A Technique for Metamodeling Diagram Types with Tool Support

Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering

Volumn 40, Issue 5, 2015, Pages 1359-1373

  García Magariño, Iván ^a   Palacios Navarro, Guillermo ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ZARAGOZA   (Spain)

Author keywords

Computer aided software engineering tool; Diagram type; Domain specific modeling language; Metamodel; Model driven engineering

Indexed keywords

EID: 84928408442     PISSN: 2193567X     EISSN: 21914281     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s13369-015-1607-z     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Tayan O.; Al BinAli A.M.; Kabir M.N.: Analytical and computer modelling of transportation systems for traffic bottleneck resolution: a Hajj case study. Arab. J. Sci. Eng. 39(10), 7013–7037 (2014)
2. Hassan A.; Kassem A.M.: Modeling, simulation and performance improvements of a PMSM based on functional model predictive control. Arab. J. Sci. Eng. 38(11), 3071–3079 (2013)
3. Memon R.N.; Salim S.S.; Ahmad R.: Analysis and classification of problems associated with requirements engineering education: Towards an integrated view. Arab. J. Sci. Eng. 39(3), 1923–1935 (2014)
4. OMG:UML Diagram Interchange Specification. Tech. rep.; Object Management Group, http://www.omg.org/ (Last Accessed 18 Dec 2014), (2006-04-04)
5. Rasool G.; Mäder P.: A customizable approach to design patterns recognition based on feature types. Arab. J. Sci. Eng. 39(12), 8851–8873 (2014)
6. Alshayeb M.; Eisa Y.; Ahmed M.A.: Object-oriented class stability prediction: a comparison between artificial neural network and support vector machine. Arab. J. Sci. Eng. 39(11), 7865–7876 (2014)
7. Costagliola G.; Delucia A.; Orefice S.; Polese G.: A classification framework to support the design of visual languages. J. Vis. Lang. Comput. 13(6), 573–600 (2002)
8. Ingenias.: INGENIAS Development Kit. http://ingenias.sourceforge.net/ (Last Accessed 18 Dec 2014), (2014)
9. OMG.: Meta Object Facility (MOF) Specification. Version 1.4. Tech. rep.; Object Management Group, http://www.omg.org/ (Last Accessed 18 Dec 2014), (2002-04-03)
10. Budinsky F.: Eclipse Modelling Framework: Developer’s Guide. Addison Wesley, Boston (2003)
11. Moore, B.; Dean, D.; Gerber, A.; Wagenknecht, G.; Vanderheyden, P.: Eclipse Development Using Graphical Editing Framework and the Eclipse Modelling Framework. IBM Redbooks, New York, (2004)
12. García-Magariño I.; Fuentes-Fernández F.; Gómez-Sanz J.J.: Guideline for the definition of EMF metamodels using an entity-relationship approach. Inform. Softw. Technol. 51(8), 1217–1230 (2009). doi:10.1016/j.infsof.2009.02.003
13. Kelly S.: GOPRR Description. PhD dissertation Appendix 1 (1997)
14. García-Magariño I.; Fuentes-Fernández R.: A technique for defining metamodel translations. IEICE Trans. Inform. Syst. 92(10), 2043–2052 (2009)
15. Pavón J.; Gómez-Sanz J.J.: Agent oriented software engineering with INGENIAS. Multi-Agent Syst. Appl. III 2691, 394–403 (2003)
16. Alanen M.; Lundkvist T.; Porres I.: Creating and reconciling diagrams after executing model transformations. Sci. Comput. Progr. 68(3), 128–151 (2007)
17. Apes: APES2: A Process Engineering Software. http://apes2.berlios.de/en/links.html (last accessed 12/18/2014), (2014)
18. Boronat A.; Carsí J.; Ramos I.; Letelier P.: Formal model merging applied to class diagram integration. Electron. Notes Theor. Comput. Sci. 166, 5–26 (2007)
19. Bouml.: BOUML: An UML Tool Box. http://www.bouml.fr (last Accessed 18 Dec 2014), (2014)
20. Celms, E.; Kalnins, A.; Lace, L.: Diagram definition facilities based on metamodel mappings. In: Proceedings of the 18th International Conference, OOPSLA, pp. 23–32 (2003)
21. Heuer A.; Stricker V.; Budnik C.J.; Konrad S.; Lauenroth K.; Pohl K.: Defining variability in activity diagrams and petri nets. Sci. Comput. Progr. 78(12), 2414–2432 (2012)
22. Kalnins A.; Barzdins J.; Celms E.; Lace L.; Opmanis M.; Podnieks K.; Zarins A.: The first step towards generic modelling tool. Proc. Baltic DB&IS 2, 167–180 (2002)
23. Koskinen, J.; Peltonen, J.; Selonen P.; Systä, T.; Koskimies, K.: Model processing tools in UML. In: Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE-01), pp. 819–820 (2001)
24. Lace, L.; Celms, E.; Kalnins, A.: Diagram definition facilities in a generic modeling tool. In: Proceedings of International Conference Modelling and Simulation of Business Systems, Vilnius, pp. 220–224 (2003)
25. Laleau R.; Polack F.: Using formal metamodels to check consistency of functional views in information systems specification. Inform. Softw. Technol. 50(7), 797–814 (2008)
26. Molina A.I.; Gallardo J.; Redondo M.A.; Ortega M.; Giraldo W.J.: Metamodel-driven definition of a visual modeling language for specifying interactive groupware applications: an empirical study. J. Syst. Softw. 86(7), 1772–1789 (2013)
27. OMG.: Unified Modeling Language: Superstructure. Tech. rep.; Object Management Group, http://www.omg.org/ (Last Accessed 18 Dec 2014), (2007-11-02)
28. OMG.:Unified Modeling Language: Infrastructure. Tech. rep.; Object Management Group, http://www.omg.org/ (Last Accessed 18 Dec 2014), (2007-11-04)
29. OMG: Software & Systems Process Engineering Metamodel Specification (SPEM) Version 2.0. Tech. rep.; Object Management Group, http://www.omg.org/ (Last Accessed 18 Dec 2014), (2008-04-01)
30. Rational-Rose.: IBM Rational Software: Rational Rose Family. http://www-03.ibm.com/software/products/en/ratirosefami/ (Last Accessed 18 Dec 2014), (2014)
31. Vroom R.: A general example model for automotive suppliers of the development process and its related information. Comput. Indust. 31(3), 255–280 (1996)
32. Wagner G.: The agent–object-relationship metamodel: towards a unified view of state and behavior. Inform. Syst. 28(5), 475–504 (2003)
33. Wohlin C.; Runeson P.; Höst M.; Ohlsson M.C.; Regnell B.; Wesslén A.: Experimentation in software engineering. Springer, Berlin (2012)