MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2179781000 · doi:10.1109/models.2015.7338256

Fully verifying transformation contracts for declarative ATL

2015· article· en· W2179781000 on OpenAlexaff
Bentley Oakes, Javier Troya, Lucio Levi, Manuel Wimmer

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicModel-Driven Software Engineering Techniques
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersChristian Doppler ForschungsgesellschaftBundesministerium für Wissenschaft, Forschung und WirtschaftEuropean Commission
KeywordsComputer scienceProgramming languageModel transformationTransformation (genetics)ScalabilitySet (abstract data type)Symbolic executionProperty (philosophy)Theoretical computer scienceSoftware engineeringArtificial intelligenceDatabaseSoftwareConsistency (knowledge bases)Epistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Atlas Transformation Language (ATL) is today a de-facto standard in model-driven development. It is understood by the community that methods for exhaustively verifying such transformations provide an important pillar for achieving a stronger adoption of model-driven development in industry. In this paper we propose a method for verifying ATL model transformations by translating them into DSLTrans, a transformation language with limited expressiveness. Pre-/postcondition contracts are then verified on the resulting DSLTrans specification using a symbolic-execution property prover. The technique we present in this paper is exhaustive for the declarative ATL subset, meaning that if a contract holds, it will hold when any input model is passed to the ATL transformation being checked. We explore the scalability of our technique using a set of examples, including a model transformation developed in collaboration with our industrial partner.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.032
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.032
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.005
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.072
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.218 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations15
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicModel-Driven Software Engineering TechniquesFrench-language works237,207