Advertisement

Graph Operations and Free Graph Algebras

  • Uwe WolterEmail author
  • Zinovy Diskin
  • Harald König
Chapter
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10800)

Abstract

We introduce a concept of graph algebra that generalizes the traditional concept of algebra in the sense that (1) we use graphs rather than sets as carriers, and (2) we generalize algebraic operations to diagrammatic operations over graphs, which we call graph operations.

Our main objective is to extend the construction of term algebras, i.e., free algebras, for the new setting. The key mechanism for the construction of free graph algebras are pushout-based graph transformations for non-deleting injective rules. The application of rules, however, has to be controlled in such a way that “no confusion” arises. For this, we introduce graph terms and present a concrete construction of free graph algebras as graph term algebras.

As the main result of the paper, we obtain for any graph signature \(\varGamma \) an adjunction between the category \(\mathsf {Graph}\) of graphs and the category \(\mathsf {GAlg}{(\varGamma )}\) of graph \(\varGamma \)-algebras. In such a way, we establish an “integrating link” between the two areas Hartmut Ehrig contributed most: algebraic specifications with initial/free semantics and pushout-based graph transformations.

Keywords

Universal Algebra Term Term algebra Free algebra Graph operation Graph algebra Graph term Graph term algebra Free graph algebra Kleisli morphism 

References

  1. 1.
    Cadish, B., Diskin, Z.: Heterogeneous view integration via sketches and equations. In: Raś, Z.W., Michalewicz, M. (eds.) ISMIS 1996. LNCS, vol. 1079, pp. 603–612. Springer, Heidelberg (1996).  https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-61286-6_184 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Claßen, I., Große-Rhode, M., Wolter, U.: Categorical concepts for parameterized partial specifications. Math. Struct. Comput. Sci. 5(2), 153–188 (1995).  https://doi.org/10.1017/S0960129500000700 MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Diskin, Z.: Databases as diagram algebras: specifying queries and views via the graph-based logic of sketches. Technical report 9602, Frame Inform Systems, Riga, Latvia (1996).http://www.cs.toronto.edu/zdiskin/Pubs/TR-9602.pdf
  4. 4.
    Diskin, Z.: Towards algebraic graph-based model theory for computer science. Bull. Symb. Log. 3, 144–145 (1997)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Diskin, Z., Cadish, B.: A graphical yet formalized framework for specifying view systems. In: First East-European Symposium on Advances in Databases and Information Systems, pp. 123–132. Nevsky Dialect (1997)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Diskin, Z., Wolter, U.: A diagrammatic logic for object-oriented visual modeling. ENTCS 203(6), 19–41 (2008).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.entcs.2008.10.041 zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ehrig, H., Ehrig, K., Prange, U., Taentzer, G.: Fundamentals of Algebraic Graph Transformations. EATCS Monographs on Theoretical Computer Science. Springer, Heidelberg (2006).  https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-31188-2 zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ehrig, H., Mahr, B.: Fundamentals of Algebraic Specification 1: Equations and Initial Semantics. EATCS Monographs on Theoretical Computer Science, vol. 6. Springer, Heidelberg (1985).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-69962-7 CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ehrig, H., Mahr, B.: Fundamentals of Algebraic Specification 2: Module Specifications and Constraints. EATCS Monographs on Theoretical Computer Science, vol. 21. Springer, Heidelberg (1990).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-61284-8 CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Mac Lane, S.: Categories for the Working Mathematician, 2nd edn. Springer, New York (1978).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-4721-8 CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Makkai, M.: Generalized sketches as a framework for completeness theorems. J. Pure Appl. Algebra 115, 49–79, 179–212, 214–274 (1997)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Mantz, F., Taentzer, G., Lamo, Y., Wolter, U.: Co-evolving meta-models and their instance models: a formal approach based on graph transformation. Sci. Comput. Program. 104, 2–43 (2015).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scico.2015.01.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Rossini, A., Rutle, A., Lamo, Y., Wolter, U.: A formalisation of the copy-modify-merge approach to version control in MDE. J. Log. Algebraic Programm. 79(7), 636–658 (2010).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jlap.2009.10.003 MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Rutle, A., Rossini, A., Lamo, Y., Wolter, U.: A formal approach to the specification and transformation of constraints in MDE. J. Log. Algebraic Programm. 81(4), 422–457 (2012).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jlap.2012.03.006 MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of BergenBergenNorway
  2. 2.McMaster UniversityHamiltonCanada
  3. 3.FHDW HannoverHannoverGermany

Personalised recommendations