Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:


Or use your Academic/Social account:


You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.


Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message


Verify Password:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Lano, Kevin; Rahimi, Shekoufeh Kolahdouz; Clark, Tony (2014)
Publisher: Tilburg University
Languages: English
Types: Unknown
One hinderance to model transformation verification is the\ud large number of different MT languages which exist, resulting in a large\ud number of different language-specific analysis tools. As an alternative,\ud we define a single analysis process which can, in principle, analyse specifications\ud in several different transformation languages, by making use of\ud a common intermediate representation to express the semantics of transformations\ud in any of these languages. Some analyses can be performed\ud directly on the intermediate representation, and further semantic models\ud in specific verification formalisms can be derived from it. We illustrate\ud the approach by applying it to ATL.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • 1. K. Anastasakis, B. Bordbar, J. Kuster, Analysis of Model Transformations via Alloy, Modevva 2007.
    • 2. V. Bollati, J. Vara, A. Jimenez, E. Marcos, Applying MDE to the (semi-)automatic development of model transformations, Information and Software Technology, 2013.
    • 3. F. Buttner, M. Egea, J. Cabot, M. Gogolla, Verification of ATL transformations using transformation models and model finders, ICFEM 2012.
    • 4. J. Cabot, R. Clariso, E. Guerra, J. De Lara, Verification and Validation of Declarative Model-to-Model Transformations Through Invariants, Journal of Systems and Software, 2010.
    • 5. E. Guerra, J. de Lara, D. Kolovos, R. Paige, O. Marchi dos Santos, transML: A family of languages to model model transformations, MODELS 2010, LNCS vol. 6394, Springer-Verlag, 2010.
    • 6. F. Jouault, F. Allilaire, J. BĀ“ezivin, I. Kurtev, ATL: A model transformation tool, Sci. Comput. Program. 72(1-2) (2008) 31-39.
    • 7. S. Kolahdouz-Rahimi, K. Lano, S. Pillay, J. Troya, P. Van Gorp, Evaluation of model transformation approaches for model refactoring, Science of Computer Programming, 2013, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scico.2013.07.013.
    • 8. D. Kolovos, R. Paige, F. Polack, The Epsilon Transformation Language, in ICMT 2008, LNCS Vol. 5063, pp. 46-60, Springer-Verlag, 2008.
    • 9. K. Lano, S. Kolahdouz-Rahimi, T. Clark, Comparing verification techniques for model transformations, Modevva workshop, MODELS 2012.
    • 10. K. Lano, S. Kolahdouz-Rahimi, Constraint-based specification of model transformations, Journal of Systems and Software, vol 88, no. 2, February 2013, pp. 412-436.
    • 11. K. Lano, The UML-RSDS Manual, www.dcs.kcl.ac.uk/staff/kcl/uml2web/umlrsds.pdf, 2014.
    • 12. K. Lano, Null considered harmfull (for transformation verification), VOLT 2014.
    • 13. OMG, MOF 2.0 Query/View/Transformation Specification, 2011.
    • 14. OMG, Object Constraint Language 2.3 Specification, 2012.
    • 15. Z3 Theorem Prover, http://research.microsoft.com/enus/um/redmond/projects/z3/, 2012.
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article