Pierantonio
  2. 2. 2 3rd International Workshop on Executable Modeling at MODELS 2017 - September 18, 2017, Austin, Texas Introduction > Model-Driven Engineering Over the last decades many MDE technologies have been conceived to support a wide range of modeling and model management activities
  3. 3. 3 3rd International Workshop on Executable Modeling at MODELS 2017 - September 18, 2017, Austin, Texas Introduction > MDE projects MDE projects contain different kinds of artifacts such as models, metamodels, model transformations, deltas, … Artifacts are related in terms of relationships such as transformation or conformance Metamodel
  4. 4. 4 3rd International Workshop on Executable Modeling at MODELS 2017 - September 18, 2017, Austin, Texas Collection of modelling artifacts developed with a specific goal MDE Projects Thank you… but … how to use it????
  5. 5. 5 3rd International Workshop on Executable Modeling at MODELS 2017 - September 18, 2017, Austin, Texas MDE Project In case of big projects it’s difficult to figure out the relations between the different artifacts and to understand their roles in the projects
  6. 6. 6 3rd International Workshop on Executable Modeling at MODELS 2017 - September 18, 2017, Austin, Texas MDE Project In case of big projects it’s difficult to figure out the relations between the different artifacts and to understand their roles in the projects
  7. 7. 7 3rd International Workshop on Executable Modeling at MODELS 2017 - September 18, 2017, Austin, Texas MDE Project In case of big projects it’s difficult to figure out the relations between the different artifacts and to understand their roles in the projects
  8. 8. 8 3rd International Workshop on Executable Modeling at MODELS 2017 - September 18, 2017, Austin, Texas MDE Project In case of big projects it’s difficult to figure out the relations between the different artifacts and to understand their roles in the projects
  9. 9. 9 3rd International Workshop on Executable Modeling at MODELS 2017 - September 18, 2017, Austin, Texas Research objective We want to exercise an effective, declarative (model- based), and transparent (understandable) approach to organizing the artifacts in an MDE project (in a model repository or not) and the relationships between the artifacts
  10. 10. 10 3rd International Workshop on Executable Modeling at MODELS 2017 - September 18, 2017, Austin, Texas Research objective A model-managed project has an associated megamodel - users can understand the structure of the project - the project’s consistency with the megamodel is continuously monitored in the background - changes can be mapped to corrective, automated actions to be proposed to and confirmed by the user
  11. 11. 11 3rd International Workshop on Executable Modeling at MODELS 2017 - September 18, 2017, Austin, Texas Research objective A model-managed project has an associated megamodel - users can understand the structure of the project - the project’s consistency with the megamodel is continuously monitored in the background - changes can be mapped to corrective, automated actions to be proposed to and confirmed by the user +
  12. 12. 12 3rd International Workshop on Executable Modeling at MODELS 2017 - September 18, 2017, Austin, Texas Research objective A model-managed project has an associated megamodel - users can understand the structure of the project - the project’s consistency with the megamodel is continuously monitored in the background - changes can be mapped to corrective, automated actions to be proposed to and confirmed by the user + MegaL/Forge
  13. 13. 13 3rd International Workshop on Executable Modeling at MODELS 2017 - September 18, 2017, Austin, Texas The MegaL/Forge language
  14. 14. 14 3rd International Workshop on Executable Modeling at MODELS 2017 - September 18, 2017, Austin, Texas A simple project’s megamodel (1/2)
  15. 15. 15 3rd International Workshop on Executable Modeling at MODELS 2017 - September 18, 2017, Austin, Texas A simple project’s megamodel (2/2)
  16. 16. 16 3rd International Workshop on Executable Modeling at MODELS 2017 - September 18, 2017, Austin, Texas MegaL/Forge Static Semantics (Well-formedness) Types, artifacts, relations, and function are declared before they are used Each name can be declared once only (‘no overloading’) The arguments of relationships and function applications and results of function applications must be of the types as prescribed by the signatures of the corresponding relations and functions Each artifact symbol is linked to some filename
  17. 17. 17 3rd International Workshop on Executable Modeling at MODELS 2017 - September 18, 2017, Austin, Texas MegaL/Forge Dynamic Semantics (Consistency) Relational consistency when the interpretation of all relation applications (relationships) in a given megamodel m for a given environment E returns true Functional consistency when the interpretation of all function applications in the megamodel m with the environment E returns true
  18. 18. 18 3rd International Workshop on Executable Modeling at MODELS 2017 - September 18, 2017, Austin, Texas Consistency recovery A project change triggers: - recovery analysis on the megamodel - to determine a sequence of function applications - execution of the recovery sequence - to facilitate consistency recovery when applied to the artifacts in the project
  19. 19. 19 3rd International Workshop on Executable Modeling at MODELS 2017 - September 18, 2017, Austin, Texas Sample change scenarios Modify difference model Modify one model
  20. 20. 20 3rd International Workshop on Executable Modeling at MODELS 2017 - September 18, 2017, Austin, Texas Consistency recovery analysis: main issues Mapping a change to an infinite sequence This may happen, if a naive definition is used where a change to an artifact m transitively leads to a change of m We set up the analysis to never change an artifact that was already changed. Nondeterminism management There may exist megamodels and changes for which different recovery sequences are possible We set up the analysis to detect nondeterminism and fail with consistency recovery in this case.
  21. 21. 21 3rd International Workshop on Executable Modeling at MODELS 2017 - September 18, 2017, Austin, Texas MegaL/Forge integration into MDEForge MDEForge is an extensible platform enabling the adoption of model management tools as SaaS (software as a service) - Users have the possibility to create modeling artifacts and organize them in projects that are, in turn, contained in workspaces
  22. 22. 22 3rd International Workshop on Executable Modeling at MODELS 2017 - September 18, 2017, Austin, Texas MegaL/Forge integration into MDEForge ProjectMonitoring implements listeners that execute the consistency recovery manager when artifacts or projects are changed.
  23. 23. 23 3rd International Workshop on Executable Modeling at MODELS 2017 - September 18, 2017, Austin, Texas MegaL/Forge integration into MDEForge ConsistencyManagement package implements the presented consistency recovery concepts For each symbolic function or relation name a corresponding IOperationApplier implementation is available
  24. 24. 24 3rd International Workshop on Executable Modeling at MODELS 2017 - September 18, 2017, Austin, Texas MegaL/Forge integration into MDEForge The links between symbolic operation names and the corresponding appliers are specified in the operationMapper HashMap of the ConsistencyRecoveryManager class
  25. 25. 25 3rd International Workshop on Executable Modeling at MODELS 2017 - September 18, 2017, Austin, Texas MegaL/Forge integration into MDEForge The consistency check between a project and the corresponding megamodel is performed by the method checkConsistency The method consistencyRecovery implements the recovery mechanism getFunctionsToRecoverConsistency is responsible of identifying the functions to be applied and their execution order
  26. 26. 26 3rd International Workshop on Executable Modeling at MODELS 2017 - September 18, 2017, Austin, Texas User feedback upon changes
  27. 27. 27 3rd International Workshop on Executable Modeling at MODELS 2017 - September 18, 2017, Austin, Texas Conclusion and future work Megamodel-based approach towards consistency recovery in MDE projects Megamodels are facilitated to express consistency and to provide guidance for consistency recovery Future plans include at least: - Management of richer dependencies between the involved artifacts (i.e., management of nondeterminism) - Application of the approach on non-trivial examples of co-evolution - Making megamodels and the underlying MDE projects explicitly version- aware
  28. 28. 28 3rd International Workshop on Executable Modeling at MODELS 2017 - September 18, 2017, Austin, Texas Thank you !!!!

×