A Rewriting Logic Semantics for ATL

As the complexity of model transformation (MT) grows, the need to rely on formal semantics of MT languages becomes a critical issue. Formal semantics provide precise specications of the expected behavior of transformations, allowing users to understand them and to use them properly, and MT tool builders to develop correct MT engines, compilers, etc. In addition, formal semantics allow modelers to reason about the MTs and to prove their correctness, something specially important in case of large and complex MTs (with, e.g., hundreds or thousands of rules) for which manual debugging is no longer possible. In this paper we give a formal semantics of the ATL 3.0 model transformation language using rewriting logic and Maude, which allows addressing these issues. Such formalization provides additional benets, such as enabling the simulation of the specications or giving access to the Maude toolkit to reason about them.

[1]  José Meseguer,et al.  Specification and proof in membership equational logic , 2000, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[2]  Perdita Stevens,et al.  Bidirectional model transformations in QVT: semantic issues and open questions , 2007, MODELS'07.

[3]  Albert Zündorf,et al.  The PROGRES approach: language and environment , 1999 .

[4]  Jean Bézivin,et al.  Extending AMMA for Supporting Dynamic Semantics Specifications of DSLs , 2006 .

[5]  Jordi Cabot,et al.  Improving Higher-Order Transformations Support in ATL , 2010, ICMT@TOOLS.

[6]  Xavier Crégut,et al.  A Framework to Formalise the MDE Foundations , 2007 .

[7]  Francisco Durán,et al.  Formal Specification and Analysis of Domain Specific Languages using Maude , 2008 .

[8]  Francisco Durán,et al.  MTT: The Maude Termination Tool (System Description) , 2008, IJCAR.

[9]  Ralph Matthes,et al.  Verification of the Schorr-Waite Algorithm - From Trees to Graphs , 2010, LOPSTR.

[10]  Ralph Matthes,et al.  Coinductive Graph Representation: the Problem of Embedded Lists , 2011, Electron. Commun. Eur. Assoc. Softw. Sci. Technol..

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

[12]  J. Küster,et al.  Analysis of Model Transformations via Alloy , 2007 .

[13]  Antonio Vallecillo,et al.  Towards a Rewriting Logic Semantics for ATL , 2010, ICMT@TOOLS.

[14]  Francisco Durán,et al.  A Church-Rosser Checker Tool for Conditional Order-Sorted Equational Maude Specifications , 2010, WRLA.

[15]  MeseguerJosé.  Conditional rewriting logic as a unified model of concurrency , 1992 .

[16]  Martin Strecker,et al.  BDDs verified in a proof assistant ( Preliminary report ) , 2010 .

[17]  Fertigungstechnik Maschinenbau,et al.  ATLAS Transformation Language , 2010 .

[18]  Narciso Martí-Oliet,et al.  All About Maude - A High-Performance Logical Framework, How to Specify, Program and Verify Systems in Rewriting Logic , 2007, All About Maude.

[19]  Rae Baxter,et al.  Acknowledgments.-The authors would like to , 1982 .

[20]  Bruno Courcelle,et al.  The Expression of Graph Properties and Graph Transformations in Monadic Second-Order Logic , 1997, Handbook of Graph Grammars.

[21]  Antonio Vallecillo,et al.  Representing and Operating with Model Differences , 2008, TOOLS.

[22]  Jean Bézivin,et al.  On the Use of Higher-Order Model Transformations , 2009, ECMDA-FA.

[23]  Iman Poernomo.  Proofs-as-Model-Transformations , 2008, ICMT@TOOLS.

[24]  Reiko Heckel,et al.  Rewriting Logic Semantics and Verification of Model Transformations , 2009, FASE.

[25]  Luciano Baresi,et al.  On the Use of Alloy to Analyze Graph Transformation Systems , 2006, ICGT.

[26]  Artur Boronat,et al.  An algebraic semantics for MOF , 2009, Formal Aspects of Computing.