CS2125 Paper Review Form - Winter 2018

Reviewer: Mikhail Berezovskiy

Paper Title: Formal Validation of Domain-Specific Languages 
	with Derived Features and Well-Formedness Constraints

Author(s): Oszkar Semerath, Agnes Barta, Akos Horvath, Zoltan Szatmari, Daniel Varro

1) Is the paper technically correct?
 [v] Yes
 [ ] Mostly (minor flaws, but mostly solid)
 [ ] No

2) Originality
 [ ] Very good (very novel, trailblazing work)
 [ ] Good 
 [v] Marginal (very incremental)
 [ ] Poor (little or nothing that is new)

3) Technical Depth
 [ ] Very good (comparable to best conference papers)
 [v] Good (comparable to typical conference papers)
 [ ] Marginal depth
 [ ] Little or no depth

4) Impact/Significance
 [ ] Very significant
 [v] Significant
 [ ] Marginal significance.
 [ ] Little or no significance.

5) Presentation
 [ ] Very well written
 [ ] Generally well written
 [v] Readable
 [ ] Needs considerable work
 [ ] Unacceptably bad

6) Overall Rating
 [ ] Strong accept (award quality)
 [v] Accept (high quality - would argue for acceptance)
 [ ] Weak Accept (borderline, but lean towards acceptance)
 [ ] Weak Reject (not sure why this paper was published)


7) Summary of the paper's main contribution and rationale for your recommendation. (1-2 paragraphs)
	This paper describes an enhanced Domain Specific Languages validation in the example of avionics modeling. 
	The industry that quite complex, has numerous constraints and documentation.
	Authors applied multi-level validation with converting: Metamodel, OCL, GP, and Partial Snapshots into First Level Logic, 
	which is used by Reasoner (Z3 or Alloy, in the paper) for representing validation results.


8) List 1-3 strengths of the paper.  (1-2 sentences each,
identified as S1, S2, S3.)
- paper cover in details how to implement Graph-queriers from EMF-IncQuery into FOL, 
	in same time introducing a concept of partial snapshots which can be used as an approximation of complex features
- this approach can reduce time and cost for DSL tools development, by earlier inconsistency detections

9) List 1-3 weaknesses of the paper (1-2 sentences each,
identified as W1, W2, W3.)
 - This article is quite complex reading for readers not familiar with EMF, IncQuery, Z3. 
	Some parts overwhelmed by details which makes hard to get the main idea of the particular section.
 - Since 2015 EMF-IncQuery hasnt been developing