Describing the Correlations between Metamodels and Transformations Aspects

Metamodels are a key concept in Model-Driven Engineering. Any artifact in a modeling ecosystem has to be defined in accordance to a metamodel prescribing its main qualities. One of the most important artifact is model transformation that are considered to be the heart and soul of MDE and as such advanced techniques and tools are needed for supporting the development, quality assurance, maintenance, and evolution of model transformations. Several works propose the adoption of metrics to measure quality attributes of transformation without considering any metamodel aspects. In this paper, we present an approach to understand structural characteristics of metamodels and how the model transformations depend on corresponding input and target metamodels.

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

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

[3]  Mohd Fadzil Hassan,et al.  Model driven software development: An overview , 2014, 2014 International Conference on Computer and Information Sciences (ICCOINS).

[4]  Balakrishnan Chandrasekaran,et al.  What are ontologies, and why do we need them? , 1999, IEEE Intell. Syst..

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[20]  Deepak Goyal,et al.  A hierarchical model for object-oriented design quality assessment , 2015 .

[21]  Douglas C. Schmidt,et al.  Guest Editor's Introduction: Model-Driven Engineering , 2006, Computer.

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

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

[24]  Richard H. Carver,et al.  An Evaluation of the MOOD Set of Object-Oriented Software Metrics , 1998, IEEE Trans. Software Eng..

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