Conceptual Modeling Method for Separation of Concerns and Integration of Structure and Behavior

Identification of discontinuities, separation of concerns, and dealing with the evolutionary changes of requirements is difficult in conceptual modeling. The limited human mind allows focusing on one particular requirement at a time in isolation. One fundamental problem is that all conventional conceptual modeling techniques deal with collections of loosely linked meta-models, which are defined by different types of diagrams. Typically, system development methods project interactive, behavioral, and structural aspects of information systems' conceptual representations into disparate views. Therefore, the semantic integrity of various architecture dimensions is difficult to achieve. The difficulties stem from the paradigmatic mismatch between static and dynamic constructs. The advantage of the conceptual modeling approach presented in this paper is flexibility. It is demonstrated by case study examples that sequential, underlying, enclosing, overriding, and overlaying interaction loops between actors provide the foundation for the composition of complex scenarios, which span across organizational and technical system boundaries. The presented semantic integration and system decomposition principles target business process modeling experts and information system designers, because they are essential for introducing evolutionary changes and managing complexity of information system conceptualizations.

[1]  Selmin Nurcan,et al.  On the Way from Research Innovations to Practical Utility in Enterprise Architecture: The Build-Up Process , 2010, Int. J. Inf. Syst. Model. Des..

[2]  John Mylopoulos,et al.  Requirements as Goals and Commitments Too , 2010, Intentional Perspectives on Information Systems Engineering.

[3]  Gustas Remigijus,et al.  Pragmatic-Driven Approach for Service-Oriented Analysis and Design , 2008 .

[4]  Gerd Wagner,et al.  The Agent-Object-Relationship metamodel: towards a unified view of state and behavior , 2003, Inf. Syst..

[5]  Terry Winograd,et al.  Understanding computers and cognition - a new foundation for design , 1987 .

[6]  Michael Hammer,et al.  Reengineering Work: Don’t Automate, Obliterate , 1990 .

[7]  Eric S. K. Yu,et al.  Interactive Analysis of Agent-Goal Models in Enterprise Modeling , 2010, Int. J. Inf. Syst. Model. Des..

[8]  Nicola Guarino,et al.  Towards an Ontological Foundation for Services Science , 2009, FIS.

[9]  Jan L. G. Dietz,et al.  Enterprise ontology - theory and methodology , 2006 .

[10]  Alan R. Dennis,et al.  Systems Analysis and Design with UML , 2003 .

[11]  James E. Rumbaugh,et al.  Object-Oriented Modeling and Design with UML , 2004 .

[12]  Ana R. Cavalli,et al.  Validation of a Trust Approach in Multi-Organization Environments , 2014, Int. J. Secur. Softw. Eng..

[13]  Remigijus Gustas Modeling Approach for Integration and Evolution of Information System Conceptualizations , 2011, Int. J. Inf. Syst. Model. Des..

[14]  Peter J. Denning,et al.  Completing the Loops , 1995 .

[15]  Muhammad Younus Javed,et al.  Context Inference Engine (CiE): Classifying Activity of Context using Minkowski Distance and Standard Deviation-Based Ranks , 2014 .

[16]  Remigijus Gustas,et al.  Overlaying Conceptualizations for Managing Complexity of Scenario Specifications , 2011, BMMDS/EMMSAD.

[17]  Remigijus Gustas,et al.  Modeling Method for Bridging Pragmatic and Semantic Dimensions of Service Architectures , 2010, ISD.

[18]  David Harel,et al.  Statecharts: A Visual Formalism for Complex Systems , 1987, Sci. Comput. Program..

[19]  Dov Dori,et al.  Object-process methodology - a holistic systems paradigm , 2013 .

[20]  M. Bunge Treatise on basic philosophy , 1974 .

[21]  Jaap Gordijn,et al.  Business Modelling Is Not Process Modelling , 2000, ER.

[22]  Roel Wieringa Operational Business-IT Alignment in Value Webs , 2008, UNISCON.

[23]  Joerg Evermann,et al.  Ontology Based Object-Oriented Domain Modeling: Representing Behavior , 2009, J. Database Manag..

[24]  Glenford J. Myers,et al.  Structured Design , 1999, IBM Syst. J..

[25]  Remigijus Gustas,et al.  Conceptual Modeling and Integration of Static and Dynamic Aspects of Service Architectures , 2010, ONTOSE.

[26]  Alistair Cockburn,et al.  Writing Effective Use Cases , 2000 .

[27]  Jennifer Papin-Ramcharan,et al.  Open Source Software: A Developing Country View , 2007 .

[28]  Veda C. Storey,et al.  An ontological analysis of the relationship construct in conceptual modeling , 1999, TODS.

[29]  Dickson K. W. Chiu,et al.  Governance of Cross-Organizational Healthcare Document Exchange through Watermarking Services and Alerts , 2011, Int. J. Syst. Serv. Oriented Eng..

[30]  Ivar Jacobson,et al.  The Unified Modeling Language User Guide , 1998, J. Database Manag..

[31]  Capers Jones,et al.  Positive and Negative Innovations in Software Engineering , 2009, Int. J. Softw. Sci. Comput. Intell..

[32]  Martin Glinz,et al.  Problems and deficiencies of UML as a requirements specification language , 2000, Tenth International Workshop on Software Specification and Design. IWSSD-10 2000.

[33]  Remigijus Gustas A Look Behind Conceptual Modeling Constructs in Information System Analysis and Design , 2010, Int. J. Inf. Syst. Model. Des..

[34]  John A. Zachman,et al.  A Framework for Information Systems Architecture , 1987, IBM Syst. J..

[35]  James Martin,et al.  Object-oriented methods : a foundation , 1995 .

[36]  Remigijus Gustas Integrated Approach for Modelling of Semantic and Pragmatic Dependencies of Information Systems , 1998, ER.

[37]  Jaap Gordijn,et al.  Value-oriented design of service coordination processes: correctness and trust , 2005, SAC '05.