Home | Sitemap | Index | Contact | Legals | KIT

Publications of Erik Burger

Journal Articles

article_burger
[1] Georg Hinkel, Thomas Goldschmidt, Erik Burger, and Ralf Reussner. Using Internal Domain-Specific Languages to inherit Tool Support and Modularity for Model Transformations. Software & Systems Modeling, pages 1-27, 2017, Springer Berlin / Heidelberg. [ bib | DOI | http ]
[2] Albert Albers, Ralf Reussner, Armin Kurrle, Erik Burger, Georg Moeser, Nikola Bursac, Simon Klingler, and Matthias Behrendt. Continuity in the development of seamless mobility: An approach for a system-of-systems environment. International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology, 4(2), 2017. [ bib | .pdf ]
[3] Matthias Budde, Sarah Grebing, Erik Burger, Max E. Kramer, Bernhard Beckert, Michael Beigl, and Ralf Reussner. Praxis der Forschung - Eine Lehrveranstaltung des forschungsnahen Lehrens und Lernens in der Informatik am KIT. Neues Handbuch Hochschullehre, 74(A 3.19), 2016, DUZ Verlags- und Medienhaus GmbH. [ bib | Abstract ]
Der neue Lehrveranstaltungstyp Praxis der Forschung wurde 2012 im Master-Studiengang Informatik des Karlsruher Instituts für Technologie (KIT) eingeführt. Zentrales Konzept dieser Veranstaltung ist das forschungsnahe Lehren und Lernen: Studierende erwerben im Rahmen eines eigenen Forschungsprojekts sowohl Fachwissen als auch methodische Kompetenz zu wissenschaftlicher Arbeit. Die konkrete Ausgestaltung folgt den Grundsätzen der Forschungsnähe und der integrierten Vermittlung methodischer Kompetenzen. Die Studierenden sollen insbesondere auch erfahren, dass es ein wesentlicher Aspekt der wissenschaftlichen Arbeit ist, Forschungsergebnisse sicht- und wahrnehmbar zu machen.
[4] Erik Burger, Jörg Henß, Martin Küster, Steffen Kruse, and Lucia Happe. View-Based Model-Driven Software Development with ModelJoin. Software & Systems Modeling, 15(2):472-496, 2014, Springer Berlin / Heidelberg. [ bib | DOI | .pdf ]

Book Chapters

bibtex-incollection_burger
[1] Axel Busch, Robert Heinrich, Jörg Henss, Martin Küster, Sebastian Lehrig, Misha Strittmatter, Max Kramer, Erik Burger, and Ralf H. Reussner. Architectural viewpoints. In Modeling and Simulating Software Architectures - The Palladio Approach, Ralf H. Reussner, Steffen Becker, Jens Happe, Robert Heinrich, Anne Koziolek, Heiko Koziolek, Max Kramer, and Klaus Krogmann, editors, chapter 3, pages 37-73. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, October 2016. [ bib | http ]
[2] Lucia Happe, Erik Burger, Max Kramer, Andreas Rentschler, and Ralf Reussner. Completion and Extension Techniques for Enterprise Software Performance Engineering. In Future Business Software - Current Trends in Business Software Development, Gino Brunetti, Thomas Feld, Joachim Schnitter, Lutz Heuser, and Christian Webel, editors, Progress in IS, pages 117-131. Springer International Publishing, 2014. [ bib | DOI ]
[3] Stefanie Betz, Erik Burger, Alexander Eckert, Andreas Oberweis, Ralf Reussner, and Ralf Trunko. An approach for integrated lifecycle management for business processes and business software. In Aligning Enterprise, System, and Software Architectures, Ivan Mistrík, Antony Tang, Rami Bahsoon, and Judith A. Stafford, editors. IGI Global, 2012. [ bib ]

Conference/Workshop papers

bibtex-inproceedings_burger
[1] Erik Burger, Victoria Mittelbach, and Anne Koziolek. Model-driven consistency preservation in cyber-physical systems. In Proceedings of the 11th Workshop on Models@run.time co-located with ACM/IEEE 19th International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems (MODELS 2016), October 2016. CEUR Workshop Proceedings. October 2016. [ bib | http | .pdf ]
[2] Max E. Kramer, Georg Hinkel, Heiko Klare, Michael Langhammer, and Erik Burger. A controlled experiment template for evaluating the understandability of model transformation languages. In Proceedings of the Second International Workshop on Human Factors in Modeling co-located with ACM/IEEE 19th International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems (MODELS 2016), October 2016, volume 1805 of CEUR Workshop Proceedings, pages 11-18. CEUR-WS.org. October 2016. [ bib | http | .pdf ]
[3] Erik Burger and Oliver Schneider. Translatability and Translation of Updated Views in ModelJoin. In Theory and Practice of Model Transformations: 9th International Conference, ICMT 2016, Held as Part of STAF 2016, Pieter van Gorp and Gregor Engels, editors, Cham, July 2016, volume 9765 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 55-69. Springer International Publishing. July 2016. [ bib | DOI | .pdf ]
[4] Georg Hinkel, Max Kramer, Erik Burger, Misha Strittmatter, and Lucia Happe. An Empirical Study on the Perception of Metamodel Quality. In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Model-Driven Engineering and Software Development, Rome, Italy, February 19-21, 2016, pages 145-152. [ bib | http | .pdf | Abstract ]
Despite the crucial importance of metamodeling for Model- Driven Engineering (MDE), there is still little discussion about the quality of metamodel design and its consequences in model-driven development processes. Presumably, the quality of metamodel design strongly affects the models and transformations that conform to these metamodels. However, so far surprisingly few work has been done to validate the characterization of metamodel quality. A proper characterization is essential to automate quality improvements for metamodels such as metamodel refactorings. In this paper, we present an empirical study to sharpen the understanding of the perception of metamodel quality. In the study, 24 participants created metamodels of two different domains and evaluated the metamodels in a peer review process according to an evaluation sheet. The results show that the perceived quality was mainly driven by the metamodels completeness, correctness and modularity while other quality attributes could be neglected.
[5] Max E. Kramer, Michael Langhammer, Dominik Messinger, Stephan Seifermann, and Erik Burger. Change-driven consistency for component code, architectural models, and contracts. In Proceedings of the 18th International ACM SIGSOFT Symposium on Component-Based Software Engineering, Montréal, QC, Canada, 2015, CBSE '15, pages 21-26. ACM, New York, NY, USA. 2015. [ bib | DOI | http | .pdf ]
[6] Erik Burger and Aleksandar Toshovski. Difference-based Conformance Checking for Ecore Metamodels. In Proceedings of Modellierung 2014, Vienna, Austria, March 21, 2014, volume 225 of GI-LNI, pages 97-104. [ bib | .pdf ]
[7] Erik Burger. Flexible Views for View-Based Model-Driven Development. In Proceedings of the 18th international doctoral symposium on Components and architecture, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, 2013, WCOP '13, pages 25-30. ACM, New York, NY, USA. 2013. [ bib | DOI | http | .pdf ]
[8] Erik Burger. Flexible Views for Rapid Model-Driven Development. In Proceedings of the 1st Workshop on View-Based, Aspect-Oriented and Orthographic Software Modelling, Montpellier, France, 2013, VAO '13, pages 1:1-1:5. ACM, New York, NY, USA. 2013. [ bib | DOI | http | .pdf ]
[9] Max E. Kramer, Erik Burger, and Michael Langhammer. View-centric engineering with synchronized heterogeneous models. In Proceedings of the 1st Workshop on View-Based, Aspect-Oriented and Orthographic Software Modelling, Montpellier, France, 2013, VAO '13, pages 5:1-5:6. ACM, New York, NY, USA. 2013. [ bib | DOI | http | .pdf ]
[10] Christian Vogel, Heiko Koziolek, Thomas Goldschmidt, and Erik Burger. Rapid Performance Modeling by Transforming Use Case Maps to Palladio Component Models. In Proceedings of the 4th ACM/SPEC International Conference on Performance Engineering, Prague, Czech Republic, 2013, ICPE '13, pages 101-112. ACM, New York, NY, USA. 2013. [ bib | DOI | http | .pdf ]
[11] Thomas Goldschmidt, Steffen Becker, and Erik Burger. Towards a tool-oriented taxonomy of view-based modelling. In Proceedings of the Modellierung 2012, Elmar J. Sinz and Andy Schürr, editors, Bamberg, 2012, volume P-201 of GI-Edition - Lecture Notes in Informatics (LNI), pages 59-74. Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V. (GI), Bonn, Germany. 2012. [ bib | .pdf ]
[12] Erik Burger and Ralf Reussner. Performance Certification of Software Components. In Proceedings of the 8th International Workshop on Formal Engineering approaches to Software Components and Architectures (FESCA), 2011, volume 279 of Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science, pages 33-41. Elsevier Science Publishers B. V. 2011. [ bib | slides | .pdf | Abstract ]
Non-functional properties of software should be specified early in the development process. In a distributed process of software development, this means that quality requirements must be made explicit in the specification, and the developing party of a commissioned component needs to deliver not only the implemented component, but also a description of its non-functional properties. Based on these artefacts, a conformance check guarantees that the implemented component fulfills the performance requirements. We extend the notion of model refinement to non-functional properties of software and propose a refinement calculus for conformance checking between abstract performance descriptions of components. The calculus is based on a refinement notion that covers the performance-relevant aspects of components. The approach is applied to the Palladio Component Model as a description language for performance properties of components.
[13] Erik Burger. Towards formal certification of software components. In Proceedings of the Fifteenth International Workshop on Component-Oriented Programming (WCOP) 2010, Barbora Bühnová, Ralf H. Reussner, Clemens Szyperski, and Wolfgang Weck, editors, June 2010, volume 2010-14 of Interne Berichte, pages 15-22. Karlsruhe Institue of Technology, Faculty of Informatics, Karlsruhe, Germany. June 2010. [ bib | slides | .pdf | Abstract ]
Software certification as it is practised today guarantees that certainstandards are kept in the process of software development. However, thisdoes not make any statements about the actual quality of implemented code.We propose an approach to certify the non-functional properties of component-based software which is based on a formal refinement calculus, using the performance abstractions of the Palladio Component Model.The certification process guarantees the conformance of a component implementationto its specification regarding performance properties, without having toexpose the source code of the product to a certification authority. Instead,the provable refinement of an abstract performance specification to the performance description of the implementation, together with evidence that the performance description reflects the propertiesof the component implementation, yields the certification seal.The refinement steps are described as Prolog rules so that the validity ofrefinement between two performance descriptions can be checked automatically.
[14] Erik Burger and Boris Gruschko. A Change Metamodel for the Evolution of MOF-Based Metamodels. In Proceedings of Modellierung 2010, Gregor Engels, Dimitris Karagiannis, and Heinrich C. Mayr, editors, Klagenfurt, Austria, March 26, 2010, volume P-161 of GI-LNI, pages 285-300. [ bib | slides | .pdf | Abstract ]
The evolution of software systems often produces incompatibilities with existing data and applications. To prevent incompatibilities, changes have to be well-planned, and developers should know the impact of changes on a software system. This consideration also applies to the field of model-driven development, where changes occur with the modification of the underlying metamodels. Models that are instantiated from an earlier metamodel version may not be valid instances of the new version of a metamodel. In contrast to other metamodeling standards like the Eclipse Modeling Framework (EMF), no classification of metamodel changes has been performed yet for the Meta Object Facility (MOF).The contribution of this paper is the evaluation of the impact of metamodel changes on models. For the formalisation of changes to MOF-based metamodels, a ChangeMetamodel is introduced to describe the transformation of one version of a metamodel to another. The changes are then classifed by their impact on the compatibility to existing model data. The classification is formalised using OCL constraints. The ChangeMetamodel and the change classifications presented in this paper lay the foundation for the implemention of a mechanism that allows metamodel editors to estimate the impact of metamodel changes semi-automatically.

Technical Reports

techreport_burger
[1] Max E. Kramer, Michael Langhammer, Dominik Messinger, Stephan Seifermann, and Erik Burger. Realizing change-driven consistency for component code, architectural models, and contracts in vitruvius. Technical report, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Department of Informatics, Karlsruhe, 2015. [ bib | http | http ]
[2] Erik Burger, Jörg Henß, Steffen Kruse, Martin Küster, Andreas Rentschler, and Lucia Happe. ModelJoin. A Textual Domain-Specific Language for the Combination of Heterogeneous Models. Technical Report 1, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Faculty of Informatics, 2014. [ bib | http ]
[3] Ralf Reussner, Steffen Becker, Erik Burger, Jens Happe, Michael Hauck, Anne Koziolek, Heiko Koziolek, Klaus Krogmann, and Michael Kuperberg. The Palladio Component Model. Technical report, KIT, Fakultät für Informatik, Karlsruhe, 2011. [ bib | http | Abstract ]
This report introduces the Palladio Component Model (PCM), a novel software component model for business information systems, which is specifically tuned to enable model-driven quality-of-service (QoS, i.e., performance and reliability) predictions. The PCMs goal is to assess the expected response times, throughput, and resource utilization of component-based software architectures during early development stages. This shall avoid costly redesigns, which might occur after a poorly designed architecture has been implemented. Software architects should be enabled to analyse different architectural design alternatives and to support their design decisions with quantitative results from performance or reliability analysis tools.
[4] Steffen Becker, Jens Happe, Heiko Koziolek, Klaus Krogmann, Michael Kuperberg, Ralf Reussner, Sebastian Reichelt, Erik Burger, Igor Goussev, and Dimitar Hodzhev. Software-komponentenmodelle. Technical report, Fakultät für Informatik, Universität Karlsruhe, Karlsruhe, 2007. Interner Bericht. [ bib | http | Abstract ]
In der Welt der komponentenbasierten Software-Entwicklung werden Komponentenmodelle unter Anderem dazu eingesetzt, Software-Systeme mit vorhersagbaren Eigenschaften zu erstellen. Die Bandbreite reicht von Forschungs- bis zu Industrie-Modellen. In Abhängigkeit von den Zielen der Modelle werden unterschiedliche Aspekte von Software in ein Komponentenmodell abgebildet. In diesem technischen Bericht wird ein überblick über die heute verfügbaren Software-Komponentenmodelle vermittelt.

Theses

theses_burger
[1] Erik Burger. Flexible Views for View-based Model-driven Development. PhD thesis, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Karlsruhe, Germany, July 2014. [ bib | DOI | http ]
[2] Erik Burger. Metamodel Evolution in the Context of a MOF-Based Metamodeling Infrastructure. Diplomarbeit, Universität Karlsruhe (TH), 2008. [ bib | .pdf | Abstract ]
The evolution of software systems can produce incompatibilities with existing data and applications. For this reason, changes have to be well-planned, and developers should know the impact of changes on a software system. This also affects the branch of model-driven development, where changes occur as modification of the metamodels that the system is based on. Models that are instantiated from an earlier metamodel version may not be valid instances if the new version of a metamodel. Also, changes in the interface definition may require adaptations to the modeling tools. In this thesis, the impact of meta-model changes is evaluated for the modeling standards Meta Object Facility (MOF) and the interface definition Java Metadata Interface (JMI), based on the Modeling Infrastructure (MOIN) project at SAP, which includes a MOF- based repository and implements the JMI standard. For the formalisation of changes to MOF-bases metamodels, a Change Metamodel is introduced to describe the transformation of one version of a metamodel to another by the means of modeling itself. The changes are then classifed by their impact on the compatibility of existing model data and the generated JMI interfaces. The description techniques and change classifications presented in this thesis can be used to implement a mechanism that allows metamodel editors to estimate the impact of metamodel changes with the help of modeling tools that can adapt existing data semi-automatically.
[3] Erik Burger. Query Infrastructure and OCL within the SAP Project “Modeling Infrastructure”. Studienarbeit, Universität Karlsruhe (TH), 2006. [ bib | .pdf ]