Mining Correlations of ATL Model Transformation and Metamodel Metrics

Model transformations are considered to be the "heart" and "soul" of Model Driven Engineering, and as a such, advanced techniques and tools are needed for supporting the development, quality assurance, maintenance, and evolution of model transformations. Even though model transformation developers are gaining the availability of powerful languages and tools for developing, and testing model transformations, very few techniques are available to support the understanding of transformation characteristics. In this paper, we propose a process to analyze model transformations with the aim of identifying to what extent their characteristics depend on the corresponding input and target met models. The process relies on a number of transformation and metamodel metrics that are calculated and properly correlated. The paper discusses the application of the approach on a corpus consisting of more than 90 ATL transformations and 70 corresponding metamodels.

[1]  Davide Di Ruscio,et al.  Evolutionary Togetherness: How to Manage Coupled Evolution in Metamodeling Ecosystems , 2012, ICGT.

[2]  Andrés Vignaga.  Measuring ATL Transformations∗ , 2009 .

[3]  van den Mgj Mark Brand,et al.  Quality assessment of ATL model transformations using metrics , 2011 .

[4]  Juri Di Rocco,et al.  MDEForge: an Extensible Web-Based Modeling Platform , 2014, CloudMDE@MoDELS.

[5]  Shane Sendall,et al.  Model Transformation: The Heart and Soul of Model-Driven Software Development , 2003, IEEE Softw..

[6]  Jonathan Evans,et al.  Rationality and reasoning , 1996 .

[7]  Mark van den Brand,et al.  Model Transformation Analysis: Staying Ahead of the Maintenance Nightmare , 2011, ICMT@TOOLS.

[8]  C. Spearman.  The proof and measurement of association between two things. , 2015, International journal of epidemiology.

[9]  W. Rice.  ANALYZING TABLES OF STATISTICAL TESTS , 1989, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[10]  H. Robinson.  Principles and Procedures of Statistics , 1961 .

[11]  Barry W. Boehm,et al.  Software development cost estimation approaches — A survey , 2000, Ann. Softw. Eng..

[12]  Chao Liu,et al.  Assessing the quality of metamodels , 2013, Frontiers of Computer Science.

[13]  Luís Ferreira Pires,et al.  Performance in Model Transformations: Experiments with ATL and QVT , 2011, ICMT@TOOLS.

[14]  Juan Manuel Cueva Lovelle,et al.  Towards the systematic measurement of ATL transformation models , 2011, Softw. Pract. Exp..

[15]  Richard F. Paige,et al.  What do Metamodels Really Look Like? , 2013, EESSMOD@MoDELS.

[16]  Shari Lawrence Pfleeger,et al.  Software Metrics : A Rigorous and Practical Approach , 1998 .

[17]  David A. Gustafson,et al.  Shotgun correlations in software measures , 1993, Softw. Eng. J..

[18]  Haruhiko Kaiya,et al.  Measuring Model Transformation in Model Driven Development , 2007, CAiSE Forum.

[19]  Mark van den Brand,et al.  Using Metrics for Assessing the Quality of ASF+SDF Model Transformations , 2009, ICMT@TOOLS.

[20]  Davide Di Ruscio,et al.  Automated Chaining of Model Transformations with Incompatible Metamodels , 2014, MoDELS.

[21]  Jean Bézivin,et al.  Measuring Model Repositories , 2006 .

[22]  Student,et al.  THE PROBABLE ERROR OF A MEAN , 1908 .

[23]  Juri Di Rocco,et al.  Mining metrics for understanding metamodel characteristics , 2014, MiSE 2014.

[24]  Jean Bézivin,et al.  ATL: A model transformation tool , 2008, Sci. Comput. Program..

[25]  J. Rodgers,et al.  Thirteen ways to look at the correlation coefficient , 1988 .

[26]  van den Mgj Mark Brand,et al.  Metrics for analyzing the quality of model transformations , 2008 .