Addressing modularity for heterogeneous multi-model systems using model federation

Model-Driven Engineering (MDE) proposes to modularize complex software-intensive systems using multiple models where each module serves a specific concern. These concerns of a system might be diverse and the use of multiple heterogeneous models often becomes inevitable. These models adhere to different paradigms and use distinct formalisms, which makes it hard to ensure consistency among them. Moreover, these models might contain certain concepts (at times overlapping) that are reused for building cross-concern views/models. Maintaining models using separation of concerns in a heterogeneous modeling space becomes difficult. Traditional MDE suggests the use of model transformations to maintain the mappings between heterogeneous models. In this paper, we introduce a different approach based on model federation to map heterogeneous models. In contrast to traditional approaches where heterogeneous models are gathered in a single technological space, model federation keeps them in their own technological spaces. We provide a mechanism so that elements of these models are accessible for the development of cross-concern views/models from their respective technological spaces.

[1]  Jean-Marie Favre,et al.  Towards a Megamodel to Model Software Evolution Through Transformations , 2005, SETra@ICGT.

[2]  Birger Møller-Pedersen,et al.  Towards non-intrusive composition of executable models , 2015, 2015 3rd International Conference on Model-Driven Engineering and Software Development (MODELSWARD).

[3]  Martin Jansche Proceedings of the Workshop on Software , 2005 .

[4]  M Mernik,et al.  When and how to develop domain-specific languages , 2005, CSUR.

[5]  Jordi Cabot,et al.  EMF Views: A View Mechanism for Integrating Heterogeneous Models , 2015, ER.

[6]  Perry Alexander,et al.  The Rosetta meta-model framework , 2003, 10th IEEE International Conference and Workshop on the Engineering of Computer-Based Systems, 2003. Proceedings..

[7]  Holger Giese,et al.  On the Complex Nature of MDE Evolution , 2013, MoDELS.

[8]  Robert B. France,et al.  Model-driven development using UML 2.0: promises and pitfalls , 2006, Computer.

[9]  Edward A. Lee,et al.  Taming heterogeneity - the Ptolemy approach , 2003, Proc. IEEE.

[10]  Melissa A. Schilling Toward a General Modular Systems Theory and Its Application to Interfirm Product Modularity , 2000 .

[11]  Robert B. France,et al.  Providing Support for Model Composition in Metamodels , 2007, 11th IEEE International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference (EDOC 2007).

[12]  Hidehiko Masuhara,et al.  Modeling Crosscutting in Aspect-Oriented Mechanisms , 2003, ECOOP.

[13]  Stanley M. Sutton,et al.  N degrees of separation: multi-dimensional separation of concerns , 1999, Proceedings of the 1999 International Conference on Software Engineering (IEEE Cat. No.99CB37002).

[14]  Bran Selic,et al.  A Systematic Approach to Domain-Specific Language Design Using UML , 2007, 10th IEEE International Symposium on Object and Component-Oriented Real-Time Distributed Computing (ISORC'07).

[15]  Olivier Barais,et al.  Model Driven Language Engineering with Kermeta , 2009, GTTSE.

[16]  François Vernadat,et al.  UEML: Towards a unified enterprise modelling language , 2002 .

[17]  Frédéric Boulanger,et al.  ModHel'X: A Component-Oriented Approach to Multi-Formalism Modeling , 2008, MoDELS.

[18]  Jeff Tyree,et al.  Architecture decisions: demystifying architecture , 2005, IEEE Software.

[19]  Jean Bézivin,et al.  Inter-DSL coordination support by combining megamodeling and model weaving , 2010, SAC '10.