MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2888138590 · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-99241-9_12

Automated Co-evolution of Metamodels and Transformation Rules: A Search-Based Approach

2018· book-chapter· en· W2888138590 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueLecture notes in computer science · 2018
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicModel-Driven Software Engineering Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersAustrian Science Fund
KeywordsComputer scienceTransformation (genetics)Model transformationArtificial intelligenceData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Metamodels frequently change over time by adding new concepts or changing existing ones to keep track with the evolving problem domain they aim to capture. This evolution process impacts several depending artifacts such as model instances, constraints, as well as transformation rules. As a consequence, these artifacts have to be co-evolved to ensure their conformance with new metamodel versions. While several studies addressed the problem of metamodel/model co-evolution (Please note the potential name clash for the term co-evolution. In this paper, we refer to the problem of having to co-evolve different dependent artifacts in case one of them changes. We are not referring to the application or adaptation of co-evolutionary search algorithms.), the co-evolution of metamodels and transformation rules has been less studied. Currently, programmers have to manually change model transformations to make them consistent with the new metamodel versions which require the detection of which transformations to modify and how to properly change them. In this paper, we propose a novel search-based approach to recommend transformation rule changes to make transformations coherent with the new metamodel versions by finding a trade-off between maximizing the coverage of metamodel changes and minimizing the number of static errors in the transformation and the number of applied changes to the transformation. We implemented our approach for the ATLAS Transformation Language (ATL) and validated the proposed approach on four co-evolution case studies. We demonstrate the outperformance of our approach by comparing the quality of the automatically generated co-evolution solutions by NSGA-II with manually revised transformations, one mono-objective algorithm, and random search.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.500
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.232 · 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