Does ‘Merging DEMO Models’ Satisfy the Associative Law? - Validation of Partial Models and Merge Operation

Tetsuya Suga, Junichi Iijima

Abstract

Partial models are small models produced by splitting a large full model into meaningful conceivable-sized fragments with each separate diagram. They are commonly used when the full model is too large and shared by several people who have their own scope of interest. Those partial models are subject to being manipulated— merged for instance. This context calls for discussion in Enterprise Ontology (EO) about the capability of business process modeling languages in handling partial models and manipulations on them. There, indeed, exists a lack of researches in the methodology of EO, namely Design & Engineering Methodology for Organizations (DEMO) for formal studies on its consistency in producing partial models and merging them. It stems from a deficiency of formal semantics in the specification of the notation. By formalizing the DEMO Construction Model (CM) with a concept of well-formed models and the merge operation from a set-theoretic approach, this paper clarifies that the closedness, commutativity, and associativity are guaranteed in merging partial models of DEMO CM. An example of EU-Rent accompanies the formalizations for validation and demonstration.

References

  1. Baresi, L. and Pezz, M. (2001). On Formalizing UML with High-Level Petri Nets. In Concurrent OOP and PN, pages 276-304. Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg.
  2. Berardi, D., Calvanese, D., and Giacomo, G. D. (2001). Reasoning on UML Class Diagrams using Description Logic Based Systems. In Proceedings of the KI2001 Workshop on Applications of Description Logics (KIDLWS'01), pages 1-12.
  3. Dietz, J. and Hoogervorst, J. (2014). The ?-theory. In TEEMs (Theories in Enterprise Engineering Memorandum).
  4. Dietz, J. L. (2006). Enterprise Ontology. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg.
  5. Dietz, J. L. (2012). DEMO-3 Way of Modelling Way of Working (version 3.5, September 2012).
  6. Dietz, J. L. (2013). DEMO-3 Models and Representations (version 3.6c, March 2013).
  7. Enjo, H., Tanabu, M., and Iijima, J. (2010). A Step Toward Foundation of Class Diagram Algebra for Enterprise Service Systems. In 6th International Conference on Service Systems and Service Management, 2009. ICSSSM 7809, pages 412-417.
  8. Klimek, R. and Szwed, P. (2010). Formal analysis of use case diagrams. Computer Science, 11:115-131.
  9. Liepins, R., Cerans, K., and Sprogis, A. (2012). Visualizing and Editing Ontology Fragments with OWLGrEd. In Lohmann, S. and Pellegrini, T., editors, the I-SEMANTICS 2012 Posters & Demonstrations Track, pages 22-25, Graz, Austria.
  10. Mancioppi, M., Danylevych, O., Karastoyanova, D., and Leymann, F. (2012). Towards classification criteria for process fragmentation techniques. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, 99 LNBIP(PART 1):1-12.
  11. Meng, S. and Aichernig, B. K. (2003). Towards a Coalgebraic Semantics of UML : Class Diagrams and Use Cases. Technical report, UNU/IIST Report No. 272.
  12. Moreira, A. M., Ringeissen, C., Déharbe, D., and Lima, G. (2004). Manipulating algebraic specifications with term-based and graph-based representations. Journal of Logic and Algebraic Programming, 59(1-2):63-87.
  13. Open Management Group (2013). Semantics of Business Vocabulary and Business Rules (SBVR), V1.2 Annex G - EU-Rent Example.
  14. Op't Land, M., Zwitzer, H., Ensink, P., and Lebel, Q. (2009). Towards a fast enterprise ontology based method for post merger integration. In Proceedings of the 2009 ACM symposium on Applied Computing - SAC 7809, number May 2004, page 245, New York, New York, USA. ACM Press.
  15. Perinforma, A. P. (2012). The Essence of Organization. Sapio Enterprise Engineering.
  16. Sengupta, S. and Bhattacharya, S. (2006). Formalization of UML use case diagram - A Z notation based approach. In 2006 International Conference on Computing and Informatics, ICOCI 7806, pages 2-7.
  17. Shroff, M. and France, R. B. (1997). Towards a formalization of UML class structures in Z. Proceedings Twenty-First Annual International Computer Software and Applications Conference (COMPSAC'97), pages 646-651.
  18. van Kervel, S. J. H. (2011). High Quality Technical Documentation for Large Industrial Plants Using an Enterprise Engineering and Conceptual Modeling Based Software Solution. Advances in Conceptual Modeling. Recent Developments and New Directions, pages 383-388.
  19. Zhao, J. and Duan, Z. (2009). Verification of use case with Petri nets in requirement analysis. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics), 5593 LNCS(PART 2):29-42.
  20. Proof of Lemma 2: Another Expression of Condition 5. Let hA?, T ?i be a given OCD, and hA, T i be an element of a family of sub-Societies D obtained from hA?, T ?i. Then, ?a ? A, ?t ? T, a ? fTin (t) ? fTex (t) if and only if A ? ? (T ). This is obvious by Definition 6.
Download


Paper Citation


in Harvard Style

Suga T. and Iijima J. (2015). Does ‘Merging DEMO Models’ Satisfy the Associative Law? - Validation of Partial Models and Merge Operation . In Proceedings of the 7th International Joint Conference on Knowledge Discovery, Knowledge Engineering and Knowledge Management - Volume 2: SSEO, (IC3K 2015) ISBN 978-989-758-158-8, pages 467-478. DOI: 10.5220/0005584004670478


in Bibtex Style

@conference{sseo15,
author={Tetsuya Suga and Junichi Iijima},
title={Does ‘Merging DEMO Models’ Satisfy the Associative Law? - Validation of Partial Models and Merge Operation},
booktitle={Proceedings of the 7th International Joint Conference on Knowledge Discovery, Knowledge Engineering and Knowledge Management - Volume 2: SSEO, (IC3K 2015)},
year={2015},
pages={467-478},
publisher={SciTePress},
organization={INSTICC},
doi={10.5220/0005584004670478},
isbn={978-989-758-158-8},
}


in EndNote Style

TY - CONF
JO - Proceedings of the 7th International Joint Conference on Knowledge Discovery, Knowledge Engineering and Knowledge Management - Volume 2: SSEO, (IC3K 2015)
TI - Does ‘Merging DEMO Models’ Satisfy the Associative Law? - Validation of Partial Models and Merge Operation
SN - 978-989-758-158-8
AU - Suga T.
AU - Iijima J.
PY - 2015
SP - 467
EP - 478
DO - 10.5220/0005584004670478