Ensuring Consistency Within Distributed Graph Transformation Systems

  • Ulrike Ranger
  • Thorsten Hermes
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4422)


Graph transformation systems can be used for modeling the structure and the behavior of a software system in a visual way. In our project, we extend existing graph transformation systems to model and execute distributed systems. One challenge in this context is the simultaneous and correct modification of the local runtime graphs of the participating applications by visual distributed graph transformations.

As the execution of these transformations may cause inconsistencies in the local runtime graphs, we present an approach to avoid inconsistencies: A runtime mechanism translates invalid graph transformations into valid transformations. This translation is based on predefined rules describing the substitution of invalid transformation parts. Thus, new graph transformations are dynamically built at runtime. Furthermore, the runtime mechanism controls access within a distributed system.


Task Manager Graph Transformation Node Type Reference Node Edge Type 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    Schürr, A.: Operationales Spezifizieren mit programmierten Graphersetzungssystemen. PhD-Thesis, RWTH Aachen University (1991)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Fischer, T., Niere, J., Torunski, L., Zündorf, A.: Story Diagrams: A New Graph Rewrite Language Based on the Unified Modeling Language and Java. In: Ehrig, H., Engels, G., Kreowski, H.-J., Rozenberg, G. (eds.) TAGT 1998. LNCS, vol. 1764, pp. 296–309. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Böhlen, B., Jäger, D., Schleicher, A., Westfechtel, B.: UPGRADE: A framework for building graph-based interactive tools. In: Mens, T., Schürr, A., Taentzer, G. (eds.) 1st International Workshop on Graph-Based Tools, GraBaTs’02. ENTCS, vol. 72, Elsevier Science Publishers, Amsterdam (2002)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Böhlen, B., Ranger, U.: Concepts for specifying complex graph transformation systems. In: Ehrig, H., Engels, G., Parisi-Presicce, F., Rozenberg, G. (eds.) ICGT 2004. LNCS, vol. 3256, pp. 96–111. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ranger, U., Schultchen, E., Mosler, C.: Specifying distributed graph transformation systems. Presented at the 3rd International Workshop on Graph-Based Tools, GraBaTs’06 (2006)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ranger, U., Lüstraeten, M.: Search trees for distributed graph transformation systems. In: Karsai, G., Taentzer, G. (eds.) 2nd International Workshop on Graph and Model Transformation, GraMoT’06. Electronic Communications of the EASST, vol. 4, European Association of Software Science and Technology (to appear, 2006)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Taentzer, G.: Towards common exchange formats for graphs and graph transformation systems. In: Ehrig, H., Ermel, C., Padberg, J. (eds.) 1st International Workshop on Uniform Approaches to Graphical Process Specification Techniques, UNIGRA’01. ENTCS, vol. 44(4), Elsevier Science, Amsterdam (2001)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Winter, A.: Visuelles Programmieren mit Graphtransformationen. PhD-Thesis, RWTH Aachen University (2000)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Heckel, R., Ehrig, H., Engels, G., Taentzer, G.: A view-based approach to system modeling based on open graph transformation systems. In: Ehrig, H., Engels, G., Kreowski, H.J., Rozenberg, G. (eds.) Handbook on Graph Grammars and Computing by Graph Transformation: Applications, Languages, and Tools, vol. 2, pp. 639–668. World Scientific, Singapore (1999)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Habel, A., Heckel, R., Taentzer, G.: Graph grammars with negative application conditions. Fundamenta Informaticae 26(3-4), 287–313 (1996)zbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Varró, D., Pataricza, A.: Generic and Meta-transformations for Model Transformation Engineering. In: Baar, T., Strohmeier, A., Moreira, A., Mellor, S.J. (eds.) UML 2004. LNCS, vol. 3273, pp. 290–304. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Tichy, M.: Durchgängige Unterstützung für Entwurf, Implementierung und Betrieb von Komponenten in offenen Softwarearchitekturen mittels UML. Diploma Thesis, University of Paderborn (2002)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Schürr, A.: Specification of graph translators with triple graph grammars. In: Mayr, E.W., Schmidt, G., Tinhofer, G. (eds.) WG 1994. LNCS, vol. 903, pp. 151–163. Springer, Heidelberg (1995)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Fischer, I., Koch, M., Taentzer, G.: Visual design of distributed object systems by graph transformation. Technical Report 98-15, Tech. University of Berlin (1998)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ulrike Ranger
    • 1
  • Thorsten Hermes
    • 1
  1. 1.RWTH Aachen University Department of Computer Science 3 (Software Engineering), Ahornstraße 55, 52074 AachenGermany

Personalised recommendations