Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Tutorial Introduction to Graph Transformation: A Software Engineering Perspective

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Graph Transformation (ICGT 2002)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 2505))

Included in the following conference series:

  • 924 Accesses

Abstract

We give an introduction to graph transformation, not only for researchers in software engineering, but based on applications of graph transformation in this domain. In particular, we demonstrate the use of graph transformation to model object- and component-based systems and to specify syntax and semantics of diagram languages. Along the way we introduce the basic concepts, discuss different approaches, and mention relevant theory and tools.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. From UML to Java and Back Again: The Fujaba homepage. http://www.fujaba.de.

  2. M. Andries, G. Engels, and J. Rekers. How to represent a visual specification. In K. Marriott and B. Meyer, editors, Visual Language Theory, pages 241–255. Springer-Verlag, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  3. J.W. Backus. The syntax and semantics of the proposed international algebraic language of the Zurich ACM-GAMM Conference. In International Conference on Information Processing, Paris, pages 125–131, 1959.

    Google Scholar 

  4. P. Baldan, A. Corradini, H. Ehrig, M. Löwe, U. Montanari, and F. Rossi. Concurrent semantics of algebraic graph transformation. In H.-J. Kreowski, U. Montanari, and G. Rozenberg, editors. Handbook of Graph Grammars and Computing by Graph Transformation, Volume 3: Concurrency and Distribution. World Scientific, 1999. Ehrig et al. [29], pages 107–188.

    Google Scholar 

  5. R. Bardohl and H. Ehrig. Conceptual model of the graphical editor GenGed for the visual definition of visual languages. In G. Engels, H.-J. Kreowski, and G. Rozenberg, editors. Proc. 6th Int. Workshop on Theory and Application of Graph Transformation (TAGT’98), Paderborn, November 1998, volume 1764 of LNCS. Springer-Verlag, 2000. Ehrig et al. [25], pages 252–266.

    Google Scholar 

  6. R. Bardohl, G. Taentzer, M. Minas, and A. Schürr. Application of graph transformation to visual languages. 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. Engels et al. [24], pages 105–180.

    Google Scholar 

  7. H. P. Barendregt, M. C. J. D. van Eekelen, J. R. W. Glauert, J. R. Kennaway, M. J. Plasmeier, and M. R. Sleep. Term graph rewriting. In PARLE, volume 259 of LNCS, pages 141–158. Springer-Verlag, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  8. E. Barendsen and S. Smeters. Graph rewriting aspects of functional programming. 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. Engels et al. [24], pages 63–102.

    Google Scholar 

  9. L. Baresi. Formal customization of graphical notations. PhD thesis, Dipartimento di Elettronica e Informazione-Politecnico di Milano, 1997. In Italian.

    Google Scholar 

  10. M. Bauderon and H. Jacquet. Categorical product as a generic graph rewriting mechanism. Applied Categorical Structures, 9(1), 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  11. P. Bottoni, M. Koch, F. Parisi-Presicce, and G. Taentzer. A visualization of OCL using collaborations. In C. Kobryn, editors. Proc. UML 2001-Modeling Language, Concepts and Tools, Toronto, Kanada, LNCS. Springer-Verlag, 2001. Gogolla and Kobryn [43], pages 257–271.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  12. P. Bottoni, A. Schürr, and G. Taentzer. Efficient Parsing of Visual Languages based on Critical Pair Analysis and Contextual Layered Graph Transformation. In Proc. IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages, September 2000. Long version available as technical report SI-2000-06, University of Rom.

    Google Scholar 

  13. G. Busatto, G. Engels, K. Mehner, and A. Wagner. A framework for adding packages to graph transformation approaches. In G. Engels, H.-J. Kreowski, and G. Rozenberg, editors. Proc. 6th Int. Workshop on Theory and Application of Graph Transformation (TAGT’98), Paderborn, November 1998, volume 1764 of LNCS. Springer-Verlag, 2000. Ehrig et al. [25], pages 352–367.

    Google Scholar 

  14. D. Coleman, P. Arnold, S. Bodof, C. Dollin, H. Gilchrist, F. Hayes, and P. Jeremes. Object Oriented Development, The Fusion Method. Prentice Hall, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  15. A. Corradini and U. Montanari. Specification of Concurrent Systems: from Petri Nets to Graph Grammars. In Quality of Communication-Based Systems, pages 35–52. Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  16. A. Corradini, U. Montanari, and F. Rossi. Graph processes. Fundamenta Informaticae, 26(3,4):241–266, 1996.

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  17. A. Corradini, U. Montanari, F. Rossi, H. Ehrig, R. Heckel, and M. Löwe. Algebraic approaches to graph transformation, Part I: Basic concepts and double pushout approach. In nberg [82] pages 163–245.

    Google Scholar 

  18. A. Corradini and F. Rossi. A new term graph rewriting formalism: Hyperedge replacement jungle rewriting. In Sleep M.R., Plasmeijer M.R., and M.C. van Eekelen, editors, Term Graph Rewriting: Theory and Practice, chapter 8, pages 101–116. John Wiley & Sons Ltd, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  19. B. Courcelle. The monadic second-order logic of graphs I, recognizable sets of finite graphs. Information and Computation, 8521:12–75, 1990.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  20. B. Courcelle. The expression of graph properties and graph transformations in monadic second-order logic. In Rozenberg [82].

    Google Scholar 

  21. F. Drewes, B. Hoffmann, and D. Plump. Hierarchical graph transformation. In J. Tiuryn, editor, Foundations of Software Science and Computation Structures (FoSSACS’00), Berlin, Germany, volume 1784 of LNCS. Springer-Verlag, March/April 2000.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  22. F. Drewes, H.-J. Kreowski, and A. Habel. Hyperedge replacement graph grammars. In Rozenberg [82], pages 95–162.

    Google Scholar 

  23. D. D’Souza and A. Wills. Components and Frameworks with UML: The Catalysis Approach. Addison-Wesley, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  24. H. Ehrig, 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.

    Google Scholar 

  25. H. Ehrig, G. Engels, H.-J. Kreowski, and G. Rozenberg, editors. Proc. 6th Int. Workshop on Theory and Application of Graph Transformation (TAGT’98), Paderborn, November 1998, volume 1764 of LNCS. Springer-Verlag, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  26. H. Ehrig and A. Habel. Graph grammars with application conditions. In G. Rozenberg and A. Salomaa, editors, The Book of L, pages 87–100. Springer-Verlag, 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  27. H. Ehrig, A. Habel, H.-J. Kreowski, and F. Parisi Presicce. Parallelism and concurrency in high-level replacement systems. Math. Struct. in Comp. Science, 1:361–404, 1991.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  28. H. Ehrig, R. Heckel, M. Korff, M. Löwe, L. Ribeiro, A. Wagner, and A. Corradini. Algebraic approaches to graph transformation, Part II: Single pushout approach and comparison with double pushout approach. In Rozenberg [82], pages 247–312.

    Google Scholar 

  29. H. Ehrig, H.-J. Kreowski, U. Montanari, and G. Rozenberg, editors. Handbook of Graph Grammars and Computing by Graph Transformation, Volume 3: Concurrency and Distribution. World Scientific, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  30. H. Ehrig and M. Löwe. Categorical principles, techniques and results for high-level replacement systems in computer science. Applied Categorical Structures, 1(1):21–50, 1993.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  31. H. Ehrig, M. Pfender, and H.J. Schneider. Graph grammars: an algebraic approach. In 14th Annual IEEE Symposium on Switching and Automata Theory, pages 167–180. IEEE, 1973.

    Google Scholar 

  32. J. Engelfriet and G. Rozenberg. Node replacement graph grammars. In Rozenberg [82], pages 1–94.

    Google Scholar 

  33. G. Engels, R. Gall, M. Nagl, and W. Schäfer. Software specification using graph grammars. Computing, 31:317–346, 1983.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  34. G. Engels, J.H. Hausmann, R. Heckel, and St. Sauer. Dynamic meta modeling: A graphical approach to the operational semantics of behavioral diagrams in UML. In A. Evans, S. Kent, and B. Selic, editors, Proc. UML 2000, York, UK, volume 1939 of LNCS, pages 323–337. Springer-Verlag, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  35. G. Engels, R. Heckel, and J.M. Küster. Rule-based specification of behavioral consistency based on the UML meta model. In Gogolla and Kobryn [43].

    Google Scholar 

  36. G. Engels and A. Schürr. Hierarchical graphs, graph types and meta types. In Proc. of SEGRAGRA’95 ”Graph Rewriting and Computation”, volume 2 of Electronic Notes in TCS, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  37. C. Ermel, M. Rudolf, and G. Taentzer. The AGG approach: Language and tool 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. Engels et al. [24], pages 551–601.

    Google Scholar 

  38. A. Finkelstein, J. Kramer, B. Nuseibeh, M. Goedicke, and L. Finkelstein. Viewpoints: A framework for integrating multiple perspectives in system development. Int. Journal of Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering, 2(1):31–58, March 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  39. T. Fischer, J. Niere, L. Torunski, and A. Zündorf. Story diagrams: A new graph transformation language based on UML and Java. In G. Engels, H.-J. Kreowski, and G. Rozenberg, editors. Proc. 6th Int. Workshop on Theory and Application of Graph Transformation (TAGT’98), Paderborn, November 1998, volume 1764 of LNCS. Springer-Verlag, 2000. Ehrig et al. [25].

    Google Scholar 

  40. P. Fradet, D. Le Métayer, and M. Périn. Consistency checking for multiple view software architectures. In Proc. Joint European Software Engineering Conference and Symp. on Foundations of Software Engineering, ESEC/FSE’99, volume 1687 of LNCS, pages 410–428, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  41. C. Ghezzi, M. Jazayeri, and D. Mandrioli. Fundamentals of Software Engineering. Prentice Hall Int., 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  42. M. Goedicke. Paradigms of modular software development. In R. J. Mitchell, editor, Managing Complexity in Software Engineering, volume 17 of IEE Computing Series. Peter Peregrinus, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  43. M. Gogolla and C. Kobryn, editors. Proc. UML 2001-Modeling Language, Concepts and Tools, Toronto, Kanada, LNCS. Springer-Verlag, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  44. M. Große-Rhode, F. Parisi-Presicce, and M. Simeoni. Refinement of graph transformation systems via rule expressions. In G. Engels, H.-J. Kreowski, and G. Rozenberg, editors. Proc. 6th Int. Workshop on Theory and Application of Graph Transformation (TAGT’98), Paderborn, November 1998, volume 1764 of LNCS. Springer-Verlag, 2000. Ehrig et al. [25], pages 368–382.

    Google Scholar 

  45. A. Habel, R. Heckel, and G. Taentzer. Graph grammars with negative application conditions. Fundamenta Informaticae, 26(3,4):287–313, 1996.

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  46. D. Harel and A. Naamad. The STATEMATE Semantics of Statecharts. ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology, 5(4):293–333, oct 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  47. J.H. Hausmann, R. Heckel, and G. Taentzer. Detecting conflicting functional requirements in a use case driven approach: A static analysis technique based on graph transformation. In Proc. Int. Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE’2002), Orlando, FL, May 2002. ACM/IEEE Computer Society.

    Google Scholar 

  48. R. Heckel, A. Corradini, H. Ehrig, and M. Löwe. Horizontal and vertical structuring of typed graph transformation systems. Math. Struc. in Comp. Science, 6(6):613–648, 1996.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  49. R. Heckel, J. Küster, and G. Taentzer. Confluence of typed attributed graph transformation systems. In A. Corradini and H.-J. Kreowski, editors, Proc. 1st Int. Conference on Graph Transformation (ICGT 02), Barcelona, Spain, LNCS. Springer-Verlag, October 2002. To appear.

    Google Scholar 

  50. R. Heckel and St. Sauer. Strengthening UML collaboration diagrams by state transformations. In H. Hußmann, editor, Proc. Fundamental Approaches to Software Engineering (FASE’2001), Genova, Italy, volume 2185 of LNCS. Springer-Verlag, April 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  51. R. Heckel and A. Wagner. Ensuring consistency of conditional graph grammars-a constructive approach. In Proc. of SEGRAGRA’ 95 “Graph Rewriting and Computation”, volume 2 of Electronic Notes in TCS, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  52. D. Hirsch, P. Inverardi, and U. Montanari. Modeling software architectures and styles with graph grammars and constraint solving. In Proceedings of the First Working IFIP Conference on Software Architecture, San Antonio, Texas, E.E.U.U., February 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  53. D. Hirsch and M. Montanari. Synchronized hyperedge replacement with name mobility. In Proc. CONCUR 2001, Aarhus, Denmark, volume 2154 of LNCS, pages 121–136. Springer-Verlag, August 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  54. C. Hoare. Communicating sequential processes. Communicat. Associat. Comput. Mach., 21(8):666–677, 1978.

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  55. B. Hoffmann and M. Minas. A generic model for diagram syntax and semantics. In Proc. ICALP2000 Workshop on Graph Transformation and Visual Modelling Techniques, Geneva, Switzerland. Carleton Scientific, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  56. D. Janssens. Actor grammars and local actions. In H.-J. Kreowski, U. Montanari, and G. Rozenberg, editors. Handbook of Graph Grammars and Computing by Graph Transformation, Volume 3: Concurrency and Distribution. World Scientific, 1999. Ehrig et al. [29], pages 57–106.

    Google Scholar 

  57. D. Janssens and G. Rozenberg. On the structure of node-label controlled graph grammars. Information Science, 20:191–216, 1980.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  58. A. Kent and D. Akehurst. A relational approach to defining transformations in a metamodel. In Proc. UML 2002, Dresden, Germany, LNCS. Springer-Verlag, 2002. To appear.

    Google Scholar 

  59. H.J. Köhler, U. Nickel, J. Niere, and A. Zündorf. Integrating UML diagrams for production control systems. In Proc. of the 22th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE), Limerick, Irland. ACM Press, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  60. J. Kramer and J. Magee. Distributed software architectures. In Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE’ 97), pages 633–634. Springer-Verlag, May 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  61. H.-J. Kreowski and S. Kuske. On the interleaving semantics of transformation units-a step into GRACE. In 5th Int. Workshop on Graph Grammars and their Application to Computer Science, Williamsburg’ 94, LNCS 1073, pages 89–106. Springer-Verlag, 1996.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  62. S. Kuske. A formal semantics of UML state machines based on structured graph transformation. In C. Kobryn, editors. Proc. UML 2001-Modeling Language, Concepts and Tools, Toronto, Kanada, LNCS. Springer-Verlag, 2001. Gogolla and Kobryn [43].

    Google Scholar 

  63. Le Métayer, D. Software architecture styles as graph grammars. In Proceedings of the Fourth ACM SIGSOFT Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering, volume 216 of ACM Software Engineering Notes, pages 15–23, New York, October 16–18 1996. ACM Press.

    Google Scholar 

  64. M. Löwe. Algebraic approach to single-pushout graph transformation. Theoret. Comput. Sci., 109:181–224, 1993.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  65. M. Löwe, M. Korff, and A. Wagner. An algebraic framework for the transformation of attributed graphs. In M. R. Sleep, M. J. Plasmeijer, and M.C. van Eekelen, editors, Term Graph Rewriting: Theory and Practice, chapter 14, pages 185–199. John Wiley & Sons Ltd, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  66. K. Marriott, B. Meyer, and K.B. Wittenburg. A survey of visual language specification and recognition. In B. Meyer K. Marriott, editor, Visual Language Theory, chapter 2, pages 5–85. Springer-Verlag, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  67. R. Milner. Communication and Concurrency. Prentice-Hall, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  68. R. Milner. Bigraphical reactive systems. In Kim Guldstrand Larsen and Mogens Nielsen, editors, Proc. 12th Intl. Conference on Concurrency Theory (CONCUR 2002), Aalborg, Denmark, volume 2154 of LNCS, pages 16–35. Springer-Verlag, August 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  69. M. Minas. Hypergraphs as a uniform diagram representation model. In G. Engels, H.-J. Kreowski, and G. Rozenberg, editors. Proc. 6th Int. Workshop on Theory and Application of Graph Transformation (TAGT’98), Paderborn, November 1998, volume 1764 of LNCS. Springer-Verlag, 2000. Ehrig et al. [25], pages 281–295.

    Google Scholar 

  70. U. Montanari. Separable graphs, planar graphs and web grammars. Information and Control 16, pages 243–267, 1970.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  71. U. Montanari, M. Pistore, and F. Rossi. Modeling concurrent, mobile, and coordinated systems via graph transformation. In H.-J. Kreowski, U. Montanari, and G. Rozenberg, editors. Handbook of Graph Grammars and Computing by Graph Transformation, Volume 3: Concurrency and Distribution. World Scientific, 1999. Ehrig et al. [29], pages 189–268.

    Google Scholar 

  72. M. Nagl. Graph-Grammatiken: Theorie, Implementierung, Anwendungen. Vieweg, 1979.

    Google Scholar 

  73. M. Nagl, editor. Building Tightly Integrated Software Development Environments: The IPSEN Approach, LNCS 1170. Springer-Verlag, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  74. Object Management Group. Meta object facility (MOF) specification, September 1999. http://www.omg.org.

  75. Object Management Group. UML specification version 1.4, 2001. http://www.celigent.com/omg/umlrtf/.

  76. J. L. Pfaltz and A. Rosenfeld. Web grammars. Int. Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 609–619, 1969.

    Google Scholar 

  77. G. Plotkin. A structural approach to operational semantics. Technical Report DAIMI FN-19, Aarhus University, Computer Science Department, 1981.

    Google Scholar 

  78. D. Plump. Term graph rewriting. 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. Engels et al. [24], pages 3–62.

    Google Scholar 

  79. T. W. Pratt. Pair grammars, graph languages and string-to-graph translations. Journal of Computer and System Sciences, 5:560–595, 1971.

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  80. T.W. Pratt. Definition of programming language semantics using grammars for hierarchical graphs. In H. Ehrig, V. Claus, and G. Rozenberg, editors, 1st Int. Workshop on Graph Grammars and their Application to Computer Science and Biology, LNCS 73, volume 73 of LNCS. Springer-Verlag, 1979.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  81. J. Rekers and A. Schürr. Defining and parsing visual languages with layered graph grammars. Journal of Visual Languages and Computing, 8(1):27–55, 1997.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  82. G. Rozenberg, editor. Handbook of Graph Grammars and Computing by Graph Transformation, Volume 1: Foundations. World Scientific, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  83. H.-J. Schneider. Chomsky-Systeme für partielle Ordnungen. Technical Report 3-3, Universität Erlangen, 1970.

    Google Scholar 

  84. A. Schürr. Specification of graph translators with triple graph grammars. In Tinhofer, editor, Proc. WG’94 Int. Workshop on Graph-Theoretic Concepts in Computer Science, number 903 in LNCS, pages 151–163. Springer-Verlag, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  85. A. Schürr. Logic based programmed structure rewriting systems. Fundamenta Informaticae, 26(3,4):363–386, 1996.

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  86. A. Schürr. Programmed graph replacement systems. In Rozenberg [82], pages 479–546.

    Google Scholar 

  87. A. Schürr, A.J. Winter, and A. Zündorf. The PROGRES approach: Language and 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. Engels et al. [24], pages 487–550.

    Google Scholar 

  88. D. Scott and C. Strachey. Towards a mathematical semantics for computer languages. In Computers and Automata, pages 19–46. Wiley, 1971.

    Google Scholar 

  89. M. Shaw and D. Garlan. Software Architecture: Perspectives on an Emerging Discipline. Prentice Hall, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  90. S. H. von Solms. Node-label controlled graph grammars with context conditions. Intern. J. Computer Math 15, pages 39–49, 1984.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  91. G. Taentzer. Parallel and Distributed Graph Transformation: Formal Description and Application to Communication-Based Systems. PhD thesis, TU Berlin, 1996. Shaker Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  92. G. Taentzer, I. Fischer, M. Koch, and V. Volle. Distributed graph transformation with application to visual design of distributed systems. In H.-J. Kreowski, U. Montanari, and G. Rozenberg, editors. Handbook of Graph Grammars and Computing by Graph Transformation, Volume 3: Concurrency and Distribution. World Scientific, 1999. Ehrig et al. [29].

    Google Scholar 

  93. G. Taentzer, M. Goedicke, and T. Meyer. Dynamic change manegement by distributed graph transformation: Towards configurable distributed systems. In Proceedings TAGT’98, volume 1764 of LNCS, pages 179–193. Springer-Verlag, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  94. M. von der Beek. A comparison of Statecharts variants. In Formal Techniques in Real-Time and Fault-Tolerant Systems. Springer LNCS 863, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  95. C.P. Wadsworth. Semantics and Pragmatics of the Lambda Calculus. PhD thesis, University of Oxford, 1971.

    Google Scholar 

  96. M. Wermelinger and J.L. Fiadero. A graph transformation approach to software architecture reconfiguration. In H. Ehrig and G. Taentzer, editors, Joint APPLIGRAPH/GETGRATS Workshop on Graph Transformation Systems (GraTra’2000), Berlin, Germany, March 2000. http://tfs.cs.tu-berlin.de/gratra2000/.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Politecnico di Milano, Italy

    Luciano Baresi

  2. University of Paderborn, Germany

    Reiko Heckel

Authors
  1. Luciano Baresi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Reiko Heckel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Dipartimento di Informatica, Università di Pisa, Corso Italia 40, 56125, Pisa, Italy

    Andrea Corradini

  2. Computer Science Department, Technical University of Berlin, Franklinstraße 28/29, 10587, Berlin, Germany

    Hartmut Ehrig

  3. Computer Science Department, University of Bremen, Bibliothekstraße 1, 28359, Bremen, Germany

    Hans -Jörg Kreowski

  4. Leiden Institute of Advanced Computer Science, Leiden University, Niels Bohrweg 1, 2333, CA Leiden, The Netherlands

    Grzegorz Rozenberg

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2002 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Baresi, L., Heckel, R. (2002). Tutorial Introduction to Graph Transformation: A Software Engineering Perspective. In: Corradini, A., Ehrig, H., Kreowski, H.J., Rozenberg, G. (eds) Graph Transformation. ICGT 2002. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 2505. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45832-8_30

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45832-8_30

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-44310-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-45832-6

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics