[ecoop-info] Call for Cases - Transformation Tool Contest 2013

Louis Rose louis.rose at york.ac.uk
Wed Dec 12 10:09:11 CET 2012

Please find below the first announcement of the Transformation Tool Contest 2013.  The deadline for submitting cases is January 21st 2013.  Subsequent deadlines are mentioned below.

A PDF version of this call can be downloaded from http://planet-sl.org/ttc2013/images/userdirs/122/ttc2013/CfC.pdf

Looking forward to your participation,
  Dr. Louis Rose, Lecturer of Enterprise Systems,
  Department of Computer Science, University of York, United Kingdom

Transformation Tool Contest 2013
Co-located with ICMT 2013 and more, Budapest, Hungary. 

1 Scope: Why people who have never heard of transformation tools 
  should also submit cases

Today models are used in a wide range of application domains from 
biology to logistics, from geographic information systems to 
finance, and, of course, also in software engineering.

With more and more models, the requirement naturally arises to 
transform (i.e. convert) models into other models. As an example, 
consider a tool that requires its input data in a particular 
form, but the actual data is only available in another form. 
Another popular use case of model transformation is the 
simulation of dynamic systems. Here, the model evolves by 
successively applying certain rules. For instance, using 
state-of-the-art transformation tools, problems such as the 
intra-cellular synthesis of proteins have been modeled 

A (non-exhaustive) list of typical use cases of transformation 

• model synchronisation and merging, 

• interoperability and migration, 

• model execution and simulation, 

• verification (of models or rule sets), 

• knowledge extraction. 

The Transformation Tool Contest (or TTC) aims at bringing the 
people from such problem domains together with the people that 
master tools for solving their transformation problems. Since it 
is difficult for people unfamiliar with model transformation to 
judge whether their problem is appropriate for TTC and, if so, to 
specify their problem in a way understandable by model 
transformation professionals, the organizing committee (see 
below) welcomes any questions in this respect.

2 About TTC

The aim of this event is to compare the expressiveness, the 
usability and the performance of graph and model transformation 
tools along a number of selected case studies. A deeper 
understanding of the relative merits of different tool features 
will help to further improve graph and model transformation tools 
and to indicate open problems. This contest is the sixth of its 
kind (after an AGTiVE 2007 session, as GraBaTs 2008 and 2009 
workshops, and as the TTC 2010 and 2011 workshops). For the 
fourth time, the contest is co-located with the international 
conference on model transformation (ICMT). Teams from the major 
international players in the development and use of model 
transformation tools are expected to participate again.

3 TTC Procedure

  Phase 1: Case proposal submission In order to facilitate the 
  comparison of transformation tools, we are soliciting potential 
  case studies. If you have a suitable case study, please 
  describe it shortly but as detailed as needed and submit it to 
  the online submission system. Cases that have already been 
  solved using a particular tool (or general purpose programming 
  language) are also very welcome. Please include a reference 
  solution for such cases 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 and extensions) 

  • What are the criteria for evaluating the submitted solutions 
    to the case?

    – 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[footnote:
See http://is.tm.tue.nl/staff/pvgorp/share/.

    – 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 
      design level?
 (e.g., measure the number of rules, the conciseness of rules, 

  • 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[footnote:
See for example 

    – a so-called “classification scheme” in ResearchR[footnote:
] (or a similar web 2.0 platform.) 

  Please submit at http://www.easychair.org/conferences/?conf=ttc2013
  . Your submission should include (i) a case description (in PDF 
  format) answering the above questions and (ii) a ZIP archive 
  that contains all test artifacts as well as the evaluation / 
  ranking instrument.

  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 5: Workshop and live contest Besides the presentations of 
  the submitted solutions, the workshop will comprise a live 
  contest. For more details (such as example cases and solutions 
  from previous editions), please consult the TTC website: http://is.tm.tue.nl/staff/pvgorp/events/TTC/

  Phase 6: Post-Proceedings and Journal Papers Case descriptions 
  and solution papers have to be resubmitted for the TTC 
  post-proceedings. All submissions will be reviewed anonymously 
  by our program committee. See http://arxiv.org/html/1111.4407v1 
  for the TTC 2010 post-proceedings. Finally, we aim at one 
  journal publication per case. Those articles will introduce the 
  case and compare the solutions from a high-level perspective. 
  Also the results of the evaluation sheets filled in during the 
  workshop will be considered. These articles will be compiled 
  and edited by the case submitters together with the workshop 

4 Important dates

| Event                         |  Deadline          |  Interval to    |
|                               |                    |  next deadline  |
| Call for cases                |  12 December 2012  |  6 weeks        |
| Case submission deadline      |  21 January 2013   |  3 weeks        |
| Call for solutions            |  11 February 2013  |  6 weeks        |
| Solution submission deadline  |  25 March 2013     |  2 weeks        |
| Open peer review deadline     |  8 April 2013      |  3 weeks        |
| Notification                  |  29 April 2013     |  8 weeks        |
| Workshop                      |  18-19 June 2013                     |

5 Committees

5.1 Organizing Committee

• Christian Krause (Hasso-Plattner-Institut, Germany) 

• Louis Rose (University of York, United Kingdom) 

• Pieter Van Gorp (Eindhoven University of Technology, The 

5.2 Steering Committee

• Richard Paige (University of York, United Kingdom) 

• Arend Rensink (University of Twente, The Netherlands) 

• Bernhard Schätz (Technical University Munich, Germany) 

• Albert Zündorf (University of Kassel, Germany) 

5.3 Program Committee

• Harrie Jan Sander Bruggink (University of Duisburg-Essen, 

• Christian Krause (Hasso-Plattner-Institut, Germany) 

• Ralf Lämmel (University of Koblenz-Landau, Germany) 

• Sonja Maier (Bundeswehr University Munich, Germany) 

• Bart Meyers (University of Antwerp, Belgium) 

• Anantha Narayanan (Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee) 

• Richard Paige (University of York, United Kingdom) 

• Arend Rensink (University of Twente, The Netherlands) 

• Louis Rose (University of York, United Kingdom) 

• Bernhard Schätz (Technische Universität München, Germany) 

• Gabriele Taentzer (University of Marburg, Germany) 

• Pieter Van Gorp (Eindhoven University of Technolgoy, The 

• Gergely Várro (Budapest University of Technology and Economics, 

• Jurgen Vinju (Universiteit van Amsterdam, The Netherlands) 

• Bernhard Westfechtel (University of Bayreuth, Germany) 

• Albert Zündorf (University of Kassel, Germany)

More information about the ecoop-info mailing list