A New Methodology CIM to PIM Transformation Resulting from an
Analytical Survey
Yassine Rhazali, Youssef Hadi and Abdelaziz Mouloudi
MISC Laboratory, Faculty of Sciences Kenitra, Ibn Tofail University, Kenitra, Morocco
Keywords: MDA, MDE, CIM to PIM Transformation, Business Process Modelling, Computer Modelling.
Abstract: Our paper shows a new methodology for controlling the models transformation from CIM to PIM into
model driven architecture. In this proposal we founded on an analytical survey. Our methodology is based
on creation of the transformable models in CIM level to facilitate the transformation task to the PIM level.
We create a good PIM level, according to the three classic modelling views. Then, a set of transformation
rules are established through ATL language to assure a semi-automatic transformation between CIM and
PIM. Our methodology ensures the recommendations of MDA approach by presenting business process in
CIM level through BPMN which is OMG standard for modelling business process. However, we founded
on UML to model the PIM level, because UML is advisable by MDA in PIM.
1 INTRODUCTION
MDE (Model Driven Engineering) is an alternative
approach of software engineering which allows the
development of information system, This approach
is founded on the creation of source models and
transforming them to multiple levels of abstraction
until having the source code automatically (Schmidt,
2006). Its objective is automated the process of
software development which is followed manually
by the information technology professionals. MDE
is a generic approach viewed as a family of
approaches, where MDA (Model Driven
Architecture) (OMG-MDA, 2003) supported by
OMG, is considered as the most interesting
approach. MDA has the same principles of MDE,
but it provides its own bases represented by three
levels of abstraction (CIM, PIM, and PSM), exacts
the respect of multiple requirements, and
recommends the use of some standards.
Model transformation forms the main key in
MDA. The transformation from CIM to PIM is the
first kind of transformation into MDA that allows
deducting PIM models from initial models built in
CIM. The objective is to reword information
contained in CIM models into PIM models, which
assures that the business information will not vanish
throughout MDA process. Then, transform PIM to
PSM allows adding in PIM models a set of technical
information of the target platform.
In practice, automatic transformation begins
from PIM level to PSM level. However, our ultimate
aim is to make the CIM a productive level, and a
basis for building PIM level through an automatic
transformation. The objective is that business
models do not remain only simple documents of
communication between business experts and
software designers.
In this paper, we present a solution for
automating the transformation from e CIM level to
PIM level. In this way, we establish a set of well
selected rules for automating the transformation
from CIM level to PIM level. According MDA
(OMG-MDA, 2015), the CIM level must be
presented by business process models. However, we
use the BPMN notation to represent CIM level in
our methodology, because BPMN is the specialized
standard, supported by OMG, for the modelization
of business process. The PIM level is presented by
information system view; nonetheless, UML is
advocated by MDA in the PIM level. Then, we
partition PIM level in accordance with the three
UML classical views including: functional, static,
and dynamic view. Our approach contains one or
more models for each modelling view. The use case
diagram model, presents the functionalities of the
information system; this model shows the functional
view. Next, the system states are modelled by state
diagram who presents the dynamic view. Then, the
model of class diagram presents of the system
266
Rhazali, Y., Hadi, Y. and Mouloudi, A.
A New Methodology CIM to PIM Transformation Resulting from an Analytical Survey.
DOI: 10.5220/0005690102660273
In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Model-Driven Engineering and Software Development (MODELSWARD 2016), pages 266-273
ISBN: 978-989-758-168-7
Copyright
c
 2016 by SCITEPRESS – Science and Technology Publications, Lda. All rights reserved

classes and their relationships which show the static
view. To ensure the semi-automatic transformation
between CIM and PIM, our approach founded on
transformation rules implemented in ATL (Atlas
Transformation Language).
The rest of this paper is presented as follows. In
section 2 we show the related works concerning
transformation between CIM and PIM. In section 3
we present our proposal and transformation rules
allow moving from CIM level to PIM level. In
section 4 we illustrate our method in a case study
demonstrating the transformation between CIM
models and PIM models. Finally, in section 5, we
conclude by specifying outcome of our work and
determining future works.
2 RELATED WORK
In this section, we present the related works of
transformation between CIM level and PIM level
according MDA.
In (Kherraf et al., 2008) the authors present a
method founded on patterns and archetypes to
transform the CIM to the PIM. The authors use
patterns to establish the CIM level, and apply
archetypes to move at the PIM level. This approach
is founded on two steps for modeling CIM. The first
stage based on activity diagram model and use case
diagram model to represent business processes, then,
the second stage involves a detailed activity diagram
model for modeling system requirements. Then the
system components are transformed from the
requirement elements as a first step in PIM level.
Finally, a collection of four archetypes (Lefebvre,
2005; Coad, 1999) contributes in the transformation
from the system components to the class diagram as
a final step of the PIM level.
(Zhang et al., 2005) the authors propose a
feature-oriented and component-based method, for
transforming the CIM to the PIM. The authors use
the feature model for structuring requirements in the
CIM level. This model contains features and
relationships between them. This approach uses
software architecture for presenting PIM which
contains a set of components and interactions
between them. However, responsibilities considered
as connectors between features and components to
simplify the transformation from CIM to PIM.
An analytical method is presented by (Kardoš et
al., 2010) for moving from the CIM models to the
PIM models. The authors show business process in
CIM with the Data Flow Diagram (DFD) (Qing et
al., 2009; Hoffer et al., 2004). However, the PIM
level is founded on activity diagram, sequence
diagram, use case diagram, and domain model.
Transformation approach from secure business
process to use case diagram model is presented in
(Rodríguez et al., 2007). This method propose
secure business process model, defined with BPMN,
into CIM level. However, a collection of
transformation rules defined in QVT (Query / View /
Transformation) (OMG, 2011), refinement rules,
and checklists, allows to obtain the use case diagram
model which shows requirement and analysis design
in the PIM level. In (Rodríguez et al., 2008;
Rodríguez et al., 2010), the authors resume their
previous approach and add the UML 2 activity
diagram to model secure business model, and class
enlarge diagram PIM level.
In (De Castro et al., 2011) the authors propose a
transformation method from the CIM level to the
PIM level for information system service-oriented
development. The authors represent business view in
the CIM level through BPMN notation, then they
use value model (Gordijn et al., 2003) for specifying
services. Next, ATL allows to move toward PIM
level that represented by two extensions of UML
activity diagram and two extensions of UML 2 use
case diagram.
A methodology of transformation from model-
driven goal-oriented requirement toward data
warehouses is shown by (Mazón et al., 2007). The
authors represent CIM level through UML profile
using the i* modelling framework (Yu, 1997).
Nevertheless, the QVT language allows moving to
PIM that is represented by data warehouse design.
An approach in (Gutiérrez et al., 2008) is based
on automatic generation of activity diagram models
from use case diagram model. The authors represent
an approach based on QVT to generate a
transformation from functional requirements,
modeled by use case diagram model in the CIM
level, to activity diagram model that define the PIM
level.
An approach for transforming process model to
Information system model is shown by (Mokrys,
2012). The author based on BPMN to create
business process model in CIM level. Nevertheless,
PIM level is presented by UML 2 state diagram
model and class diagram model.
An approach for transforming a CIM level to a
PIM level is represented by (Bousetta et al., 2013).
The authors describe the CIM level with high level
business model, use case diagram model, and low
level business model. Nevertheless, the PIM level is
defined by domain class diagram model, and
sequence diagram model for system external
A New Methodology CIM to PIM Transformation Resulting from an Analytical Survey
267

behavior. Domain class diagram model is resulted
from low business process model by using resource,
and business rules and objects.
In (Fatolahi et al., 2008) the authors present a
method of web-based applications deducted through
a semi-automatic transformation from use cases.
This methodology respects the MDA approach. The
authors show the CIM level with requirement
models described by default domain objects and use
cases. Nevertheless, PIM level defined with user
interface model, state machine model, and refined
domain model.
A method to model user interface according
MDA is shown by (Wu et al., 2007). The authors are
founded on activity diagram, use case diagram, and
robustness diagram for representing user
requirements in the CIM. Nevertheless, the PIM
level is presented by UML 2 class diagram model
and sequence diagram model.
In (Rhazali et al., 2014), we proposed a method
to transform business process models to use case
diagram model and class diagram model. The
approach based on BPMN for modeling business
process in CIM. Nevertheless, PIM level is shown
by UML 2 use case diagram model and class
diagram model.
In (Rhazali et al., 2015) we present a disciplined
approach to transform CIM towards PIM. Business
process model is described by BPMN and UML 2
activity diagram. Use case diagram model, state
diagram model and class diagram model represent
PIM level. This method based on a set of
transformation rules for moving from CIM to PIM.
In (Rhazali et al., 2015) we established a
transformation approach for shifting from CIM to
PIM. The approach is founded on BPMN and
activity diagram for modeling the business process.
The PIM level is presented by state diagram model,
class and package diagram model. This approach
based on improved rules allows shifting from CIM
to PIM through a semi-automatic transformation.
In (Rhazali et al., 2015) we proposed a
methodology allows transforming CIM models to
PIM models. The approach is based only on UML 2
activity diagram to model business process.
However, the PIM level including state diagram
model, class diagram model and package diagram
model. This method based on a collection of
transformation rules for moving from CIM level to
PIM level.
3 OUR PROPOSAL
Figure 1: Scheme of our proposal.
According OMG (OMG-MDA, 2015), our proposal
considers the business dimension in the CIM level,
through the modelization of real business process, in
order to keep the knowledge of business throughout
the transformation to PIM. This ensures the
development of quality information system.
However, in (BPMN, 2011), the benefits of most
standards of business process modelling converge in
BPMN. Thereby, our approach founded on two
diagrams of BPMN, collaboration diagram and
business process diagram, for modelling the business
process in CIM.
MDA recommends the use of UML in the PIM
level, according (Blanc, 2005; Kleppe, 2003;
Fowler, 2005).Then, in (Roques, 2004; Shin, 2000;
Demuth, 1999) the UML diagrams can be divided
into three classical modeling views: functional,
dynamic, and static. In our approach we based on
one UML diagram for modeling each view, thereby,
the use case diagram model shows functional view,
the state diagram model presents the dynamic view,
and the class diagram model interprets the static
view.
All PIM models are obtained by a semi-
automatic transformation from CIM models (Fig. 1).
Transformation is ensured through selected rules
implemented in ATL language.
Below we describe construction rules of CIM
level, and transformation rules to PIM level. Each
transformation rule is described in human language,
MODELSWARD 2016 - 4th International Conference on Model-Driven Engineering and Software Development
268

and ATL language. Before start the transformation
the designer can intervene just for choosing the not
transformable elements (actor, task, gatway…).
Nevertheless, in the beginning of each rule we verify
through ATL language if the element is
transformable, for that, in each rule, we call helpers
already described with OCL language.
3.1 The Transformation from BPMN
Models to Use Case Model
In (Fig. 2) we show the transformation rules which
ensure the transformation from BPMN models to use
case model.
Figure 2: Transformation rules from BPMN models to use
case diagram model.
3.2 Transformation from BPMN to
State Diagram Model
In (Fig. 3) we present the transformation rules allow
moving from BPMN model towards state diagram
model.
3.3 Transformation from BPMN to
Class Diagram Model
In (Fig. 4) we show the transformation rules allow
shifting BPMN models to class diagram model.
4 CASE STUDY
In this section, we illustrate our transformation
methodology from the CIM to the PIM through a
case study “booking services”.
The rooms’ catalogue can be browsed by the
customer. He can also present the information about
a room available in the catalogue, and then decides
to reserve the room or not. In any time, customer can
to add, update or delete booking options. Once
booking options are well chosen, the customer
begins booking while presenting his information,
including payment information.
Figure 3: Transformation rules from BPMN model to state
diagram model.
Figure 4: Transformation rules from BPMN model to class
diagram model.
Declaration of the room reservation with the
options specified by the customer is ensured by the
A New Methodology CIM to PIM Transformation Resulting from an Analytical Survey
269

booking agent. Then the room, with specified
options, is prepared manually by the maid. However,
the butler examines the availability of options and
verifies the quality of the room.
4.1 Presentation of the CIM Level
In (Fig. 5) we represent the model of business
process through the BPMN collaboration diagram.
In this model we show a general business process by
representing just the sub-processes and their
sequence, and by avoiding identification of tasks and
connections between them. Nevertheless, we show
the maximum possible of collaborators to represent a
real business process, in which several business
actors collaborate between them.
Figure 5: BPMN collaboration diagram model.
The representation of several collaborators
facilitates the task of transformation from CIM to
PIM. Indeed, when moving from CIM models to the
use case diagram model, the collaborators will be
transformed to the actors. However, we show
averages sub-processes, for example, customer must
show the sub-processes "choose room", "start
reservation" and "present information", nevertheless
the sub-process "start reservation" contain few tasks,
for that, we have merged "choose room" and "start
reservation" into single sub-process "choose rooms
for reservation". Indeed, in this model we must
indicate all manual tasks. We can make several
refinements into basic models for obtaining
transformable models in CIM.
The BPMN business process diagram model
(Fig. 6) represents the second model in the CIM
level. In this model, we itemized each sub-process
into several tasks. Nevertheless, into this model we
detailed the sub-process "choose room for
reservation" into several tasks with their
relationships. Then, in the output of each task we
show an object node with its state.
4.2 Presentation of the PIM Level
The (Fig. 7) presents the use case diagram model.
This latter model is transformed from the CIM
models. Nevertheless, the sub-process “choose room
for reservation” becomes a package of use cases.
Next, the collaborator "customer" transformed to
actor, and the tasks becomes use cases. Decision
node that lies between two actions transformed to
relationship "extend", then, the control flow which
lies between two actions transformed relationship
"include". Indeed, in this model, we do not present
the flows that return backward. For instance, the
relationship which returns from the task "add
accommodation options" to "display catalog" is not
shown in this model, in order to not complicate the
use case diagram model, because this model must
concentrates just on the identification of
functionalities and not on their logical sequences.
Figure 6: BPMN business process diagram model.
The (Fig. 8) from business process diagram
model we obtain the second PIM model, that is the
state diagram model. First, the states transformed
from object nodes. Next, the "sequence flow" that
lies between two tasks is transformed to a transition,
e.g. the object node "catalog" with the state
"displayed" transformed to state "catalog displayed"
in the state diagram model. Nevertheless, the initial
state transformed from the start event; the final state
becomes from end event; the exclusive fork becomes
decision point; exclusive join transformed to
MODELSWARD 2016 - 4th International Conference on Model-Driven Engineering and Software Development
270

junction point, finally, junction point becomes from
exclusive fork & join node.
The establishment of class diagram model (Fig.
9) represents the ultimate objective of the PIM level.
This model comes from model of BPMN business
process diagram. In class diagram model, the classes
are transformed from object nodes. Next, the object
states transformed to class methods. Indeed, the
object node "reservation" that contains state
"started" becomes class "reservation" with method
"started".
Figure 7: Use case diagram model.
Figure 8: State diagram model.
Figure 9: Class diagram model.
5 ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION
For modelling CIM level, there is a stream that is
founded only on system requirement model as in
(Gutiérrez et al., 2008; Wu et al., 2007), but CIM
level is independent of computation. Next, there is a
hybrid current which is based on system requirement
and business process for modelling the CIM level
like in (Kherraf et al., 2008). In these methods,
system requirements are modelled from the
beginning into CIM, for facilitating transformation
to PIM. In our proposal, business processes are
modelled in CIM level. Indeed, according OMG in
(OMG-MDA, 2015) the CIM level must be
modelled with business processes which are
independent of computation. However, in (BPMN,
2011), the benefits of most standards of business
process converge to BPMN, for that, we based on
BPMN to model business process.
We partition the models of the PIM level in
accordance with the three classical modeling views
(Roques, 2004; Shin, 2000; Demuth, 1999) includes
static, dynamic, and functional. In (Blanc, 2005;
Kleppe, 2003; Fowler, 2005) UML is advocated by
MDA in the PIM level. Nevertheless, the
intersection of our UML 2.0 models and modeling
views is presented as follows: the functional view is
interpreted by the use case diagram model, the state
diagram model presents the dynamic view and the
static view is shown by the class diagram model.
There is no method that covers the three
modelling views, In the PIM level, except (Kardoš et
al., 2010; Rhazali et al., 2015). However, various
methodologies do not model the classes in the PIM
like in (Zhang et al., 2005; Rodríguez et al., 2007;
Castro et al., 2011; Mazón et al., 2007; Gutiérrez et
al., 2008; Wu et al., 2007), although without classes
the code does not readily results by transformation.
Our approach covers the three modelling views.
However, in static view we based on class diagram
model.
The rules of model transformation may be
defined by human language that has less value,
indeed, algorithm and programming language are
more technical, however, model transformation
languages are the most effective.
Most approaches describes the transformation
with a human language as (Kherraf et al., 2008;
Kardoš et al., 2010; Mokrys et al., 2012; Bousetta et
al., 2013; Wu et al., 2007; Rhazali et al., 2014;
Rhazali et al., 2015), There is one method (Zhang et
al., 2005) founded on algorithm to define
transformation, but transformation must be
described by a transformation language as in
(Rodríguez et al., 2007; Rodríguez et al., 2008;
Rodríguez et al., 2010; Castro et al., 2011; Mazón et
al., 2007; Gutiérrez et al., 2008).
There are several manners that approve the
transformation approaches from CIM to PIM. We
A New Methodology CIM to PIM Transformation Resulting from an Analytical Survey
271

can approve our approach by a theoretical case
study, by a practical case, or by a developed tool
which allows ensuring a model transformation.
Most transformation approaches, approves their
methodology through a theoretical case study as
(Kherraf et al., 2008; Zhang et al., 2005; Kardoš et
al., 2010; Rodríguez et al., 2007; Rodríguez et al.,
2008; Rodríguez et al., 2010; Mazón et al., 2007;
Gutiérrez et al., 2008 Mokrys et al., 2012; Bousetta
et al., 2013; Rhazali et al., 2014; Rhazali et al.,
2015). In practice, there is one approach (Castro et
al., 2011), based on Eclipse tool to implement
transformation. Then one approach (Wu et al., 2007)
does not approve his methodology. However, our
approach is approved in practice through Eclipse.
6 CONCLUSIONS
One of the principal challenges in software
development process is the foundation of a approach
that allows shifting, semi-automatically, from
models of the business process to models that
present the design of software. Based on MDA, our
approach proposes a solution to the problem of
transformation from business models (CIM level) to
the design models (PIM level). Our approach
provides a set of useful classes in the process of
software development. However, in the ongoing
work we define a transformation from the PIM
models to PSM models. Nevertheless, in our future
work we plan to construct a transformation tool
founded on MDA principles, indeed, our goal is to
obtain the code from the business models by means
of semi-automatic transformations.
REFERENCES
Blanc, X., 2005. MDA in action, Ed. Eyrolles. 1st edition.
Bousetta, B., El Beggar, O., Gadi, T., 2013, A
methodology for CIM modeling and its transformation
to PIM, Journal of Information Engineering and
Applications, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 1-21.
BPMN, 2011, Business Process Model and Notation
(BPMN)-Version 2.0, In OMG, http://www.omg.org/
spec/BPMN/2.0, January 2011.
Clark, J., Casanave, C., Kanaskie, K., Harvey, B., Clark,
J., Smith, N., Yunker, J., and Riemer, K.: ebXML
Business Process Specification Schema Version 1.01.
UN/CEFACT and OASIS. 2001.
Coad, P., Lefebvre, E., De Luca, J., 1999, Java Modeling
In Color With UML: Enterprise Components and
Process, Textbook Binding.
De Castro, V., Marcos, E., Vara, J. M., 2011. Applying
CIM-to-PIM model transformations for the service-
oriented development of information systems, Journal
of Information and Software Technology 53, pp. 87-
105.
Demuth, B., Hussmann, H., 1999, Using OCL Constraints
for Relational Database Design. In UML’99 The
Unified Modeling Language, Second Int. Conference
Fort Collins, CO, USA, October 1999, Springer.
Fatolahi, A., Somé, S.S., Lethbridge, T.C., 2008, Towards
a semi-automated model-driven method for the
generation of web-based applications from use cases,
In 4
th
Model Driven Web Engineering Workshop, page
31, Toulouse, France.
Fowler, M., 2005, Language Workbenches and Model
Driven Architecture, http://www.martinfowler.com/
articles /mdaLanguageWorkbench.html.
Giaglis, G., 2001, A Taxonomy of Business Process
Modeling and Information Systems Modeling
Techniques.
Gordijn, J., Akkermans, J. M., 2003, Value based
requirements engineering: exploring innovative e-
commerce idea, Requirements Engineering Journal 8
(2) 114–134.
Gutiérrez, J. J., Nebut, C., Escalona, M. J., Mejías, M.,
Ramos, I.M., 2008, Visualization of use cases through
automatically generated activity diagrams, In
Proceedings of the 11
th
International Conference
MoDELS’08, Toulouse, France.
Hoffer, J. A, George, J. F, Valacich, J. S., 2004, Modern
system analysis and design. Prentice Hall ISBN 0-13-
145461-7, 2004.
Kardoš, M., Drozdová, M., 2010, Analytical method of
CIM to PIM transformation in Model Driven
Architecture (MDA), Journal of information and
organizational sciences, vol. 34, pp. 89-99.
Kherraf, S., Lefebvre, É., Suryn, W., 2008.
Transformation from CIM to PIM using patterns and
Archetypes, In ASWEC’08, 19th Australian Software
Engineering Conference, Perth, Australia.
Kleppe, A., Warmer, G. J., Bast, W., 2003, MDA
Explained: The Model Driven Architecture: Practice
and Promise. Addison-Wesley.
Kriouile, A., Gadi, T., Balouki, Y., 2013, CIM to PIM
Transformation: A criteria Based Evaluation,
International Journal Computer Technology &
Applications, vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 616-625.
Lefebvre, E., 2005, Building Platform-Independent
Models with Business Archetypes and Patterns,
Montreal Conference on eTechnologies.
Li, Q., Chen, Y. L., 2009, Modeling and Analysis of
Enterprise and Information Systems. Beijing : Higher
Education Press.
Mayer, R., Menzel, C., Painter, M., Perakath, B., de Witte
P. and Blinn T. Information Integration For
Concurrent Engineering (IICE) - IDEF3 Process
Description Capture Method Report. Technical Report
September 1995 http://www.idef.com/pdf/idef3_fn.pdf.
Mazón, J., Pardillo, J., Trujillo, J., 2007, A model-driven
goal-oriented requirement engineering approach for
data warehouses, In Proceedings of the Conference on
MODELSWARD 2016 - 4th International Conference on Model-Driven Engineering and Software Development
272

Advances in Conceptual Modeling: Foundations and
Applications, ER Workshops, Auckland, New Zealand,
pp. 255–264.
Mokrys, M., 2012, Possible transformation from Process
Model to IS Design Model, In the 1th International
Virtual Conference Slovakia, pp. 71–74.
OMG, MOF 2.0 Query/View/Transformation (QVT),
2011, V1.0. OMG Document – formal/2011-01-01.
<http://www.omg.org/spec/QVT/1.1/PDF/>.
OMG-MDA, 2003, "MDA Guide Version 1.0.1," 1 juin
2003.
OMG-MDA, 2015a, Model Driven Architecture (MDA)
FAQ, http://www.omg.org/mda/faq_mda.htm.
OMG-MDA, 2015b, MDA Guide revision 2.0, ormsc/14-
06-01. http://www.omg.org/cgi-bin/doc?ormsc/14-06-
01.pdf.
OMG-SoaML, 2012, Service Oriented Architecture
Modeling Language (SoaML) – Specification for the
UML Profile and Metamodel for Services (UPMS).
OMG document: ad/2012-05-10.
<http://www.omg.org/spec/SoaML/1.0.1/PDF>.
OMG-UML, 2011, OMG Unified Modeling Language
TM
(OMG-UML), Infrastructure, http://www.omg.org
/spec /UML/2.4.1/Infrastructure," August 2011.
Qing, L., Yu-Liu, C., 2009. Modeling and Analysis of
Enterprise and Information Systems, Springer
Publishing Company. Beijing, 1st edition.
Rhazali, Y., Hadi, Y., Mouloudi, A., 2014, Transformation
Method CIM to PIM: From Business Processes
Models Defined in BPMN to Use Case and Class
Models Defined in UML, In 16
th
International
Conference on Model Transformation, Kuala Lumpur,
Malaysia, pp. 1374–1378.
Rhazali, Y., Hadi, Y., Mouloudi, A., 2015, Disciplined
Approach for Transformation CIM to PIM in MDA, In
MODELSWARD’15, the 3
rd
International Conference
on Model-Driven Engineering and Software
Development, Angers, France, pp. 312 - 320.
Rhazali, Y., Hadi, Y., Mouloudi, A., 2015, A
Methodology for Transforming CIM to PIM through
UML: From Business View to Information System
View, In WCCS15, Third World Conference on
Complex Systems, Marrakech, Morocco.
Rhazali, Y., Hadi, Y., Mouloudi, A., 2015, Transformation
Approach CIM to PIM: From Business Processes
Models to State Machine and Package Models, In
OSSCOM 2015, the 1st International Conference on
Open Source Software Computing, Amman, Jordan.
Rodríguez, A., Fernández-Medina, E., Piattini, M., 2007.
Towards CIM to PIM transformation: from Secure
Business Processes defined in BPMN to Use-Cases,
Business Process Management, vol. 4714, pp. 408-
415.
Rodríguez, A., Fernández-Medina, E., Piattini, M., 2008.
CIM to PIM Transformation: A Reality, in Research
and Practical Issues of Enterprise Information
Systems II, IFIP International Federation for
Information Processing, Volume 255/2008. Vyd.:
Springer Berlin / Heidelberg, strany 1239-1249.
Rodríguez, A., García-Rodríguez de Guzmán, I.,
Fernández Medina, E., Piattini, M., 2010. Semi-formal
transformation of secure business processes into
analysis class and use case models: an MDA
approach, Information and Software Technology 52
(9) (2010) 945–971.
Roques, P., 2004. UML in Practice: The Art of Modeling
Software Systems Demonstrated through Worked
Examples and Solutions, Wiley. 1st edition.
Schmidt, D. C., 2006. Model-Driven Engineering, IEEE
Computer. vol.39, no. 2, pp. 25-31, February 2006,
doi:10.1109/MC.2006.58.
Workflow Management Coalition. XPDL, Welcome to
XPDL.org, http://www.xpdl.org.
Wu, J. H., Shin, S. S., Chien, J. L., Chao, W. S., Hsieh,
M.C., 2007, An extended MDA method for user
interface modeling and transformation, In the 15
th
European Conference on Information Systems (pp.
1632-1641).
Yu, E., 1997, Towards modeling and reasoning support for
early-phase requirements engineering, In Proceedings
of the 3rd IEEE International Symposium on
Requirements Engineering. RE, Washington, DC,
USA, pp. 226–235.
Yue, T., Briand, L., Labiche, Y., 2011, A Systematic
Review of Transformation Approaches between User
Requirements and Analysis Models, Requirements
Engineering (Springer), pp. 75-99.
Zhang,W., Mei, H., Zhao, H., Yang, J., 2005,
Transformation from CIM to PIM: A Feature-Oriented
Component-Based approach, In MoDELS, Montego
Bay, Jamaica.
A New Methodology CIM to PIM Transformation Resulting from an Analytical Survey
273