Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Exploring Conflict Reasons for Graph Transformation Systems

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Graph Transformation (ICGT 2019)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNTCS,volume 11629))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

Conflict and dependency analysis (CDA) is a static analysis for the detection of conflicting and dependent rule applications in a graph transformation system. Recently, granularity levels for conflicts and dependencies have been investigated focussing on delete-use conflicts and produce-use dependencies. A central notion for granularity considerations are (minimal) conflict and dependency reasons. For a rule pair, where the second rule is non-deleting, it is well-understood based on corresponding constructive characterizations how to efficiently compute (minimal) conflict and dependency reasons. We further explore the notion of (minimal) conflict reason for the general case where the second rule of a rule pair may be deleting as well. We present new constructive characterizations of (minimal) conflict reasons distinguishing delete-read from delete-delete reasons. Based on these constructive characterizations we propose a procedure for computing (minimal) conflict reasons and we show that it is sound and complete.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    For brevity, since all conflict-specific considerations in this paper dually hold for dependencies (see our argumentation in [4]), we omit talking about dependencies.

  2. 2.

    A morphism between two graphs consists of two mappings between their nodes and edges being both structure-preserving w.r.t. source and target functions. Note that in the main text we denote inclusions by \(\hookrightarrow \) and all other morphisms by \(\rightarrow \).

References

  1. Ehrig, H., Ehrig, K., Prange, U., Taentzer, G.: Fundamentals of Algebraic Graph Transformation. Monographs in Theoretical Computer Science. An EATCS Series. MTCSAES. Springer, Heidelberg (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-31188-2

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. Lambers, L., Strüber, D., Taentzer, G., Born, K., Huebert, J.: Multi-granular conflict and dependency analysis in software engineering based on graph transformation. In: International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE). pp. 716–727. ACM (2018). Extended version. www.uni-marburg.de/fb12/swt/forschung/publikationen/2018/LSTBH18-TR.pdf

  3. Plump, D.: Critical pairs in term graph rewriting. In: Prívara, I., Rovan, B., Ruzička, P. (eds.) MFCS 1994. LNCS, vol. 841, pp. 556–566. Springer, Heidelberg (1994). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-58338-6_102

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  4. Lambers, L., Born, K., Kosiol, J., Strüber, D., Taentzer, G.: Granularity of conflicts and dependencies in graph transformation systems: a two-dimensional approach. J. Log. Algebr. Methods Program. 103, 105–129 (2019)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  5. Born, K., Lambers, L., Strüber, D., Taentzer, G.: Granularity of conflicts and dependencies in graph transformation systems. In: de Lara, J., Plump, D. (eds.) ICGT 2017. LNCS, vol. 10373, pp. 125–141. Springer, Cham (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-61470-0_8

    Chapter  MATH  Google Scholar 

  6. Lambers, L., Kosiol, J., Strüber, D., Taentzer, G.: Exploring conflict reasons for graph transformation systems: Extended version (2019). https://www.uni-marburg.de/fb12/arbeitsgruppen/swt/forschung/publikationen/2019/LKST19-TR.pdf

  7. Beck, K., et al.: Manifesto for Agile software development (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Arendt, T., Biermann, E., Jurack, S., Krause, C., Taentzer, G.: Henshin: advanced concepts and tools for in-place EMF model transformations. In: Petriu, D.C., Rouquette, N., Haugen, Ø. (eds.) MODELS 2010. LNCS, vol. 6394, pp. 121–135. Springer, Heidelberg (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-16145-2_9

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  9. Lambers, L., Ehrig, H., Orejas, F.: Efficient conflict detection in graph transformation systems by essential critical pairs. Electr. Notes Theor. Comput. Sci. 211, 17–26 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Lambers, L., Born, K., Orejas, F., Strüber, D., Taentzer, G.: Initial conflicts and dependencies: critical pairs revisited. In: Heckel, R., Taentzer, G. (eds.) Graph Transformation, Specifications, and Nets. LNCS, vol. 10800, pp. 105–123. Springer, Cham (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-75396-6_6

    Chapter  MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. AGG: Attributed Graph Grammar system. http://user.cs.tu-berlin.de/~gragra/agg/

  12. Ehrig, H., Padberg, J., Prange, U., Habel, A.: Adhesive high-level replacement systems: a new categorical framework for graph transformation. Fundam. Inform. 74(1), 1–29 (2006)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. Azzi, G.G., Corradini, A., Ribeiro, L.: On the essence and initiality of conflicts. In: Lambers, L., Weber, J. (eds.) ICGT 2018. LNCS, vol. 10887, pp. 99–117. Springer, Cham (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-92991-0_7

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  14. Corradini, A., et al.: On the essence of parallel independence for the double-pushout and sesqui-pushout approaches. In: Heckel, R., Taentzer, G. (eds.) Graph Transformation, Specifications, and Nets. LNCS, vol. 10800, pp. 1–18. Springer, Cham (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-75396-6_1

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was partially funded by the German Research Foundation, project “Triple Graph Grammars (TGG) 2.0: Reliable and Scalable Model Integration”.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Hasso-Plattner-Institut, Universität Potsdam, Potsdam, Germany

    Leen Lambers

  2. Philipps-Universität Marburg, Marburg, Germany

    Jens Kosiol & Gabriele Taentzer

  3. Chalmers University, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden

    Daniel Strüber

Authors
  1. Leen Lambers
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jens Kosiol
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Daniel Strüber
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Gabriele Taentzer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Leen Lambers .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Madrid, Spain

    Esther Guerra

  2. Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya, Barcelona, Spain

    Fernando Orejas

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Lambers, L., Kosiol, J., Strüber, D., Taentzer, G. (2019). Exploring Conflict Reasons for Graph Transformation Systems. In: Guerra, E., Orejas, F. (eds) Graph Transformation. ICGT 2019. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 11629. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-23611-3_5

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-23611-3_5

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-23610-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-23611-3

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation