@inproceedings{8033, abstract = {{Version management of business process models requires that changes can be resolved by applying change operations. In order to give a user maximal freedom concerning the application order of change operations, position parameters of change operations must be computed dynamically during change resolution. In such an approach, change operations with computed position parameters must be applicable on the model and dependencies and conflicts of change operations must be taken into account because otherwise invalid models can be constructed. In this paper, we study the concept of partially specified change operations where parameters are computed dynamically. We provide a formalization for partially specified change operations using graph transformation and provide a concept for their applicability. Based on this, we study potential dependencies and conflicts of change operations and show how these can be taken into account within change resolution. Using our approach, a user can resolve changes of business process models without being unnecessarily restricted to a certain order.}}, author = {{Küster, Jochen and Gerth, Christian and Engels, Gregor}}, booktitle = {{Proceedings of the 6th European Conference on Modelling Foundations and Applications (ECMFA'10)}}, pages = {{201--216}}, publisher = {{Springer}}, title = {{{Dynamic Computation of Change Operations in Version Management of Business Process Models}}}, doi = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-13595-8_17}}, volume = {{6138}}, year = {{2010}}, } @inproceedings{8034, author = {{Engels, Gregor and Sauer, Stefan}}, booktitle = {{Graph Transformations and Model-Driven Engineering}}, editor = {{Engels, Gregor and Lewerentz, Claus and Schäfer, Wilhelm and Schürr, Andy and Westfechtel, Bernhard}}, pages = {{411--440}}, publisher = {{Springer}}, title = {{{A Meta-Method for Defining Software Engineering Methods}}}, doi = {{https://groups.uni-paderborn.de/fg-engels/Publications/10.1007/978-3-642-17322-6_18}}, volume = {{5765}}, year = {{2010}}, } @inproceedings{8035, author = {{Sancar, Yavuz and Schumacher, Claudia}}, booktitle = {{Proceedings of the Conference on Software & Systems Engineering Essentials 2010 (SEE 2010), Köln (Germany)}}, pages = {{299--314}}, publisher = {{Technische Universität München}}, title = {{{Erweiterung des TPI-Modells zur Reifegradbewertung unter Berücksichtigung von projekteigenen Anforderungen}}}, year = {{2010}}, } @inproceedings{8037, author = {{Salger, Frank and Engels, Gregor and Hofmann, Alexander}}, booktitle = {{Proceedings ACM/IEEE 32nd International Conference on Software Engineering, Software Engineering in Practice Track, Cape Town, South Africa (ICSE'10)}}, pages = {{29--38}}, publisher = {{ACM New York, NY, USA}}, title = {{{Assessments in Global Software Development: A Tailorable Framework for Industrial Projects}}}, doi = {{http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1810295.1810301}}, volume = {{2}}, year = {{2010}}, } @inproceedings{8038, author = {{Chambers, Chris and Erwig, Martin and Luckey, Markus}}, booktitle = {{Proceedings of the 26th IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages and Human-Centric Computing 2010 (VL/HCC 2010)}}, pages = {{85--92}}, publisher = {{IEEE Computer Society}}, title = {{{SheetDiff: A Tool for Identifying Changes in Spreadsheets}}}, year = {{2010}}, } @inproceedings{8039, author = {{Van den Bergh, Jan and Meixner, Gerrit and Breiner, Kai and Pleuß, Andreas and Sauer, Stefan and Hussmann, Heinrich}}, booktitle = {{Proc. 28th International Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI 2010)}}, pages = {{4429--4432}}, publisher = {{ACM}}, title = {{{Model-driven Development of Advanced User Interfaces}}}, year = {{2010}}, } @inproceedings{8040, abstract = {{Software Quality Lab (s-lab) is an open multi-private-public partnership institute for knowledge and technology transfer. In s-lab, partners from industrial software development closely cooperate with research groups of the University of Paderborn. Together with partners from industry, s-lab develops and evaluates constructive and analytical methods and tools of software engineering for obtaining high-quality software. Testing plays an important role in analytical quality assurance within s-lab’s activities. Thereby our main focus lies on the development of testing methods, test automation tools and test management concepts for the individual needs of the industrial partners. Because of the different requirements of the university and the industry; the cooperation involves some challenges, e.g. defining projects aiming at the commercial interests of the industry and addressing interesting research questions. In this paper, we give an overview of testing activities in s-lab and address targets and challenges of the cooperative work between industry and university. We also summarize the lessons learned during the numerous testing projects especially in the domain of business information systems.}}, author = {{Güldali, Baris and Sauer, Stefan}}, booktitle = {{online Proc. of International TestIstanbul Conference 2010 (URL: www.testistanbul.org/presentations.html)}}, publisher = {{Turkish Testing Board}}, title = {{{Transfer of Testing Research from University to Industry: An Experience Report}}}, year = {{2010}}, } @inproceedings{8041, author = {{von der Maßen, Thomas and Wübbeke, Andreas}}, booktitle = {{Proceedings of Software Engineering 2010 (SE2010)}}, pages = {{17--18}}, publisher = {{Gesellschaft für Informatik (GI)}}, title = {{{Verteiltes Testen heterogener Systemlandschaften}}}, volume = {{P-159}}, year = {{2010}}, } @techreport{8219, abstract = {{Modern business process modeling environments support distributed development by means of model version control, i.e., comparison and merging of two different model versions. This is a challenging task since most modeling languages support an almost arbitrary creation of process models. Thus, in multi-developer environments, process models or parts of them are often syntactically very different but semantically equivalent. Hence, the comparison of business process models must be performed on a semantic level rather then on a syntactic level. For the domain of business process modeling, this problem is yet unsolved. This paper describes an approach that allows the semantic comparison of different business process models using a normal form. For that purpose, the process models are fully automatically translated into process model terms and normalized using a term rewriting system. The resulting normal forms can be efficiently compared. Our approach enables the semantic comparison of business process models ignoring syntactic redundancies.}}, author = {{Gerth, Christian and Luckey, Markus and Küster, Jochen and Engels, Gregor}}, publisher = {{IBM Research}}, title = {{{Detection of Semantically Equivalent Fragments for Business Process Model Change Management}}}, year = {{2010}}, } @techreport{8220, author = {{Hülsbusch, Mathias and König, Barbara and Rensink, Arend and Semenyak, Maria and Soltenborn, Christian and Wehrheim, Heike}}, publisher = {{Centre for Telematics and Information Technology of the University of Twente}}, title = {{{Full Semantics Preservation in Model Transformation - A Comparison of Proof Techniques}}}, year = {{2010}}, } @inproceedings{5756, author = {{Brüseke, Frank and Sancar, Yavuz and Yigitbas, Enes}}, booktitle = {{Proceedings of the Conference on Software & Systems Engineering Essentials 2010 (SEE 2010), Köln (Germany)}}, pages = {{277--298}}, publisher = {{Technische Universität München}}, title = {{{Erfolgsfaktoren von Testprozessbewertungsmodellen}}}, year = {{2010}}, } @article{7356, author = {{Löffler, Renate and Güldali, Baris and Geisen, Silke}}, journal = {{Softwaretechnik-Trends}}, number = {{3}}, pages = {{9--12}}, title = {{{Towards Model-based Acceptance Testing for Scrum}}}, volume = {{30}}, year = {{2010}}, } @article{7357, author = {{Güldali, Baris and Jungmayr, Stefan and Mlynarski, Michael and Neumann, Stefan and Winter, Mario}}, journal = {{OBJEKTspektrum}}, number = {{3}}, pages = {{63--69}}, title = {{{Starthilfe für modellbasiertes Testen}}}, year = {{2010}}, } @article{7358, author = {{Beulen, Dominik and Güldali, Baris and Mlynarski, Michael}}, journal = {{Softwaretechnik-Trends}}, number = {{2}}, pages = {{6--9}}, title = {{{Tabellarischer Vergleich der Prozessmodelle für modellbasiertes Testen aus Managementsicht}}}, volume = {{30}}, year = {{2010}}, } @article{7359, author = {{Späth, Melanie and Mlynarski, Michael}}, journal = {{Softwaretechnik-Trends}}, title = {{{Agiles Testen in Großprojekten mit TDD und Testaspekten: Beobachtungen und erste Erfahrungen}}}, volume = {{30}}, year = {{2010}}, } @article{7364, abstract = {{In the last years the software engineering community pays a strong interest in agile development methods. Those methods place software testing for example the Test-Driven Development method as an important task of the development process. Agile projects rely on good test automation tools. In this paper we evaluate five test automation tools for their usage in acceptance testing for web applications using Test-Driven Development.}}, author = {{Jureczko, Marian and Mlynarski, Michael}}, journal = {{Electrical Review}}, pages = {{198--202}}, title = {{{Automated acceptance testing tools for web applications using Test-Driven Development}}}, volume = {{86}}, year = {{2010}}, } @inbook{7556, author = {{Oster, Sebastian and Wübbeke, Andreas and Engels, Gregor and Schürr, Andy}}, booktitle = {{Model-Based Testing For Embedded Systems}}, editor = {{Mosterman, I. Schieferdecker, J. Zander , P.}}, pages = {{339--381}}, publisher = {{CRC Press}}, title = {{{Model-Based Software Product Lines Testing Survey}}}, year = {{2010}}, } @phdthesis{7573, abstract = {{Software Product Lines (SPL) are a development paradigm allowing the reduction of the software system development time while increasing their quality. To reach these goals, the artefacts being part of many or all software systems are developed only once and reused within the different software systems. The software systems developed by a software product line approach are called products. Like a thread the reuse of artefacts is woven into the software product line development process. As some artefacts are only used for the development of some products, these artefacts constitute the variability of the SPL. First of all, the modelling of variability has to be enabled in every artefact. Beside this, dependencies can arise between variable artefacts. The modelling of variability and dependencies also demands the redevelopment or adaption of specification techniques for these artefacts. This thesis focuses on the variability management concerning requirements and test case specification for Software Product Lines. For this purpose, existing modelling languages and specification techniques are augmented with variability instead of redeveloping similar software development artefacts over and over again. In order to augment the modelling languages by variability, a language construction process based on a meta model of the variability management is defined. In order to manage the dependencies between variable artefacts, a feature based variability management is introduced. Finally, the extension of specification techniques for requirements specifications based on use case descriptions and test specifications are described. The contribution of this thesis is substantiated by a prototypical tool support and an industrial case study.}}, author = {{Wübbeke, Andreas}}, title = {{{Variabilitätsmanagement in Anforderungs- und Testfallspezifikation für Software-Produktlinien}}}, year = {{2010}}, } @inproceedings{8437, abstract = {{Deriving a new language L_B from an already existing one L_A is a typical task in domain-specific language engineering. Here, besides adjusting L_A's syntax, the language engineer has to modify the semantics of L_A to derive L_B's semantics. Particularly, in case of behavioral modeling languages, this is a difficult and error-prone task, as changing the behavior of language elements or adding behavior for new elements might have undesired side effects. Therefore, we propose a test-driven language derivation process. In a first step, the language engineer creates example models containing the changed or newly added elements in different contexts. For each of these models, the language engineer also precisely describes the expected behavior. In a second step, each example model and its description of behavior is transformed into an executable test case. Finally, these test cases are used when deriving the actual semantics of L_B - at any time, the language engineer can run the tests to verify whether the changes he performed on L_A's semantics indeed produce the desired behavior. In this paper, we illustrate the approach using our graph transformation-based semantics specification technique Dynamic Meta Modeling. This is once more an example where the graph transformation approach shows its strengths and appropriateness to support software engineering tasks as, e.g., model transformations, software specifications, or tool development.}}, author = {{Engels, Gregor and Soltenborn, Christian}}, booktitle = {{Proceedings of the International Colloquium on Graph and Model Transformation (GraMoT 2010), Berlin (Germany)}}, pages = {{240--257}}, publisher = {{European Association of Software Science and Technology}}, title = {{{Test-driven Language Derivation with Graph Transformation-based Dynamic Meta Modeling}}}, volume = {{30}}, year = {{2010}}, } @inproceedings{8438, author = {{Güldali, Baris and Mlynarski, Michael}}, booktitle = {{Proceedings of the IWK2010 Workshops: The First International Workshop on Evolution Support for Model-Based Development and Testing (EMDT2010)}}, pages = {{55--58 }}, title = {{{Agility vs. Model-based Testing: A fair Play?}}}, volume = {{646}}, year = {{2010}}, }