Download to read offline
![SOME EXPERIMENTS
Analysing meta-models
• Checking “smells” for refactoring into multi-level [1]
Analysing transformations
• Static analysis of transformations to discover errors [2]
Evaluating tools and notations (with users)
• DSL construction tools [3]
• Domain-specific tools [4]
6
[1] de Lara, Guerra, Sánchez Cuadrado: When and How to Use Multilevel Modelling. ACM
Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. 24(2): 12:1-12:46 (2014)
[2] Sánchez Cuadrado, Guerra, de Lara: Static Analysis of Model Transformations. IEEE Trans.
Softw. Eng. 2017 (in press)
[3] Pescador, de Lara: DSL-maps: from requirements to design of domain-specific languages.
Proc. ASE 2016: 438-443.
[4] Buezas, et al : Umbra Designer: Graphical Modelling for Telephony Services. Proc. ECMFA
2013: 179-191](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/madsesejuan-170309205111/85/MDE-experiments-6-320.jpg)
![TYPE-OBJECT
9
Intent: explicit modelling of types and instances
• Types can be added dynamically
• Features of types are fixed and known a priori
Also known as: Type object [Martin et. al 97], item descriptor
[Coad 1992], metaobject [Kiczales and Rivieres 1991]
Example: model product types (books, CDs) and their
instances, to be added on demand. Product types have a vat,
while instances have a price.
R. Martin, D. Riehle, F. Buschmann. 1997. Pattern languages of program design 3. A. Wesley.
P. Coad. 1992. Object-oriented patterns. Commun. ACM 35, 9 (1992), 152–159.
G. Kiczales, J. Des Rivieres. 1991. The art of the metaobject protocol. MIT Press.](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/madsesejuan-170309205111/85/MDE-experiments-9-320.jpg)
![PRACTICAL APPLICABILITY
How often do these patterns occur?
Analysis of meta-model repositories:
• ATL meta-model zoo (305 meta-models) [8.5% occur.]
• OMG specifications (116 specs) [35%~38% occur.]
• ReMoDD (15 meta-models) [20% occur.]
• Articles in journals/conferences
84 meta-models with 459 occurrences (avg 5.5)
• Most common pattern is the type-object
• Most used solution is explicit types (~70%)
11](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/madsesejuan-170309205111/85/MDE-experiments-11-320.jpg)
Uploaded bymiso_uam
MDE-experiments
This document summarizes some experiments conducted by researchers from the Universidad Autónoma de Madrid on model-driven engineering. It introduces the researchers and their work analyzing meta-models, model transformations, and evaluating modeling tools and notations with users. Specific experiments discussed include checking meta-models for refactoring opportunities, statically analyzing transformations to find errors, and evaluating domain-specific modeling tools and construction notations. The researchers find multi-level modeling patterns commonly occur in meta-models and show examples of refactoring modeling scenarios to a multi-level structure.
More Related Content
MDE-experiments
- 1. MODEL-DRIVEN ENGINEERING SOME COLLECTED EXPERIMENTS J.de Lara, E. Guerra, J. Sánchez Cuadrado Computer Science Department Universidad Autónoma de Madrid (Spain) madSESE’2017 http://miso.es
- 2. WHO ARE WE? 2 UniversidadAutónoma de Madrid • Established in 1968. • North part of Madrid (campus Cantoblanco). • One of the top universities in Spain. • >30000 students • “Excellence” campus with CSIC (Spanish Research Council). Computer Science and Telecommunication Engineering. • Created in 1992. • 96 full time professors. No se puede mostrar la imagen. Puede que su equipo no tenga suficiente memoria para abrir la imagen o que ésta esté dañada. Reinicie el equipo y, a continuación, abra el archivo de nuevo. Si sigue apareciendo la x roja, puede que tenga que borrar la imagen e insertarla de nuevo.
- 3. WHO ARE WE? 3 EstherGuerra Juan de Lara Jesús Sánchez Cuadrado Antonio Garmendia Jesús J. López Fernández Ángel Mora Segura Pablo Gómez Professors PhD Students Javier Palomares Sara Pérez Research Project Assoc. http://miso.es We are hiring!
- 4. WHAT DO WEDO? Model-driven engineering Meta-modelling • Multi-level modelling. MetaDepth tool (http://metadepth.org) • A-posteriori typing Domain-Specific Languages • Example-based DSL developmemt. MetaBUP • Pattern-based DSL development. DSL-tao • Domain-specific modelling in mobile devices. DSL-comet (iOS). Model transformations • Transformation reuse. Bento tool. • Transformation analysis. • Graph transformation. 4
- 5.
- 6. SOME EXPERIMENTS Analysing meta-models •Checking “smells” for refactoring into multi-level [1] Analysing transformations • Static analysis of transformations to discover errors [2] Evaluating tools and notations (with users) • DSL construction tools [3] • Domain-specific tools [4] 6 [1] de Lara, Guerra, Sánchez Cuadrado: When and How to Use Multilevel Modelling. ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. 24(2): 12:1-12:46 (2014) [2] Sánchez Cuadrado, Guerra, de Lara: Static Analysis of Model Transformations. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 2017 (in press) [3] Pescador, de Lara: DSL-maps: from requirements to design of domain-specific languages. Proc. ASE 2016: 438-443. [4] Buezas, et al : Umbra Designer: Graphical Modelling for Telephony Services. Proc. ECMFA 2013: 179-191
- 7. MULTI-LEVEL MODELLING Multi-level modelling • Morethan two meta-levels at a time • Simplifies modelling in some scenarios 7 ProductType@2 VAT@1: double price: double Book: ProductType VAT=18.0 price=10.0 mobyDick: Book vs.
- 8. When is itgood to use multi-level modelling? • Five patterns whose occurrence signal a multi-level “smell” Can it be applied often? • Analysed a large corpus of more than 400 meta-models (OMG, ATL zoo) • Pervasive in some domains (software architecture, enterprise/process modelling) • Relatively frequent in OMG specifications (over 35%) How to apply multi-level modelling? • We show how to map patterns in two-level modelling to multi-level modelling • We show refactorings of “real-world” examples OUR MOTIVATION 8
- 9. TYPE-OBJECT 9 Intent: explicit modellingof types and instances • Types can be added dynamically • Features of types are fixed and known a priori Also known as: Type object [Martin et. al 97], item descriptor [Coad 1992], metaobject [Kiczales and Rivieres 1991] Example: model product types (books, CDs) and their instances, to be added on demand. Product types have a vat, while instances have a price. R. Martin, D. Riehle, F. Buschmann. 1997. Pattern languages of program design 3. A. Wesley. P. Coad. 1992. Object-oriented patterns. Commun. ACM 35, 9 (1992), 152–159. G. Kiczales, J. Des Rivieres. 1991. The art of the metaobject protocol. MIT Press.
- 10. TYPE-OBJECT SOLUTIONS 10 ProductType Book vat: double{readonly} price: double vat : double =4.0 GoF: Book price = 35 ProductType vat: double Product price: double type1 Book: ProductType vat = 4.0 :type GoF: Product price = 35 ProductType Book: ProductType GoF: Book vat@1: double price: double vat=4.0 price = 35 @2 @1 @0 Static types Dynamic types … Multi-level
- 11. PRACTICAL APPLICABILITY How oftendo these patterns occur? Analysis of meta-model repositories: • ATL meta-model zoo (305 meta-models) [8.5% occur.] • OMG specifications (116 specs) [35%~38% occur.] • ReMoDD (15 meta-models) [20% occur.] • Articles in journals/conferences 84 meta-models with 459 occurrences (avg 5.5) • Most common pattern is the type-object • Most used solution is explicit types (~70%) 11
- 12. WHERE? 12 19 17 13 4 4 3 3 3 2 3 Enterprise/Process Modelling SoftwareArchitecture Systems/Software Modelling Manufacturing Reverse Engineering Data modelling Requirements Bibliographic Traceability Metrics #META-MODELS 153 85 48 46 19 14 10 9 8 4 #PATTERN OCCURRENCES
- 13. EXPLICIT TYPES TOMULTI-LEVEL 13 • CloudML (6 T-O, 1 DF) • 14 classes • Multi-level solution • 6 classes
- 14. 14 No! Discard error ATL transf. meta- models 1:type checking TDG 4: constraint solving potential problems errors, warnings 3: transformation analysis 2: create TDG annot. ATL model Yes! Confirm error Check it out at: http://miso.es/tools/anATLyzer.html witness found? STATIC ANALYSIS OF (ATL) TRANSFORMATIONS
- 15.
- 16. EVALUATION ATL transformation zoo •101 transformations • More than 4.000 problems found • All transformations have problems 16 Mutation testing of a synthetic transformation • Precision 96% • Recall 96%
- 17. DSL-MAPS 17 Evaluation • Understandability, usefulnessand completeness of synthesized meta-model • User study with 7 engineers • Likert scale (subjective) and • Evaluation of produced artefacts (errors, completeness) http://miso.es/tools/DSLtao.html
- 18. UMBRA-DESIGNER 18 Evaluation • Productivity • 2users: One using Java code, the other using the DSL • Evaluation of productivity gain on the basis of 10 tasks • Results: productivity gain of 45% in average
- 19. EVALUATIONS IN MDE Userstudies • Hard! • Difficult to have access to expert users Evaluations based on artefact analysis • We need (bigger) repositories! • Of models, meta-models, transformations, etc • ATL meta-model zoo: some of them really toy meta-models • ATL transformation zoo: Buggy! • Standards: slight variations in OCL • Repositories of meta-models with OCL constraints MDE techniques for software evaluations • JavaCheck: a DSL for static analysis of Java programs 19
- 20.