Incremental integrity checking of UML/OCL conceptual schemas

Journal of Systems and Software

Volumn 82, Issue 9, 2009, Pages 1459-1478

  Cabot, Jordi ^a,b   Teniente, Ernest ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITAT OBERTA DE CATALUNYA   (Spain)

^c UNIVERSITAT POLITÈCNICA DE CATALUNYA   (Spain)

Author keywords

Efficient constraint checking; Incremental; Model driven development; OCL; Runtime checking; UML

Indexed keywords

EFFICIENT CONSTRAINT CHECKING; INCREMENTAL; MODEL-DRIVEN DEVELOPMENT; OCL; RUNTIME CHECKING; UML;

COMPUTER SOFTWARE; QUALITY ASSURANCE; SPECIFICATIONS; SYSTEMS ANALYSIS;

MODEL CHECKING;

EID: 68949105369     PISSN: 01641212     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jss.2009.03.009     Document Type: Article

References (58)

1. Al-Jumaily H.T., Cuadra D., and Martínez P. OCL2Trigger: deriving active mechanisms for relational databases using Model-Driven Architecture. Journal of Systems and Software 81 12 (2008) 2299-2314
2. Altenhofen, M., Hettel, T., Kusterer, S., 2007. OCL Support in an industrial environment. In: Proc. MoDELS Workshops 2006 (revised papers), LNCS, vol. 4364, pp. 169-178.
3. Anastasakis, K., Bordbar, B., Georg, G., Ray, I., 2007. UML2Alloy: a challenging model transformation. In: Proc. 10th Int. Conf. on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems (MoDELS'07), LNCS, vol. 4735, pp. 436-450.
4. Babes-Bolyai. Object Constraint Language Environment 2.0. .
5. Balaban M., and Shoval P. MEER - an EER model enhanced with structure methods. Information Systems 27 4 (2002) 245-275
6. Barnett, M., Leino, K.R.M., Schulte, W., 2004. The Spec# programming system: an overview. In: Proc. Int. Workshop on Construction and Analysis of Safe, Secure, and Interoperable Smart Devices, LNCS, vol. 3362, pp. 49-69.
7. Benzaken V., Doucet A., and Schafer X. Integrity constraint checking optimization based on abstract databases generation and program analysis. Ingéniere des systèmes d'information 3 1 (1995) 9-28
8. ® Architect 2006. .
9. Briand L.C., Labiche Y., Penta M.D., and Yan-Bondoc H. An experimental investigation of formality in UML-based development. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 31 10 (2005) 833-849
10. Brucker, A.D., Wolff, B., 2006. The HOL-OCL book. ETH Technical Report, 525, 2006.
11. Cabot, J., 2006. Incremental integrity checking in UML/OCL conceptual schemas. Ph.D. Thesis. Adv: E. Teniente. Technical University of Catalonia.
12. Cabot, J., 2007. From declarative to imperative UML/OCL operation specifications. In: Proc. 26th Int. Conf. on Conceptual Modeling (ER 2007) LNCS, vol. 4801, pp. 198-213.
13. Cabot, J., Teniente, E., 2004. Determining the structural events that may violate an integrity constraint. In: Proc. 7th Int. Conf. on the Unified Modeling Language (UML'04), LNCS, vol. 3273, pp. 173-187.
14. Cabot, J., Teniente, E., 2005. Computing the relevant instances that may violate an OCL constraint. In: Proc. 17th Int. Conf. on Advanced Information Systems Engineering (CAiSE'05), LNCS, vol. 3520, pp. 48-62.
15. Cabot, J., Teniente, E., 2006. Incremental evaluation of OCL constraints. In: Proc. 18th Int. Conf. on Advanced Information Systems Engineering (CAiSE'06), LNCS, vol. 4001, pp. 81-95.
16. Cabot J., and Teniente E. Transformation techniques for OCL constraints. Science of Computer Programming 68 3 (2007)
17. Cabot, J., Teniente, E. A tool for the incremental evaluation of OCL constraints. Available: .
18. Ceri, S., Widom, J., Deriving production rules for constraint maintenance. In: Proc. 16th Int. Conf. on Very Large Databases (VLDB'90), pp. 566-577.
19. Ceri S., Fraternali P., Bongio A., Brambilla M., Comai S., and Matera M. Designing Data-Intensive Web Applications. Morgan Kaufmann (2002)
20. Clavel, M., Egea, M., 2006. ITP/OCL: a rewriting-based validation tool for UML + OCL static class diagrams. In: Proc. 11th Int. Conf. on Algebraic Methodology and Software Technology, vol. 4019, pp. 368-373.
21. Compuware. OptimalJ. .
22. Chae H.S., Yeom K., and Kim T.Y. Specifying and validating structural constraints of analysis class models using OCL. Information and Software Technology 50 (2007) 436-448
23. Decker, H., 2008. Extending inconsistency-tolerant integrity checking by semantic query optimization. In: Proc. 19th Int. Conf. on Database and Expert Systems Applications (DEXA'08), LNCS, vol. 5181, pp. 89-96.
24. Demuth, B., Hussmann, H., Loecher, S., 2001. OCL as a specification language for business rules in database applications. In: Proc. 4th Int. Conf. on the Unified Modeling Language (UML'01), LNCS, vol. 2185, pp. 104-117.
25. Dresden. Dresden OCL Toolkit. .
26. Dzidek, W.J., Briand, L.C., Labiche, Y., 2005. Lessons learned from developing a dynamic OCL constraint enforcement tool for java. In: Proc. MODELS 2005 Workshops, LNCS, vol. 3844, pp. 10-19.
27. Elmasri R., and Navathe S. Fundamentals of Database Systems. fifth ed. (2006), Addison-Wesley
28. Embley D.W., Barry D.K., and Woodfield S. Object-Oriented Systems Analysis. A Model-Driven Approach (1992), Yourdon Press Computing Series, Yourdon
29. Garcia M. Efficient integrity checking for essential MOF + OCL in software repositories. Journal of Object Technology 7 6 (2008) 101
30. Gogolla M., and Richters M. Expressing UML class diagrams properties with OCL. In: Clark A., and Warmer J. (Eds). Object Modeling with the OCL (2002), Springer-Verlag 85-114
31. Gupta, A., Mumick, I.S., 1999. Maintenance of materialized views: problems, techniques, and applications. In: Materialized Views Techniques, Implementations, and Applications, The MIT Press, pp. 145-157.
32. Hamie, A., On the relationship between the object constraint language (OCL) and the java modeling language (JML). In: Proc. 7th Int. Conf. on Parallel and Distributed Computing, Applications and Technologies, pp. 411-414.
33. InteractiveObjects. ArcStyler v.5. .
34. ISO/TC97/SC5/WG3: Concepts and Terminology for the Conceptual Schema and Information Base. ISO, 1982.
35. Jackson D. Alloy: a lightweight object modelling notation. ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology 11 2 (2002) 256-290
36. KentModellingFramework. Kent OCL Library. .
37. KlasseObjecten. Octopus: OCL Tool for Precise Uml Specifications. .
38. Laleau R., and Polack F. Specification of integrity-preserving operations in information systems by using a formal UML-based language. Information and Software Technology 43 (2001) 693-704
39. Leavens G.T., Baker A.L., and Ruby C. JML: a notation for detailed design. In: Kilov H., Rumpe B., and Simmonds I. (Eds). Behavioral Specifications of Businesses and Systems (1999), Kluwer 175-188
40. Leuschel M., and Butler M. ProB: an automated analysis toolset for the B method. International Journal on Software Tools for Technology Transfer 10 2 (2008) 185-203
41. Melton J., and Simon A.R. SQL:1999. Understanding Relational Language Components (2002), Morgan Kaufmann
42. Mellor S.J., and Balcer M.J. Executable UML. Object Technology Series (2002), Addison-Wesley
43. Meyer b. Eiffel: programming for reusability and extendibility. SIGPLAN Notices 22 2 (1987) 85-94
44. NetBeans. Metadata Repository Project. .
45. NoMagicInc. MagicDraw UML v. 10.5. .
46. Olivé, A., 2003. Derivation rules in object-oriented conceptual modeling languages. In: Proc. 15th Int. Conf. on Advanced Information Systems Engineering (CAiSE'03), LNCS, vol. 2681, pp. 404-420.
47. Olivé, A., 2005. Conceptual schema-centric development: a grand challenge for information systems research. In: Proc. 17th Int. Conf. on Advanced Information Systems Engineering (CAiSE'05), LNCS, vol. 3520, pp. 1-15.
48. OMG: UML 2.0 OCL Specification. OMG Adopted Specification (ptc/03-10-14), 2003.
49. OMG: UML 2.0 Superstructure Specification. OMG Adopted Specification (ptc/03-08-02), 2003.
50. OMG: MDA Guide Version 1.0.1., 2003.
51. Pastor O., Gómez J., Insfrán E., and Pelechano V. The OO-method approach for information systems modeling: from object-oriented conceptual modeling to automated programming. Information Systems 26 7 (2001) 507-534
52. Plat, N., Larsen, P.G., 1992. An overview of the ISO/VDM-SL standard. SIGPLAN Notices 27(8), 76-82.
53. Selic B. The pragmatics of model-driven development. IEEE Software 20 5 (2003) 19-25
54. Softeam. Objecteering/UML v. 5.3. .
55. Software, R. Rational Rose. .
56. Thalheim, B., Achievements and problems of conceptual modelling. In: Proc. 1st Workshop on Active Conceptual Modeling of Learning (ACM-L'06), LNCS, vol. 4512, pp. 72-96.
57. Wieringa R. A survey of structured and object-oriented software specification methods and techniques. ACM Computing Surveys 30 4 (1998) 459-527
58. Wolschon, M., Johner, C. OCL4Java. Available: .