Call for Cases
In order to facilitate the
comparison of transformation tools, we are soliciting potential
case studies. Specific areas of transformation case studies relevant
to TTC are described on our aims and scope page. If you have a suitable case study, please
describe it shortly but as detailed as needed and submit it to
the online submission system. Please include a reference
solution to your case to support the evaluation of the
correctness of submitted solutions.
Our program committee will select a small, but representative
set of case studies to be used for the contest. Case
descriptions should answer the following questions:
- What is the context of the case?
(provide a short description and references)
- What is the subject to be modeled?
(what are the input and output modeling languages?)
- What is the purpose of the models?
(what are they typically used for from a larger
perspective than the proposed case study?)
- What are variation points in the case?
(divide up your case in core characteristics
- What are the criteria for evaluating the submitted solutions
to the case?
- What should be the prizes for the solutions for the case? Simply
1st/2nd/3rd place may be fitting, or Best Overall and then Best X (where
X is one of the desired attributes).
- Correctness test: which are the reference input/ouput
documents (models/graphs) and how should they be used?
Ideally, a case description includes a testsuite, as well
as a test driver (The test driver can be an online web service,
or a local script that can be deployed in SHARE,
or a Docker image on Docker Hub
- Which transformation tool-related features are important
and how can they be classified?
(e.g., formal analysis of the transformation program, rule
debugging support, ...)
- What transformation language-related challenges are
important and how can they be classified?
(e.g., declarative bidirectionality, declarative change
propagation, declarative subgraph copying, cyclic graph
support, typing issues, ...)
- How to measure the quality of submitted solutions, at the
(e.g., measure the number of rules, the conciseness of
- How can the solutions be evaluated (ranked) systematically
using information technology?
Please provide one of the following:
- a simple spreadsheet (an evaluation form that can be
aggregated easily (See for example http://goo.gl/QwxTAs),
- a so-called "classification scheme" in ResearchR
(or a similar web 2.0 platform.)
Please submit through EasyChair.
Your submission should include:
a case description answering the above questions in PDF format using the CEUR-WS style and not exceeding 10 excluding references and appendices.
a URL to a publicly available repository hosting service (e.g., github, bitbucket) that contains all test artifacts as well as the evaluation / ranking instrument and any other necessary resources. The repository hosting should additionally provide a basic issue tracking system to keep track of any problems encountered by solution authors. This link should be referenced in the PDF document. Furthermore, in an appendix within the document should be clearly described all necessary instructions how to evaluate the submission. For example, if the case includes a reference implementation (which is highly recommended), a set of steps to run the implementation should be provided.
The deadline for cases will be in early Spring 2019.
Following the selection of a subset of the submitted cases by our
programme committee, the following phases will be conducted.
Phase 2: Case solution submission. All those who like to
participate in the contest will be asked to choose one or more
case studies, take their favorite transformation tool and
submit their solutions. A separate call for solutions will be
distributed, after the cases have been selected.
Phase 3: Open peer review. The solution reviewing before the
workshop will be done by other solution submitters. All
solution submitters have to review three other solutions to the
case that they have addressed. These reviews will not be
anonymous, since these reviewers ideally will also be the
opponents at the workshop. The purpose of the peer reviewing is
that the participants get as much insight into the competitor's
solutions as possible and also to raise potential problems.
Case submitters should be available at this stage to resolve
conflicting interpretations (if any) about the case
Phase 4: Workshop and live contest. Besides the
presentations of the submitted solutions, the workshop will comprise a
live contest. The case submitters should have evaluated independently the
various presented solutions according to the spreadsheet, and should be
present during the break to discuss the final awards to be given. For more
details (such as example cases and solutions
from previous editions), please consult the other sections of the TTC