Horizontal and vertical structuring of typed graph transformation systems

Received Based on a categorical semantics that has been developed recently we study composition and reenement as horizontal and vertical structuring techniques for typed graph transformation systems. Composition of graph transformation systems w.r.t. common subsystems is shown to be compatible with the semantics, i.e., the semantics of the composed system is obtained as the composition of the semantics of the component systems. Moreover, the structure of a composed graph transformation system is preserved during a reenement step in the sense that compatible reenements of the components induce a reenement of the composition. The concepts and results are illustrated by a sample development of a small information system using entity relationship modeling techniques.

[1]  Reiko Heckel,et al.  Algebraic Approaches to Graph Transformation - Part I: Basic Concepts and Double Pushout Approach , 1997, Handbook of Graph Grammars.

[2]  Hartmut Ehrig,et al.  Introduction to the Algebraic Theory of Graph Grammars (A Survey) , 1978, Graph-Grammars and Their Application to Computer Science and Biology.

[3]  Reiko Heckel,et al.  Ensuring consistency of conditional graph rewriting - a constructive approach , 1995, SEGRAGRA.

[4]  Martin Korff.  Generalized graph structure grammars with applications to concurrent object-oriented systems , 1996 .

[5]  Andy Schürr.  PROGRESS: A VHL-Language Based on Graph Grammars , 1990, Graph-Grammars and Their Application to Computer Science.

[6]  Hartmut Ehrig,et al.  Algebraic high-level net transformation systems , 1995, Mathematical Structures in Computer Science.

[7]  Azriel Rosenfeld,et al.  Web Grammars , 1969, IJCAI.

[8]  Francesca Rossi,et al.  Graph Processes , 1996, Fundam. Informaticae.

[9]  Joseph A. Goguen,et al.  A categorical manifesto , 1989, Mathematical Structures in Computer Science.

[10]  José Meseguer,et al.  Petri Nets Are Monoids , 1990, Inf. Comput..

[11]  S. Lane.  Categories for the Working Mathematician , 1971 .

[12]  Peter P. Chen.  The Entity-Relationship Model: Towards a unified view of Data , 1976 .

[13]  Hartmut Ehrig,et al.  Fundamentals of Algebraic Specification 2: Module Specifications and Constraints , 1990 .

[14]  Hans-Jörg Kreowski,et al.  On the Interleaving Sematics of Transformation Units - A Step into GRACE , 1994, TAGT.

[15]  Hartmut Ehrig,et al.  Fundamentals of Algebraic Specification 1: Equations and Initial Semantics , 1985 .

[16]  Reiko Heckel,et al.  Graph Grammars with Negative Application Conditions , 1996, Fundam. Informaticae.

[17]  Reiko Heckel,et al.  A compositional approach to structuring and refinement of typed graph grammars , 1995, Electron. Notes Theor. Comput. Sci..

[18]  Ugo Montanari,et al.  Separable Graphs, Planar Graphs and Web Grammars , 1970, Inf. Control..

[19]  Gabriele Taentzer,et al.  DIEGO, another step towards a module concept for graph transformation systems , 1995, SEGRAGRA.

[20]  Hartmut Ehrig,et al.  Graph-Grammars: An Algebraic Approach , 1973, SWAT.

[21]  Reiko Heckel,et al.  Algebraic Approaches to Graph Transformation - Part II: Single Pushout Approach and Comparison with Double Pushout Approach , 1997, Handbook of Graph Grammars.

[22]  Michael Löwe,et al.  Algebraic Approach to Single-Pushout Graph Transformation , 1993, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[23]  Francesco Parisi-Presicce.  Transformations of Graph Grammars , 1994, TAGT.

[24]  Leila Ribeiro,et al.  Parallel composition and unfolding semantics of graph grammars , 1996 .

[25]  Hartmut Ehrig,et al.  Pragmatic and Semantic Aspects of a Module Concept for Graph Transformation Systems , 1994, TAGT.

[26]  Dirk Janssens,et al.  The Decomposition of ESM Computations , 1994, TAGT.

[27]  S. Maclane,et al.  Categories for the Working Mathematician , 1971 .

[28]  Hartmut Ehrig,et al.  The Category of Typed Graph Grammars and its Adjunctions with Categories , 1994, TAGT.

[29]  Joseph A. Goguen,et al.  Types as theories , 1991 .