Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Survey and classification of model transformation tools

  • Regular Paper
  • Published:
Software & Systems Modeling Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Model transformation lies at the very core of model-driven engineering, and a large number of model transformation languages and tools have been proposed over the last few years. These tools can be used to develop, transform, merge, exchange, compare, and verify models and metamodels. In this paper, we present a comprehensive catalog of existing metamodel-based transformation tools and compare them using a qualitative framework. We begin by organizing the 60 tools we identified into a general classification based on the transformation approach used. We then compare these tools using a number of particular facets, where each facet belongs to one of six different categories and may contain several attributes. The results of the study are discussed in detail and made publicly available in a companion website with a capability to search for tools using the specified facets as search criteria. Our study provides a thorough picture of the state-of-the-art in model transformation techniques and tools. Our results are potentially beneficial to many stakeholders in the modeling community, including practitioners, researchers, and transformation tool developers.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. http://www.mdetools.com.

  2. http://www.mdetools.com.

References

  1. Kahani, N., Cordy, J.: Comparison and evaluation of model transformation tools. In: Technical Report 2015-627, Queen’s University, pp. 1–42 (2015)

  2. Bagherzadeh, M., Hili, N., Dingel, J.: Model-level, platform-independent debugging in the context of the model-driven development of real-time systems. In: Proceedings of the 2017 11th Joint Meeting on Foundations of Software Engineering, pp. 419–430 (2017)

  3. Lúcio, L., Amrani, M., Dingel, J., Lambers, L., Salay, R., Selim, G., Syriani, E., Wimmer, M.: Model transformation intents and their properties. In: Software and Systems Modeling, pp. 1–38 (2014)

  4. Czarnecki, K., Helsen, S.: Feature-based survey of model transformation approaches. IBM Syst. J. 45(3), 621–645 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Mens, T., Gorp, P.V.: A taxonomy of model transformation. Electron. Notes Theor. Comput. Sci. 152, 125–142 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Salem, R.B., Grangel, R., Bourey, J.: A comparison of model transformation tools: Application for transforming GRAI extended Actigrams into UML activity diagrams. In: Computers in Industry, pp. 682–693 (2008)

  7. Macedo, N., Jorge, T., Cunha, A.: A feature-based classification of model repair approaches. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 43(7), 615–640 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Jakumeit, E., Buchwald, S., Wagelaar, D., Dan, L., Hegedüs, Á., Herrmannsdörfer, M., Horn, T., Kalnina, E., Krause, C., Lano, K., Lepper, M., Rensink, A., Rose, L., Wätzoldt, S., Mazanek, S.: A survey and comparison of transformation tools based on the transformation tool contest. Sci. Comput. Program. 85, 41–99 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Taentzer, G., Ehrig, K., Guerra, E., Lara, J., Lengyel, L., Levendovszky, T., Prange, U., Varro, D., Varró-Gyapay, S.: Model transformation by graph transformation: A comparative study. In: Proceedings Workshop Model Transformation in Practice, Montego Bay, Jamaica, pp. 1–48 (2005)

  10. Hidaka, S., Tisi, M., Cabot, J., Hu, Z.: Feature-based classification of bidirectional transformation approaches. Softw. Syst. Model. 15(3), 1–22 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Gomes, C., Barroca, B., Amaral, V.: Classification of model transformation tools: pattern matching techniques, pp. 619–635 (2014)

  12. Biehl, M.: Literature study on model transformations. In: Royal Institute of Technology, pp. 1–24 (2010)

  13. Mesa, J. M. V.: M2DAT: A technical solution for model-driven development of web information systems.Ph.D. thesis, University of Rey Juan Carlos (2009)

  14. Uhl, A.: Model-driven development in the enterprise. IEEE Softw. 1, 46–49 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Huber, P.: The model transformation language jungle: An evaluation and extension of existing approaches. In: Master thesis, University of Vienna (2008)

  16. Rothenberg, J., Widman, L., Loparo, K., Nielsen, N.: The nature of modeling, pp. 1–18 (1989)

  17. Brambilla, M., Cabot, J., Wimmer, M.: Model-driven software engineering in practice. Synth. Lect. Softw. Eng. 1(1), 1–182 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Unified Modeling Language (UML) http://www.uml.org. Accessed 16 Feb 2018

  19. Aers, K.: Graphiti and GMF compared: revisiting the graph editor. In: EclipseCon 2011, Santa Clara, California (2011)

  20. Viyović, V., Maksimović, M., Perisić, B.: Sirius: A rapid development of DSM graphical editor. In: IEEE 18th International Conference on Intelligent Engineering Systems, pp. 233–238 (2014)

  21. Efftinge, S., Völter, M.: oAW xText: A framework for textual DSLs. In: Workshop on Modeling Symposium at Eclipse Summit, pp. 118–121 (2006)

  22. Henriksson, J., Johannes, J., Zschaler, S., Asmann, U.: Reuseware-adding modularity to your language of choice. J. Object Technol. 6(9), 127–146 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Kleppe, A.: A language description is more than a metamodel. In: Fourth International Workshop on Software Language Engineering, pp. 1–9 (2007)

  24. ArcStyler: The leading platform for model driven architecture (MDA) http://www.omg.org/mda/mda_files/ArcStyler5_Whitepaper_220205.pdf. Accessed 16 Feb 2018

  25. Patrascoiu, O.: YATL: yet another transformation language-reference manual version 1.0. In: Technical Report No. 2-04 (2004)

  26. Codagen Architect http://www.omg.org/mda/mda_files/codagen_technologies.htm. Accessed 20 Feb 2018

  27. OptimalJ http://www.compuware.com. Accessed 16 Feb 2018

  28. Biermann, E., Ehrig, K., Köhler, C., Kuhns, G., Taentzer, G., Weiss, E.: Graphical definition of in-place transformations in the eclipse modeling framework. In: Proceeding of the International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems (MoDELS06) 425439 (2006)

  29. FUUT-je http://www.eclipse.org/gmt/. Accessed 01 May 2017

  30. Boronat, A.: MOMENT: a formal framework for MOdel manageMENT, In: Ph.D. thesis in Computer Science, University of Politécnica de Valéncia, pp. 1–287 (2007)

  31. Sánchez-Barbudo, A., Sánchez, E., Roldán, V., Estévez, A., Roda, J.: Providing an open virtual-machine-based QVT implementation. In: Proceedings of the V Workshop on Model-Driven Software Development, pp. 42–51 (2008)

  32. b+m ArchitectureWare http://www.omg.org/mda/mda_files/b+m_OMGCommittment.pdf. Accessed 16 Feb 2018

  33. Gerber, A., Lawley, M., Raymond, K., Steel, J., Wood, A.: Transformation: the missing link of MDA. In: Graph Transformation, pp. 90–105 (2002)

  34. QVTd https://projects.eclipse.org/projects/modeling.mmt.qvtd. Accessed 16 Feb 2018

  35. Vlad, A., Störrle, H., Strüber, D.: VMTL: A language for end-user model transformation. In: Software and Systems Modeling, pp. 1–29 (2016)

  36. Acerbis, R., Bongio, A., Brambilla, M., Butti, S.: Webratio 5: An Eclipse-based case tool for engineering web applications, pp. 501–505. In. In Web, Engineering (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  37. UMT http://umt-qvt.sourceforge.net/. Accessed 16 Feb 2018

  38. Roy, C., Cordy, J., Koschke, R.: Comparison and evaluation of code clone detection techniques and tools: a qualitative approach. Sci. Comput. Program. 74(7), 470–495 (2009)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  39. Kastenberg, H., Rensink, A.: Model checking dynamic states in GROOVE. In: International SPIN Workshop on Model Checking of Software, McGill University, pp. 299–305 (2006)

  40. Bruneliere, H., Cabot, J., Jouault, F., Madiot, F.: MoDisco: A generic and extensible framework for model driven reverse engineering. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated software engineering, pp. 173–174 (2010)

  41. Lano, K., Kolahdouz-Rahimi, S.: Specification and verification of model transformations using UML-RSDS, pp. 199–214 (2010)

  42. Lawley, M., Steel, J.: Practical declarative model transformation with Tefkat, pp. 139–150 (2006)

  43. Romina, E., Pierantonio, A., Rosa, G.: Managing uncertainty in bidirectional model transformations, in: Proceedings of the 2015 ACM SIGPLAN International Conference on Software Language Engineering, pp. 49–58 (2015)

  44. Almendros-Jiménez, J. M., Iribarne, L., López-Fernández, J., Mora-Segura, A.: PTL: A model transformation language based on logic programming. In: Journal of Logical and Algebraic Methods in Programming, pp. 89–105 (2015)

  45. Bonde, L., Dumoulin, C., Dekeyser, J.: Metamodels and MDA transformations for embedded systems. In: Advances in Design and Specification Languages for SoCs, pp. 89–105 (2005)

  46. Macedo, N., Cunha, A.: Implementing QVT-R bidirectional model transformations using Alloy. In: Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Fundamental Approaches to Software Engineering, pp. 297–311 (2013)

  47. Li, D., Li, X., Stolz, V.: QVT-based model transformation using XSLT. In: SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes, pp. 1–8 (2011)

  48. Reddy, S., Venkatesh, R., Ansari, Z.: A relational approach to model transformation using QVT relations. In: TATA Research Development and Design Centre, pp. 1–15 (2006)

  49. medini QVT http://projects.ikv.de/qvt/wiki. Accessed 16 Feb 2018

  50. Schätz, B.: Formalization and rule-based transformation of EMF Ecore-based models, pp. 227–244 (2009)

  51. Paige, R., Radjenovic, A.: Towards model transformation with TXL. In: Metamodelling for MDA, pp. 162–177 (2003)

  52. ModelAnt http://mdatools.net/blog/modelant. Accessed 16 Feb 2018

  53. Xtend https://eclipse.org/xtend/index.html

  54. Kelly, S., Lyytinen, K., Rossi, M.: Metaedit+ a fully configurable multi-user and multi-tool case and came environment. Adv. Inf. Syst. Eng. 1080, 1–21 (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  55. Gerking, C., Heinzemann, C.: Solving the movie database case with QVTo. In: TTC, pp. 98–102 (2014)

  56. Drey, Z., Faucher, C., Fleurey, F., Mahé, V., Vojtisek, D.: Kermeta language reference manual, pp. 1–84 (2010)

  57. Modelio http://www.modeliosoft.com. Accessed 16 Feb 2018

  58. Forward, A., Lethbridge, T., Brestovansky, D.: Improving program comprehension by enhancing program constructs: An analysis of the Umple language. In: ICPC, pp. 311–312 (2009)

  59. Degueule, T., Combemale, B., Blouin, A., Barais, O., Jézéquel, J.: Melange: A meta-language for modular and reusable development of DSLs. In: 8th International Conference on Software Language Engineering (SLE), pp. 65–75 (2015)

  60. MagicDraw http://www.nomagic.com. Accessed 16 Feb 2018

  61. Jamda http://jamda.sourceforge.net/#documentation

  62. SmartQVT https://sourceforge.net/projects/smartqvt. Accessed 16 Feb 2018

  63. SiTra http://www.cs.bham.ac.uk/~bxb/Sitra/index.html. Accessed 16 Feb 2018

  64. Pilgrim, J.V.: Computerunterstützte Modelltransformationen. Ph.D. thesis in Computer Science, Fernuniversität Hagen (2010)

  65. JQVT https://sourceforge.net/projects/jqvt/. Accessed 16 Feb 2018

  66. Merlin https://sourceforge.net/projects/merlingenerator/?source=navbar. Accessed 16 Feb 2018

  67. Together http://www.borland.com/Products/Requirements-Management/Together. Accessed 16 Feb 2018

  68. MOFScript https://marketplace.eclipse.org/content/mofscript-model-transformation-tool. Accessed 16 Feb 2018

  69. Rensink, A.: The GROOVE simulator: a tool for state space generation. In: Applications of Graph Transformations with Industrial Relevance, pp. 479–485 (2004)

  70. Willink, E. D.: UMLX: A graphical transformation language for MDA. In: Proceedings of the Workshop on Model Driven Architecture: Foundations and Applications, pp. 13–24 (2003)

  71. Lara, J., Vangheluwe, H.: AToM3: A tool for multi-formalism and meta-modelling. In: FASE, pp. 174–188 (2002)

  72. Syriani, E., Vangheluwe, H., Mannadiar, R., Hansen, C., Mierlo, S. V., Ergin, H.: AToMPM: A web-based modeling environment. In: Demos/Posters/Student Research MoDELS, pp. 21–25 (2013)

  73. Ermel, C., Rudolf, M., Taentzer, G.: The AGG approach: Language and environment. Appl. Lang. Tools. 2, 551–603 (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  74. Braun, P., Marschall, F.: Transforming object oriented models with BOTL. In: Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science, pp. 103–117 (2003)

  75. Hidaka, S., Hu, Z., Inaba, K., Kato, H., Nakano, K.: GRoundTram: An integrated framework for developing well-behaved bidirectional model transformations. In: 26th IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASE), pp. 480–483 (2011)

  76. Lauder, M., Anjorin, A., Varró, G., Schürr, A.: Bidirectional model transformation with precedence triple graph grammars, pp. 287–302 (2012)

  77. Giese, H., Hildebrandt, S., Lambers, L.: Bridging the gap between formal semantics and implementation of triple graph grammars. Softw. Syst. Model. 13(1), 273–299 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  78. GReAT http://www.isis.vanderbilt.edu/tools/great. Accessed 16 Feb 2018

  79. Greenyer, J., Kindler, E.: Reconciling TGGs with QVT. In: Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems, pp. 16–30 (2007)

  80. Fleck, M., Troya, J., Wimmer, M.: Marrying search-based optimization and model transformation technology. In: Proceedings of the First North American Search Based Software Engineering Symposium, pp. 1–16 (2015)

  81. Klassen, L., Wagner, R.: EMorF-A tool for model transformations. In: Electronic Communications of the EASST, pp. 1–6 (2012)

  82. Barroca, B., Lúcio, L., Amaral, V., Félix, R., Sou, V.: Dsltrans: A Turing incomplete transformation language. In: Software Language Engineering, 29630 (2011)

  83. Gorp, G. V.: Model-driven development of model transformations. Ph.D. thesis, University of Antwerp (2008)

  84. Varró, D., Balogh, A.: The model transformation language of the VIATRA2 framework. Sci. Comput. Program. 68(3), 214–234 (2007)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  85. Cuadrado, J.: Towards a family of model transformation languages, pp. 176–191 (2012)

  86. Kolovos, D., Paige, R., Polack, F.: The Epsilon transformation language. In: Theory and Practice of Model Transformations, pp. 46–60 (2008)

  87. Cuadrado, J., Molina, J., Tortosa, M.: Rubytl: A practical, extensible transformation language. In: Model Driven Architecture-Foundations and Application, pp. 158–172 (2006)

  88. Levendovszky, T., Lengyel, L., Mezei, G., Charaf, H.: A systematic approach to metamodeling environments and model transformation systems in VMTS. In: Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science, pp. 65–75 (2005)

  89. Jouault, F., Allilaire, F., Bézivin, J., Kurtev, I.: ATL: A model transformation tool. In: Science of Computer Programming, pp. 31–39 (2008)

  90. Nickel, U., Niere, J., Zündorf, A.: The FUJABA environment. In: Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on Software Engineering, pp. 742–745 (2000)

  91. Jakumeit, E., Buchwald, S., Kroll, M.: Grgen.net: The expressive, convenient and fast graph rewrite system. In: International Journal on Software Tools for Technology Transfer, pp. 263–271 (2010)

  92. Arendt, T., Biermann, E., Jurack, S., Krause, C., Taentzer, G.: Henshin: Advanced concepts and tools for in-place EMF model transformations. In: Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems, pp. 121–135 (2010)

  93. Blu Age http://www.bluage.com/en/en_home.html. Accessed 16 Feb 2018

  94. Kalnins, A., Barzdins, J., Celms, E.: Model transformation language MOLA. In: Model Driven Architecture, pp. 62–76 (2005)

  95. Enterprise Architect http://www.sparxsystems.com. Accessed 16 Feb 2018

  96. MDWorkbench http://sodius.com/products-overview/mdworkbench. Accessed 16 Feb 2018

  97. Brun, C., Pierantonio, A.: Model differences in the Eclipse modeling framework. In: The European Journal for the Informatics Professional, pp. 29–34 (2008)

  98. AndroMDA http://andromda.sourceforge.net. Accessed 16 Feb 2018

  99. Xpand https://eclipse.org/modeling/m2t/?project=xpand. Accessed 16 Feb 2018

  100. Varró, D., Hegedüs, G.B.A., Horváth, A., Ráth, I., Ujhelyi, Z.: Road to a reactive and incremental model transformation platform: three generations of the VIATRA framework. Softw. Syst. Model. 15(9), 609–629 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  101. Actifsource, http://www.actifsource.com. Accessed 16 Feb 2018

  102. Query/views/transformation language (QVT) http://www.omg.org/spec/QVT. Accessed 16 Feb 2018

  103. Andries, M., Engels, G., Habel, A., Hoffmann, B., Kreowski, H.J., Kuske, S., Plump, D., Schürr, A., Taentzer, G.: Graph transformation for specification and programming. Sci. Comput. Program. 31(1), 1–54 (1999)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  104. Schürr, A.: Specification of graph translators with triple graph grammars. In: Graph-Theoretic Concepts in Computer Science, pp. 151–163 (1995)

  105. Roser, S., Lautenbacher, F., Bauer, B.: Generation of workflow code from DSMs. In: Proceedings of the 7th OOPSLA Workshop on Domain-Specific Modeling, pp. 1–11 (2007)

  106. Pearson, H.: Open source licences: open source–the death of proprietary systems? Comput. Law Secur. Rev. 16, 151–156 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  107. Eramo, R., Marinelli, R., Pierantonio, A.: Towards a taxonomy for bidirectional transformation. In: SATToSE, pp. 122–131 (2014)

  108. Kahani, N., Bagherzadeh, M., Dingel, J., Cordy, J.: The problems with Eclipse modeling tools: a topic analysis of eclipse forums. In: Proceedings of the ACM/IEEE 19th International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems, pp. 227–237 (2016)

  109. Ahmad, M., Bruel, J., Laleau, R., Gnaho, C.: Using RELAX SysML and KAOS for ambient systems requirements modeling. In: Procedia Computer Science, pp. 474–481 (2012)

  110. xtUML https://xtuml.org. Accessed 16 Feb 2018

  111. Kahani, N., Hili, N., Cordy, J., Dingel, J.: Evaluation of UML-RT and Papyrus-RT for modelling self-adaptive systems. In: Proceedings of the 9th International Workshop on Modelling in Software Engineering, pp. 12–18 (2017)

  112. Peterson, J.: Petri Net theory and the modeling of systems. In: Prentice Hall PTR (1981)

  113. Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN) http://www.bpmn.org. Accessed 16 Feb 2018

  114. Meta-Object Facility (MOF) http://www.omg.org/mof. Accessed 16 Feb 2018

  115. Eclipse Modeling Framework (EMF) https://eclipse.org/modeling/emf. Accessed 16 Feb 2018

  116. Kernel Meta-Meta Model (KM3) https://wiki.eclipse.org/KM3. Accessed 16 Feb 2018

  117. Stephan, M., Cordy, J.: A survey of model comparison approaches and applications. In: Modelsward, pp. 265–277 (2013)

  118. Bergmann, G.: Translating ocl to graph patterns, pp. 670–686 (2014)

  119. Cetinkaya, D., Verbraeck, A.: Metamodeling and model transformations in modeling and simulation. In: Proceedings of the Winter Simulation Conference, pp. 3048–3058 (2011)

  120. CDO http://eclipse.org/cdo. Accessed 16 Feb 2018

  121. Blanc, X., Gervais, M., Sriplakich, P.: Model bus: Towards the interoperability of modelling tools. In: Model Driven Architecture, pp. 17–32 (2005)

  122. EMFStore http://eclipse.org/emfstore. Accessed 16 Feb 2018

  123. Benelallam, A., Gómez, A., Sunyé, G., Tisi, M., Launay, D.: Neo4EMF, a scalable persistence layer for EMF models. In: European Conference on Modelling Foundations and Applications, pp. 230–241 (2014)

  124. NetBeans Meta-data Repository (MDR) https://netbeans.org. Accessed 16 Feb 2018

  125. Canonical XMI http://www.omg.org/spec/XMI/2.5.1. Accessed 16 Feb 2018

  126. Human Usable Textual Notation (HUTN) http://www.omg.org/spec/HUTN. Accessed 16 Feb 2018

  127. Java Meta-data Interface (JMI) http://download.oracle.com/otn-pub/jcp/7791-jmi-1.0-prd-spec-oth-JSpec/jmi-1_0-prd-spec-update.pdf. Accessed 16 Feb 2018

  128. Diagram Definition Specification (DD) http://www.omg.org/spec/DD. Accessed 16 Feb 2018

  129. MOF model to text transformation language http://www.omg.org/spec/MOFM2T. Accessed 16 Feb 2018

  130. Common Warehouse Meta-model (CWM) http://www.omg.org/spec/CWM. Accessed 16 Feb 2018

  131. Object Constraint Language, http://www.omg.org/spec/OCL. Accessed 16 Feb 2018

  132. Sendall, S., Küster, J.: Taming model round-trip engineering. In: Proceedings of Workshop on Best Practices for Model-Driven Software Development, pp. 1–13 (2004)

  133. Hettel, T., Lawley, M., Raymond, K.: Model synchronisation: Definitions for round-trip engineering, in: International Conference on Theory and Practice of Model Transformations, pp. 31–45 (2008)

  134. Syriani, E.: A multi-paradigm foundation for model transformation language engineering. Ph.D. thesis in Computer Science, McGill University, pp. 1–291 (2011)

  135. Cuadrado, J. S., Molina, J. G.: A phasing mechanism for model transformation languages. In: Proceedings of the 2007 ACM Symposium on Applied Computing, SAC ’07 (2007)

  136. Jilani, A., Usman, M., Halim, Z.: Model transformations in model driven architecture. In: Universal Journal of Computer Science and Engineering Technology, pp. 50–54 (2010)

  137. Hildebrandt, S., Lambers, L., Giese, H., Rieke, J., Greenyer, J., Schäfer, W., Lauder, M., Anjorin, A., Schürr, A.: A survey of triple graph grammar tools. In: International Workshop on Bidirectional Transformations (Bx), pp. 1–17 (2013)

  138. Stevens, P.: A landscape of bidirectional model transformations. Gener. Transform. Tech. Softw. Eng. II, 408–424 (2008)

  139. Macedo, N., Cunha, A., Pacheco, H.: Towards a framework for multidirectional model transformations. In: EDBT/ICDT Workshops, pp. 71–74 (2014)

  140. Czarnecki, K., Foster, J.N., Hu, Z., Lämmel, Schürr, A., Terwilliger, J.F.: Bidirectional transformations: a cross-discipline perspective, pp. 260–283 (2009)

  141. Leblebici, E., Anjorin, A., Schürr, A., Hildebrandt, S., Rieke, J., Greenyer, J.: A comparison of incremental triple graph grammar tools. In: Electronic Communications of the EASST, pp. 1–15 (2014)

  142. Amrani, M., Combemale, B., Lúcio, L., Selim, G.M.K., Dingel, J., Traon, Y.L., Vangheluwe, H., Cordy, J.R.: Formal verification techniques for model transformations: a tridimensional classification. J. Object Technol. 14(3), 921–928 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  143. Varró, D., Pataricza, A.: Automated formal verification of model transformations. In: CSDUML, pp. 63–78 (2003)

  144. Asztalos, M., Lengyel, L., Levendovszky, T.: Towards automated, formal verification of model transformations. In: Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation, ICST ’10, pp. 15–24 (2010)

  145. Lano, K., Kolahdouz-Rahimi, S., Poernomo, I.: Comparative evaluation of model transformation specification approaches. Int. J. Softw. Inform. 6(2), 233–269 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  146. Hooper, P.K.: The undecidability of the Turing machine immortality problem. J. Symbol. Logic 31(2), 219–234 (1966)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  147. Assmann, U.: Graph rewrite systems for program optimization. ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst. (TOPLAS) 22(4), 583–637 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  148. Varró, D., Varró-Gyapay, S., Ehrig, H., Prange, U., Taentzer, G.: Termination analysis of model transformations by Petri Nets. In: Graph Transformations, pp. 260–274 (2006)

  149. Ehrig, H., Ehrig, K., Lara, J., Taentzer, G., Varró, D., Varró-Gyapay, S.: Termination criteria for model transformation. In: International Conference on Fundamental Approaches to Software Engineering, pp. 49–63 (2005)

  150. Jouault, F., Kurtev, I.: Transforming models with ATL. In: International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems, Springer, pp. 128–138 (2005)

  151. Rahim, L., Whittle, J.: A survey of approaches for verifying model transformations. Softw. Syst. Model. 14(2), 1003–1028 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  152. Rensink, A., Schmidt, Á., Varró, D.: Model checking graph transformations: a comparison of two approaches. In: ICGT, pp. 226–241 (2004)

  153. Kastenberg, H., Rensink, A.: Model checking dynamic states in GROOVE. In: Model Checking Software, pp. 299–305 (2006)

  154. Fleurey, F., Steel, J., Baudry, B.: Validation in model-driven engineering: Testing model transformations. In: First International Workshop on Model, Design and Validation, pp. 29–40 (2004)

  155. Auziņš, A., Bãrzdiņš, J., Bičevskis, J., Čerãns, K., Kalniņš, A.: Automatic construction of test sets: theoretical approach. In: Baltic Computer Science, pp. 286–359 (1991)

  156. Schätz, B.: Verification of model transformations. In: Electronic Communications of the EASST, pp. 1–14 (2010)

  157. France, R., Bruel, J., LarrondoPetrie, M.: An integrated object-oriented and formal modeling environment. Object-Oriented Program. 10(7), 25 (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  158. Winkler, S., Pilgrim, J.: A survey of traceability in requirements engineering and model-driven development. Softw. Syst. Model. (SoSyM) 9(4), 529–565 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  159. Bergmayr, A., Troya, J., Wimmer, M.: From out-place transformation evolution to in-place model patching. In: Proceedings of the 29th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Automated Software Engineering, 647pp. –652 (2014)

  160. Klatt, B.: Xpand: A closer look at the model2text transformation language. In: Language (2007)

  161. Ráth, I., Bergmann, G., Ökrös, A., Varró, D.: Live model transformations driven by incremental pattern matching. In: Theory and Practice of Model Transformations, pp. 107–121 (2008)

  162. Calisir, F., Calisir, F.: The relation of interface usability characteristics, perceived usefulness, and perceived ease of use to end-user satisfaction with enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems. Comput. Hum. Behav. 20(4), 505–515 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  163. Cho, V., Cheng, T.E., Lai, W.J.: The role of perceived user-interface design in continued usage intention of self-paced e-learning tools. Comput. Educ. 53(2), 216–227 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  164. Bastien, J.M.C., Scapin, D.L.: Evaluating a user interface with ergonomic criteria. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact. 7(2), 105–121 (1995)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  165. Kusel, A., Schönböck, J., Wimmer, M., Retschitzegger, W., Schwinger, W., Kappel, G.: Reality check for model transformation reuse: The ATL transformation zoo case study. In: AMT@MoDELS, pp. 1–11 (2013)

  166. Louridas, P.: Version control software. In: IEEE Software, pp. 104–107 (2006)

  167. Giese, H., Wagner, R.: From model transformation to incremental bidirectional model synchronization. Softw. Syst. Model. 8(1), 21–43 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  168. Gardner, T., Griffin, C., Koehler, J., Hauser, R.: A review of OMG MOF 2.0 query/views/transformations submissions and recommendations towards the final standard. In: MetaModelling for MDA Workshop, vol. 13, p. 41 (2003)

  169. Abelein, U., Sharp, H., Paech, B.: Does involving users in software development really influence system success? In: IEEE Software, pp. 17–23 (2013)

  170. Jackson, E. K., Schulte, W., Bjorner, N.: Detecting specification errors in declarative languages with constraints. In: International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems, pp. 399–414 (2012)

  171. Kainz, G. G., Buckl, C., Knoll, A.: A generic approach simplifying model-to-model transformation chains. In: International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems, pp. 579–594 (2012)

  172. Cuadrado, J. S., Guerra, E., de Lara, J.: Quick fixing ATL model transformations. In: International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems, pp .146–155 (2015)

  173. Dubois, C., Famelis, M., Gogolla, M., Nobrega, L., Ober, I., Seidl, M., Völter, M.: Research questions for validation and verification in the context of model-based engineering. In: International Workshop on Model Driven Engineering, Verification and Validation (MoDeVVA), pp. 67–77 (2013)

  174. Rivera, J. E., Guerra, E., de Lara, J., Vallecillo, A.: Analyzing rule-based behavioral semantics of visual modeling languages with Maude. In: Software Language Engineering, pp. 54–73 (2008)

  175. Taentzer, G.: AGG: A graph transformation environment for modeling and validation of software. In: Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 446–453 (2003)

  176. EMFcompare https://www.eclipse.org/emf/compare/. Accessed 16 Feb 2018

  177. Eclipse EMF query https://projects.eclipse.org/projects/modeling.emf.query. Accessed 16 Feb 2018

  178. Diskin, Z., Gholizadeh, H., Wider, A., Czarnecki, K.: A three-dimensional taxonomy for bidirectional model synchronization. Syst. Softw. 111, 298–322 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  179. Varró, D., Asztalos, M., Bisztray, D., Boronat, A., Dang, D., Geiß, R., Greenyer, J., Gorp, P., Kniemeyer, O., Narayanan, A., Rencis, E., Weinell, E.: Transformation of UML models to CSP: A case study for graph transformation tools. In: Applications of Graph Transformations with Industrial Relevance, pp. 540–565 (2008)

Download references

Acknowledgements

The assistance of the following people is gratefully acknowledged: Kevin Lano, Jim Steel, Antonio Cicchetti, Jesús Manuel Almendros Jiménez, Cedric Dumoulin, Alcino Cunha, Nuno Macedo, Li Dan, Sreedhar S. Reddy, Bernhard Schätz, Rusi Popov, Sven Efftinge, Peter Friese, Janne Luoma, Juha-Pekka Tolvanen, Christopher Gerking, Didier Vojtisek, Desfray Philippe, Timothy Lethbridge, Thomas Degueule, Donatas Mazeika, Paul Boocock, Jens von Pilgrim, Hui Song, Joël Cheuoua, Gary Reeves, Arend Rensink, Ed Willink, Hans Vangheluwe, Simon Van Mierlo, Claudia Ermel, Peter Braun, Soichiro Hidaka, Zhenjiang Hu, Andy Schürr, Gergely Varro, Joel Greenyer, Wimmer Manuel, Gehan M.K. Selim, Pieter Van Gorp, Jesús Sánchez Cuadrado, Dimitris Kolovos, Mezei Gergely, William Piers, Albert Zündorf, Edgar Jakumeit, Christian Krause, Jean-Michel Bruel, the Blu Age customer service, Audris Kalnins, Dermot O’Bryan, Thomas Capelle, Cédric Brun, and Reto Carrara. This work is supported in part by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Computing, Queen’s University, Kingston, Canada

    Nafiseh Kahani, Mojtaba Bagherzadeh, James R. Cordy & Juergen Dingel

  2. School of Electrical and Computer Engineering, McGill University, Montreal, Canada

    Daniel Varró

  3. MTA-BME Lendület Research Group on Cyber-Physical Systems, Budapest, Hungary

    Daniel Varró

Authors
  1. Nafiseh Kahani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mojtaba Bagherzadeh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. James R. Cordy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Juergen Dingel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Daniel Varró
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nafiseh Kahani.

Additional information

Communicated by Professor Alfonso Pierantonio.

Appendix A: Summary of tool attributes

Appendix A: Summary of tool attributes

Table 9 Summary of tool attributes
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kahani, N., Bagherzadeh, M., Cordy, J.R. et al. Survey and classification of model transformation tools. Softw Syst Model 18, 2361–2397 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-018-0665-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-018-0665-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation