Matthias Tichy

Chico Sundermann, Stefan Vill, Elias Kuiter et al.

Configurable systems typically consist of reusable assets that have dependencies between each other. To specify such dependencies, feature models are commonly used. As feature models in practice are often complex, automated reasoning is typically employed to analyze the dependencies. Here, the de facto standard is translating the feature model to conjunctive normal form (CNF) to enable employing off-the-shelf tools, such as SAT or #SAT solvers. However, modern feature-modeling dialects often contain constructs, such as cardinality constraints, that are ill-suited for conversion to CNF. This mismatch between the input of reasoning engines and the available feature-modeling dialects limits the applicability of the more expressive constructs. In this work, we shorten this gap between expressive constructs and scalable automated reasoning. Our contribution is twofold: First, we provide a pseudo-Boolean encoding for feature models, which facilitates smaller representations of commonly employed constructs compared to Boolean encoding. Second, we propose a novel method to compile pseudo-Boolean formulas to Boolean d-DNNF. With the compiled d-DNNFs, we can resort to a plethora of efficient analyses already used in feature modeling. Our empirical evaluation shows that our proposal substantially outperforms the state-of-the-art based on CNF inputs for expressive constructs. For every considered dataset representing different feature models and feature-modeling constructs, the feature models can be significantly faster translated to pseudo-Boolean than to CNF. Overall, deriving d-DNNFs from a feature model with the targeted expressive constraints can be substantially accelerated using our pseudo-Boolean approach. Furthermore, our approach is competitive on feature models with only basic constructs.

Stefan Höppner, Yves Haas, Matthias Tichy et al.

Model driven development envisages the use of model transformations to evolve models. Model transformation languages, developed for this task, are touted with many benefits over general purpose programming languages. However, a large number of these claims have not yet been substantiated. They are also made without the context necessary to be able to critically assess their merit or built meaningful empirical studies around them. The objective of our work is to elicit the reasoning, influences and background knowledge that lead people to assume benefits or drawbacks of model transformation languages. We conducted a large-scale interview study involving 56 participants from research and industry. Interviewees were presented with claims about model transformation languages and were asked to provide reasons for their assessment thereof. We qualitatively analysed the responses to find factors that influence the properties of model transformation languages as well as explanations as to how exactly they do so. Our interviews show, that general purpose expressiveness of GPLs, domain specific capabilities of MTLs as well as tooling all have strong influences on how people view properties of model transformation languages. Moreover, the Choice of MTL, the Use Case for which a transformation should be developed as well as the Skills of involved stakeholders have a moderating effect on the influences, by changing the context to consider. There is a broad body of experience, that suggests positive and negative influences for properties of MTLs. Our data suggests, that much needs to be done in order to convey the viability of model transformation languages. Efforts to provide more empirical substance need to be undergone and lackluster language capabilities and tooling need to be improved upon. We suggest several approaches for this that can be based on the results of the presented study.

Alexander Breckel, Jakob Pietron, Katharina Juhnke et al.

The introduction of major innovations in industry requires a collaboration across the whole value chain. A common way to organize such a collaboration is the use of technology roadmaps, which act as an industry-wide long-term planning tool. Technology roadmaps are used to identify industry needs, estimate the availability of technological solutions, and identify the need for innovation in the future. Roadmaps are inherently both time-dependent and based on uncertain values, i.e., properties and structural components can change over time. Furthermore, roadmaps have to reason about alternative solutions as well as their key performance indicators. Current approaches for model-based engineering do not inherently support these aspects. We present a novel model-based approach treating those aspects as first-class citizens. To address the problem of missing support for time in the context of roadmap modeling, we introduce the concepts of a common global time, time-dependent properties, and time-dependent availability. This includes requirements, properties, and the structure of the model or its components as well. Furthermore, we support the specification and analysis of key performance indicators for alternative solutions. These concepts result in a continuous range of various valid models over time instead of a single valid model at a certain point of time. We present a graphical user interface to enable the user to efficiently create and analyze those models. We further show the semantics of the resulting model by a translation into a set of global constraints as well as how we solve the resulting constraint system. We report on the evaluation of these concepts and the Iris tool with domain experts from different companies in the automotive value chain based on the industrial case of a smart sensing electrical fuse.

Stefan Wagner, Matthias Tichy, Michael Felderer et al.

Software is the main innovation driver in many different areas, like cloud services, autonomous driving, connected medical devices, and high-frequency trading. All these areas have in common that they require high dependability. In this paper, we discuss challenges and research directions imposed by these new areas on guaranteeing the dependability. On the one hand challenges include characteristics of the systems themselves, e. g., open systems and ad-hoc structures. On the other hand, we see new aspects of dependability like behavioral traceability.