Fine-grained metamodel-assisted model comparison

IWMCP '10 Pub Date : 2010-07-01 DOI:10.1145/1826147.1826152
M. Brand, Z. Protic, T. Verhoeff
{"title":"Fine-grained metamodel-assisted model comparison","authors":"M. Brand, Z. Protic, T. Verhoeff","doi":"10.1145/1826147.1826152","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this paper we consider two major concerns in the process of comparing two models -- representation and calculation of model differences.\n Based on previous work, we adopt a set of requirements which a difference representation should satisfy in order to be seamlessly used in Model Driven Engineering environments. Given these requirements, we represent model differences by means of a differences model, which conforms to a differences metamodel. We show that the traditional meta-modeling approaches, which conform to the four-layered meta-modeling architecture, lack means for the specification of differences metamodels which fully satisfy the specified requirements. Consequently, we specify a metametamodel which offers a different view on the traditional metamodeling approaches and we use it to define the differences metamodel which fully satisfies the specified requirements.\n Traditional approaches to difference calculation consider models as trees, and use the structure provided by these trees to guide the calculation process. The calculation algorithms used in those approaches are based on matching elements in one model to elements in another model by using one of the following four types of matching: static-identity, signature-based, similarity-based, and language-specific. We adopt the same philosophy, but unlike the traditional approaches which have a fixed calculation algorithm and a fixed matching type, we provide a calculation algorithm that is highly configurable and is designed such that all four traditional types of matching can be used together.\n As a proof-of-concept we have implemented a tool which allows representation, calculation, and visualization of model differences.","PeriodicalId":235689,"journal":{"name":"IWMCP '10","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2010-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"20","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"IWMCP '10","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/1826147.1826152","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 20

Abstract

In this paper we consider two major concerns in the process of comparing two models -- representation and calculation of model differences. Based on previous work, we adopt a set of requirements which a difference representation should satisfy in order to be seamlessly used in Model Driven Engineering environments. Given these requirements, we represent model differences by means of a differences model, which conforms to a differences metamodel. We show that the traditional meta-modeling approaches, which conform to the four-layered meta-modeling architecture, lack means for the specification of differences metamodels which fully satisfy the specified requirements. Consequently, we specify a metametamodel which offers a different view on the traditional metamodeling approaches and we use it to define the differences metamodel which fully satisfies the specified requirements. Traditional approaches to difference calculation consider models as trees, and use the structure provided by these trees to guide the calculation process. The calculation algorithms used in those approaches are based on matching elements in one model to elements in another model by using one of the following four types of matching: static-identity, signature-based, similarity-based, and language-specific. We adopt the same philosophy, but unlike the traditional approaches which have a fixed calculation algorithm and a fixed matching type, we provide a calculation algorithm that is highly configurable and is designed such that all four traditional types of matching can be used together. As a proof-of-concept we have implemented a tool which allows representation, calculation, and visualization of model differences.
细粒度元模型辅助模型比较
在本文中,我们考虑了比较两个模型过程中的两个主要问题——模型差异的表示和计算。基于之前的工作,我们采用了一组差异表示应该满足的需求,以便在模型驱动工程环境中无缝使用。给定这些需求,我们通过符合差异元模型的差异模型来表示模型差异。传统的元建模方法遵循四层元建模体系结构,缺乏对完全满足指定需求的差异元模型进行规范的手段。因此,我们指定了一个元模型,它提供了与传统元建模方法不同的视图,并使用它来定义完全满足指定需求的差异元模型。传统的差分计算方法将模型视为树,并使用这些树提供的结构来指导计算过程。这些方法中使用的计算算法基于使用以下四种匹配类型之一将一个模型中的元素与另一个模型中的元素进行匹配:静态身份、基于签名、基于相似度和特定于语言。我们采用相同的理念,但与传统方法不同,传统方法具有固定的计算算法和固定的匹配类型,我们提供了一种高度可配置的计算算法,并且设计成所有四种传统类型的匹配都可以一起使用。作为概念验证,我们已经实现了一个工具,它允许模型差异的表示、计算和可视化。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信