5.2 KiB
5.2 KiB
type:: REVIEWS
tags::
year:: 2023
venue:: SLE
full-title:: Towards Efficient Model Comparison Using Automated Program Rewriting
date-start:: 18-08-2023 - 15:10
date-submitted:: 19-08-2023
external-links:: #45 - SLE 2023 (hotcrp.com)
status:: DONE
deadline-submission:: 18-08-2023
file::
- [[Highlights]]
- #+BEGIN_IMPORTANT
((64df79ad-dbf7-4f3a-a90f-5981648d1e06))
((64df7a01-f3b2-4fa8-b957-2dee106bc18f))
#+END_IMPORTANT
- ((64df7a98-9143-4d8c-8876-1e31a9aca768))
- Model comparison seems to be used as synonm of model matching.
- #+BEGIN_NOTE
Model matching is one of the model comparison phase, which is then followed by the difference calculation on the matched model elements of the two models given as input to the whole model comparison process.
#+END_NOTE
- See for instance
- ((64df7b3d-c275-4c03-9167-68c0e7794857))
- I would say: ECL permits to explicitly define complex matching criteria ....
- in the paper
- ((64df7dda-65cc-4e85-9f78-00669b2ecb38))
- This is correct if hierarchies are not considered.
- ((64df805a-a292-4387-a930-f9919c2dd942))
- Can you explain this?
- ((64df8522-e60a-4ca4-a096-fa215ea8a83a))
- This step is not clear, because if I'm not wrong the existin ECL Engine already dose some rule depencency analysis, isn't it?
- The same comment applies to
- ((64df8769-f43c-429a-9916-8f4d192ee55f))
- ((64df8565-febe-429f-a916-ed10fa6cffb5))
- An explanatory example is needed here to explain the result of the wanted optimization.
- So three steps are performed:
- Static analysis
- Dependency graph
- Identifying Optimisable MatchRules
- Program rewriting
- Section III is not always easy to read. Verbose and long texts are missing running example to help the reader understand the technical content.
- ((64df90c9-d494-46ba-b375-0b9483158ac7))
- What's the complexity of this?
- ((64df90f4-5d05-4d8b-aa04-17ee2e17617f))
- DIfficult to understand without a corresponding explanatory example
- ((64df9168-c16e-4b74-98fa-c434850b09c1))
- Maybe such execution mode can add some degree on unceartanty, isn't it?
-
- ((64df94f4-add5-46f3-b38b-f1ad1e29ad56))
- What's the complexity of this?
- ((64df94b0-5588-4429-a20b-77e7d267c062))
- I don't think there is a trend to show, thus the graph chart is not appropriate here.
- ((64df9571-6094-4913-930e-5ebf28f578d7))
- It is necessary to show how ECL works without such an improvement. I guess it already does some analysis of the rules to be executed and to decide their execution order according to their dependency.
-
- [[Comments]]
- The paper presents a novel approach aimed at enhancing the execution performance of model comparison specifications given in the Epsilon Comparison Language (ECL). The approachs leverages static program analysis and automated program rewriting techniques to achieve performance gains in terms of execution time of ECL programs.
- The problem addressed by the paper is well elaborated and motivated. The proposed solution, while straightforward, demonstrates its effectiveness through performed experiments. My main concerns about the paper are related to its presentation. However, the presentation of the paper could benefit from some enhancements. Several readability issues are identified, including the following:
- The original execution semantics of ECL is not properly introduced. If I'm not wrong, ECL matching rules are evaluated by the engine in a top-down fashion in two passes by following the order of appearance. To truly elucidate the problem, it becomes crucial to delve into the current execution semantics of the ECL engine. This also enables a clearer illustration of the advantages of the proposed solution. To this end, it is important to clarify if any form of dependency check among matching rules is performed by the ECL engine without the proposed approach.
- Section 3 is too dense and it lacks illustrative examples that could effectively elucidate the various steps depicted in Figure 5. The inclusion of such examples would aid in comprehending the intricate approach discussed.
- The paper would benefit from a comprehensive analysis of the execution complexity introduced by the 'pre { }' section, which is incorporated by the rewriter component.
- The functioning of the proposed approach in the presence of class hierarchies is not well-defined, potentially leaving a gap in understanding.
- The paper employs "model comparison" and "model matching" interchangeably, causing confusion. It's important to clarify that comparing different models entails not only matching model elements but also calculating the differences between the matched elements. The focus of this work specifically addresses the initial aspect of the model comparison process, i.e., model matching.
- To summarize, while the paper introduces an interesting approach to enhance the execution performance of ECL specifications, improvements can be made in its presentation. Addressing the aforementioned readability concerns will significantly enhance the paper's clarity and impact.
-
-
-
-