Assessing the quality of metamodels

The complexity and diversity of modern software demands a variety of metamodel-based modeling languages for software development. Existing languages change continuously, and new ones are constantly emerging. In this situation, and especially for metamodel-based modeling languages, a quality assurance mechanism for metamodels is needed. This paper presents an approach to assessing the quality of metamodels. A quality model, which systematically characterizes and classifies quality attributes, and an operable measuring mechanism for effectively assessing the quality of metamodels based on the quality model, are presented, using UML as the main example.

[1]  Juan Llorens Morillo,et al.  Errors in the UML metamodel? , 2003, SOEN.

[2]  Antonia Bertolino,et al.  Is my model right? Let me ask the expert , 2011, J. Syst. Softw..

[3]  Zhao Junfeng,et al.  Research and Implementation of Jade Bird Object-Oriented Software Modeling Tool , 2003 .

[4]  Juan de Lara,et al.  Meta-Model validation and verification with MetaBest , 2014, ASE.

[5]  Hong Zhu,et al.  Unifying the Semantics of Models and Meta-Models in the Multi-Layered UML Meta-Modelling Hierarchy , 2012, Int. J. Softw. Informatics.

[6]  Cristina Gómez,et al.  A Method for the Definition and Treatment of Conceptual Schema Quality Issues , 2012, ER.

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

[8]  Omg Available Specification.  Business Process Modeling Notation, V1.1 , 2008 .

[9]  Cris Kobryn,et al.  UML 3.0 and the future of modeling , 2004, Software & Systems Modeling.

[10]  Carl G. Davis,et al.  A Hierarchical Model for Object-Oriented Design Quality Assessment , 2002, IEEE Trans. Software Eng..

[11]  Anna Rita Fasolino,et al.  Lo Standard ISO/IEC 9126 – Software engineering – Product Quality , 2010 .

[12]  Daniel L. Moody,et al.  The “Physics” of Notations: Toward a Scientific Basis for Constructing Visual Notations in Software Engineering , 2009, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering.

[13]  Ralf Lämmel,et al.  Towards an engineering discipline for GRAMMARWARE Draft as of August 17 , 2003 , 2003 .

[14]  Martin Gogolla.  Unified Modeling Language , 2009, Encyclopedia of Database Systems.

[15]  G. Webb.  Evolution not revolution. , 2003, Journal of radiological protection : official journal of the Society for Radiological Protection.

[16]  Carlos José Pereira de Lucena,et al.  Software engineering for large-scale multi-agent systems: SELMAS 2003: workshop report , 2003, SOEN.

[17]  Iman Keivanloo,et al.  SE-EQUAM - An Evolvable Quality Metamodel , 2012, 2012 IEEE 36th Annual Computer Software and Applications Conference Workshops.

[18]  B. P. Douglass.  UML FOR SYSTEMS ENGINEERING , 1998 .

[19]  Cris Kobryn.  Will UML 2.0 be agile or awkward? , 2002, CACM.

[20]  Hans Rudolf Schwarz.  An introduction to ALGOL: a tutorial paper on ALGOL with explanations and examples to make the use of the ALGOL report more familiar , 1962, CACM.

[21]  George A. Miller,et al.  WordNet: A Lexical Database for English , 1995, HLT.

[22]  Jagdish Bansiya.  Evaluating framework architecture structural stability , 2000, CSUR.

[23]  Ron Weber,et al.  An Ontological Model of an Information System , 1990, IEEE Trans. Software Eng..

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

[25]  Colin Atkinson,et al.  The Essence of Multilevel Metamodeling , 2001, UML.

[26]  Brian Willard.  UML for systems engineering , 2007, Comput. Stand. Interfaces.

[27]  Cristina Gómez,et al.  Enforcement of Conceptual Schema Quality Issues in Current Integrated Development Environments , 2013, CAiSE.

[28]  Jean-Marc Jézéquel,et al.  A Comparison of Six UML-Based Languages for Software Process Modeling , 2010, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering.

[29]  Arne Sølvberg,et al.  Understanding quality in conceptual modeling , 1994, IEEE Software.

[30]  Chris F. Kemerer,et al.  A Metrics Suite for Object Oriented Design , 2015, IEEE Trans. Software Eng..

[31]  Keng Siau,et al.  How Complex Is the Unified Modeling Language? , 2002, Advanced Topics in Database Research, Vol. 1.

[32]  Bernhard Rumpe,et al.  Meaningful modeling: what's the semantics of "semantics"? , 2004, Computer.

[33]  KobrynCris.  UML 3.0 and the future of modeling , 2004 .

[34]  Lu Zhang,et al.  Applying OO Metrics to Assess UML Meta-models , 2004, UML.

[35]  Narasimha Bolloju,et al.  Assisting novice analysts in developing quality conceptual models with UML , 2006, CACM.

[36]  Qing Li,et al.  Unified Modeling Language , 2009 .

[37]  Dov Dori.  Why significant UML change is unlikely , 2002, CACM.

[38]  Liu Hui,et al.  Progress of Research on Metamodeling , 2008 .

[39]  Lionel C. Briand,et al.  Domain-Specific Model Verification with QVT , 2011, ECMFA.

[40]  Wei Tang,et al.  Meta Object Facility , 2009, Encyclopedia of Database Systems.

[41]  Cristina Gómez,et al.  A complete set of guidelines for naming UML conceptual schema elements , 2013, Data Knowl. Eng..

[42]  Brian Henderson-Sellers,et al.  UML – the Good, the Bad or the Ugly? Perspectives from a panel of experts , 2005, Software & Systems Modeling.

[43]  Bhuvan Unhelkar.  Verification and Validation for Quality of UML 2.0 Models , 2005 .

[44]  Yannis Tzitzikas.  OCL: Object Constraint Language , 2005 .

[45]  Mark Rouncefield,et al.  Empirical assessment of MDE in industry , 2011, 2011 33rd International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE).

[46]  Hui Liu.  Progress of Research on Metamodeling: Progress of Research on Metamodeling , 2008 .

[47]  Peter Fettke,et al.  Business Process Modeling Notation , 2008, Wirtschaftsinf..

[48]  Jan Bosch,et al.  Characterizing stability in evolving frameworks , 1999, Proceedings Technology of Object-Oriented Languages and Systems. TOOLS 29 (Cat. No.PR00275).

[49]  Antoni Olivé,et al.  An Eclipse Plugin for Validating Names in UML Conceptual Schemas , 2011, ER Workshops.

[50]  G. A. Miller.  THE PSYCHOLOGICAL REVIEW THE MAGICAL NUMBER SEVEN, PLUS OR MINUS TWO: SOME LIMITS ON OUR CAPACITY FOR PROCESSING INFORMATION 1 , 1956 .

[51]  Bernhard Rumpe,et al.  Modeling Languages: Syntax, Semantics and All That Stuff, Part I: The Basic Stuff , 2000 .