500 rub
Journal Information-measuring and Control Systems №4 for 2026 г.
Article in number:
Metamodel of a software resource and an algorithm for traceable construction of software projections
Type of article: scientific article
DOI: https://doi.org/10.18127/j20700814-202604-10
UDC: 004.42:004.5:004.6
Keywords: Metamodel software resource model-driven engineering traceability model consistency incremental transformation mutation testing
Authors:

E.Yu. Bolshakov¹

¹ Russian Biotechnological University (ROSBIOTECH) (Moscow, Russia)
1emil.bolshakov@mgupp.ru

Abstract:

The proposed metamodel improves the consistency and reliability of constructing and maintaining software representations of a domain resource by separating construct types, a specification instance, and derived artifacts. The resource is represented as a typed tuple of informational, behavioral, control, and interface components. Partial operators are defined for DB, API, UI, OWL, BPMN, and documentation projections, together with predicates for completeness, executability, and cross-projection consistency.
An artifact-to-component trace relation is used to determine the projections affected by a specification change and to explain the reason for each reconstruction. The dependency-completeness condition requires every generator input to be registered, while the atomic publication rule preserves the previous registry state whenever specification validation, artifact construction, or final verification fails. Thus, interpretation, generation, verification, and version commit form separate deterministic stages and a partially consistent version cannot become active.

Computational validation on ten resource types included 80 mutation tests and 120 change-propagation scenarios. For the implemented violation catalogue, Precision and Recall were both 1.00, and the version number and SHA-256 digest remained unchanged after every rejected candidate. The predicted projection set matched the reference oracle in all propagation scenarios. Local construction selected 400 generator executions instead of 720 full-reconstruction executions, which corresponds to a structural reduction of 44.4%. These findings confirm the implementation against the controlled specification rather than provide a universal estimate of development effort or industrial runtime performance.

The method is applicable to verifiable enterprise-system constructors, schema registries, and maintenance tools that must coordinate storage, API, user-interface, semantic, process, and documentation artifacts. Further work should include independent dependency annotation, evaluation on real evolving projects, fault-injection tests for a persistent transactional registry, and controlled comparison with contract-first and MDE tools. Formal migration of existing instances when the metamodel itself changes also remains an important research task.

Pages: 88-100
For citation

Bolshakov E.Yu. Metamodel of a software resource and an algorithm for traceable construction of software projections // Information-measuring and Control Systems. 2026. V. 24. № 4. P. 88−100. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18127/j20700814-202604-10

References
  1. Skryl' S.V., Terekhov V.I., Goryachkin B.S., Myshenkov K.S. Polnota i svoevremennost' informacionnogo vzaimodejstviya v ASOI kak ob"ektivnaya harakteristika effektivnosti kognitivnoj deyatel'nosti v takoj sisteme. Dinamika slozhnyh sistem. 2026. T. 20, № 2. S. 5–13. DOI: 10.18127/j19997493-202602-01. EDN: VBAROI (In Russian).
  2. Schmidt D.C. Model-Driven Engineering. Computer. 2006. V. 39. № 2. P. 25–31. DOI: 10.1109/MC.2006.58.
  3. Bézivin J. On the Unification Power of Models. Software and Systems Modeling. 2005. V. 4. P. 171–188. DOI: 10.1007/s10270-005-0079-0 (In Russian).
  4. France R., Rumpe B. Model-driven Development of Complex Software: A Research Roadmap. Future of Software Engineering. IEEE. 2007. P. 37–54. DOI: 10.1109/FOSE.2007.14.
  5. Brambilla M., Cabot J., Wimmer M. Model-Driven Software Engineering in Practice. 2nd ed. Morgan & Claypool, 2017. 207 p.
  6. Object Management Group. Meta Object Facility Core Specification. Version 2.5.1. 2016. URL: https://www.omg.org/spec/MOF/ 2.5.1 (data obrashcheniya: 15.07.2026).
  7. Object Management Group. Meta Object Facility Query/View/Transformation. Version 1.3. 2016. URL: https://www.omg.org/spec/ QVT/1.3 (data obrashcheniya: 15.07.2026).
  8. Object Management Group. Object Constraint Language. Version 2.4. 2014. URL: https://www.omg.org/spec/OCL/2.4 (data obrashcheniya: 15.07.2026).
  9. Mens T., Van Gorp P. A Taxonomy of Model Transformation. Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science. 2006. Vol. 152. P. 125–142. DOI: 10.1016/j.entcs.2005.10.021.
  10. Boronat A. Incremental Execution of Rule-Based Model Transformation. International Journal on Software Tools for Technology Transfer. 2021. Vol. 23. P. 289–311. DOI: 10.1007/s10009-020-00583-y.
  11. Mkaouar H., Blouin D., Borde E. A Benchmark of Incremental Model Transformation Tools Based on an Industrial Case Study with AADL. Software and Systems Modeling. 2023. V. 22. P. 175–201. DOI: 10.1007/s10270-022-00989-z.
  12. Barkowsky M., Giese H. Incremental Model Transformations with Triple Graph Grammars for Multi-Version Models and Multi-Version Pattern Matching. Software and Systems Modeling. 2025. V. 24. P. 1699–1736. DOI: 10.1007/s10270-024-01238-1.
  13. Rinker F., Waltersdorfer L., Meixner K., Winkler D., Lüder A., Biffl S. Traceable Multi-view Model Integration: A Transformation Pipeline for Agile Production Systems Engineering. SN Computer Science. 2023. V. 4. Article 205. DOI: 10.1007/s42979-022-01572-5.
  14. Bol'shakov E.Yu., Novickij V.O. Avtomatizirovannaya razrabotka programmnogo obespecheniya dlya sozdaniya bekend-veb-serverov. Dinamika slozhnyh sistem – XXI vek. 2025. T. 19. № 3. S. 58–66. DOI: 10.18127/j19997493-202503-06 (In Russian).
  15. Bol'shakov E.Yu., Novickij V.O. Integraciya ontologicheskih modelej i biznes-processov v informacionno-analiticheskoj sisteme predpriyatiya. Dinamika slozhnyh sistem – XXI vek. 2026. T. 20. № 3. S. 28–39. DOI: 10.18127/j19997493-202603-03 (In Russian).
  16. Fielding R.T. Architectural Styles and the Design of Network-Based Software Architectures: doctoral dissertation. University of California, Irvine, 2000. 180 p.
  17. OpenAPI Initiative. OpenAPI Specification. Version 3.1.1. 2024. URL: https://spec.openapis.org/oas/v3.1.1.html (data obrashcheniya: 15.07.2026).
  18. Object Management Group. Business Process Model and Notation. Version 2.0.2. 2014. URL: https://www.omg.org/spec/BPMN/ 2.0.2 (data obrashcheniya: 15.07.2026).
  19. Object Management Group. Ontology Definition Metamodel. Version 1.1. 2014. URL: https://www.omg.org/spec/ODM/1.1 (data obrashcheniya: 15.07.2026).
  20. ISO/IEC 25010:2023. Systems and Software Engineering – Systems and Software Quality Requirements and Evaluation (SQuaRE) – Product Quality Model. Geneva: ISO, 2023.
  21. ISO/IEC/IEEE 42010:2022. Software, Systems and Enterprise – Architecture Description. Geneva: ISO, 2022.
  22. Antsifrov N.S., Myshenkov K.S. Evaluation of Software Lifecycle Models Based on Project Parameter Metrics. 2026 International Conference on Integrated Intelligence and Cognitive Engineering (ICIICE), Dubai, United Arab Emirates, 18–19 Apr. 2026. IEEE, 2026. P. 1–6. DOI: 10.1109/ICIICE69672.2026.11565157.
Date of receipt: 15.06.2026
Approved after review: 22.06.2026
Accepted for publication: 15.07.2026