Consistency-preserving model evolution through transformations

Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics)

Volumn 2460 LNCS, Issue , 2002, Pages 212-227

  Engels, Gregor ^a   Heckel, Reiko ^a   Küster, Jochen M ^a   Groenewegen, Luuk ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PADERBORN   (Germany)

^b LEIDEN UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

INDUSTRIAL RESEARCH; SOFTWARE TESTING;

COMPLEX EVOLUTIONS; CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS; CONSISTENCY CHECKS; CONSISTENCY TESTS; INDUSTRIAL STANDARDS; MODEL BASED DEVELOPMENT; MODEL TRANSFORMATION; TRANSFORMATION RULES;

UNIFIED MODELING LANGUAGE;

EID: 79955165780     PISSN: 03029743     EISSN: 16113349     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1007/3-540-45800-x_18     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (16)

1. H. Ehrig, M. Pfender, and H. Schneider. Graph grammars: an algebraic approach. In 14th Annual IEEE Symposium on Switching and Automata Theory, pages 167-180. IEEE, 1973.
2. G. Engels, R. Heckel, and J. M. Küster. Rule-based specification of behavioral consistency based on the UML meta-model. In M. Gogolla and C. Kobryn, editors, UML 2001 - The Unified Modeling Language. Modeling Languages, Concepts, and Tools., 4th International Conference, Toronto, Canada, October 1-5, 2001, Proceedings, volume 2185 of LNCS, pages 272-287. Springer, 2001.
3. G. Engels, J. M. Küster, L. Groenewegen, and R. Heckel. Amethodology for specifying and analyzing consistency of object-oriented behavioral models. In V. Gruhn, editor, Proceedings of the 8th European Software Engineering Conference (ESEC), pages 186-195. ACM Press, 2001. (Pubitemid 35466923)
4. Formal Systems Europe (Ltd). Failures-Divergence-Refinement: FDR2 User Manual, 1997.
5. J.-J. Hiemer. Statecharts in CSP: Ein Prozessmodell in CSP zur Analyse von STATEMATE-Statecharts. DrKovac Verlag, 1999.
6. C. A. R. Hoare. Communicating Sequential Processes. Prentice Hall, 1985.
7. J. Jahnke and A. Zündorf. Using graph grammars for building the VARLET database reverse engineering environment. In G. Engels, H.-J. Kreowski, and G. Rozenberg, editors, Handbook of Graph Grammars and Computing by Graph Transformation, Volume 2: Applications, Languages, and Tools. World Scientific, 1999.
8. M. Löwe. Evolution patterns. Postdoctoral thesis, Technical University of Berlin. Tech. Report 98-4, Dept. of Comp. Sci, 1997.
9. W. McUmber and B. Cheng. AGeneral Framework for Formalizing UML with Formal Languages. In Proceedings 23rd International Conference on Software Engineering. IEEE Computer Society, May 2001.
10. T. Mens, S. Demeyer, and D. Janssens. Object-oriented refactoring using graph rewriting. Technical Report vub-prog-tr-02-01, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, 2001.
11. Object Management Group. Model driven architecture, 2001. http://www.omg.org/mda.
12. A. W. Roscoe. The Theory and Practice of Concurrency. Prentice Hall, 1998.
13. B. Rumpe, M. Schoenmakers, A. Radermacher, and A. Schürr. UML + ROOM as a standard ADL? In Proc. ICECCS'99 Fifth IEEE International Conference on Engineering of Complex Computer Systems, Las Vegas, USA. IEEE Computer Society Press, 1999.
14. B. Selic. Using UML for modeling complex real-time systems. In F. Mueller and A. Bestavros, editors, Languages, Compilers, and Tools for Embedded Systems, volume 1474 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 250-262. Springer Verlag, 1998.
15. G. Sunyé, D. Pollet, Y. LeTraon, and J.-M. Jézéquel. Refactoring UML models. In M. Gogolla and C. Kobryn, editors, UML 2001 - The Unified Modeling Language. Modeling Languages, Concepts, and Tools., 4th International Conference, Toronto, Canada, October 1-5, 2001, Proceedings, volume 2185 of LNCS, pages 134-148. Springer, 2001. (Pubitemid 33351890)
16. M. Wermelinger and J. Fiadero. Agraph transformation approach to software architecture reconfiguration. In H. Ehrig and G. Taentzer, editors, Joint APPLIGRAPH/GETGRATS Workshop on Graph Transformation Systems (Gra-Tra'2000), Berlin, Germany, March 2000.