Formal Semantics and Ontological Analysis for Understanding Subsetting, Specialization and Redefinition of Associations in UML

The definition of the exact meaning of conceptual modeling constructs is considered a relevant issue since it contributes to their effective and appropriate use by conceptual modelers. This paper studies three related constructs that enhance the expressiveness of the UML language about associations and which still lack a complete and comprehensive study, namely, association subsetting, specialization and redefinition. It formalizes their semantics, analyses them from an ontological perspective and compares them. The semantic formalization is based on mapping the studied constructs to a basic UML layer which have a previous formal definition in the literature. Furthermore, the ontological analysis developed here is based on a formal theory of relations which is part of the Unified Foundational Ontology (UFO).

[1]  Martin Gogolla,et al.  On Formalizing the UML Object Constraint Language OCL , 1998, ER.

[2]  Dragan Milicev.  Model-Driven Development with Executable UML , 2009 .

[3]  Kevin Lano,et al.  Slicing of UML models using model transformations , 2010, MODELS'10.

[4]  Marcin Szlenk.  Formal Semantics and Reasoning about UML Class Diagram , 2006, 2006 International Conference on Dependability of Computer Systems.

[5]  Alexander Borgida,et al.  Conceptual Modeling of Information Systems , 1985, On Knowledge Base Management Systems.

[6]  Daniel Bildhauer.  On the Relationships Between Subsetting , Redefinition and Association Specialization , 2011 .

[7]  Cristina Gómez,et al.  On the Use of Association Redefinition in UML Class Diagrams , 2006, ER.

[8]  Perdita Stevens.  On the interpretation of binary associations in the Unified Modelling Language , 2002, Software and Systems Modeling.

[9]  Giancarlo Guizzardi,et al.  Ontological foundations for structural conceptual models , 2005 .

[10]  Ivar Jacobson,et al.  Unified Modeling Language Reference Manual, The (2nd Edition) , 2004 .

[11]  Cristina Gómez,et al.  Enhancing the semantics of UML association redefinition , 2011, Data Knowl. Eng..

[12]  Antoni Olivé,et al.  Relationship Type Refinement in Conceptual Models with Multiple Classification , 2001, ER.

[13]  Ivar Jacobson,et al.  The unified modeling language reference manual , 2010 .

[14]  Christian S. Jensen,et al.  Capturing Temporal Constraints in Temporal ER Models , 2008, ER.

[15]  Arend Rensink,et al.  On a Graph-Based Semantics for UML Class and Object Diagrams , 2008, Electron. Commun. Eur. Assoc. Softw. Sci. Technol..

[16]  H. Herre,et al.  Ontological Categories in GOL , 2004 .

[17]  David W. Embley,et al.  Conceptual Modeling - ER 2006, 25th International Conference on Conceptual Modeling, Tucson, AZ, USA, November 6-9, 2006, Proceedings , 2006, ER.

[18]  Cristina Gómez Seoane,et al.  On the meanings of subsetting, specialization and redefinition in UML , 2011 .

[19]  Joerg Evermann,et al.  The Association Construct in Conceptual Modelling - An Analysis Using the Bunge Ontological Model , 2005, CAiSE.

[20]  Sushil Jajodia,et al.  Conceptual Modeling — ER 2001 , 2001, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[21]  Ivan Porres,et al.  Basic operations over models containing subset and union properties , 2006, MoDELS'06.

[22]  Tony Clark,et al.  Object Modeling with the OCL , 2002, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[23]  Gerd Wagner,et al.  What's in a Relationship: An Ontological Analysis , 2008, ER.

[24]  Ivar Jacobson,et al.  Unified Modeling Language User Guide, The (2nd Edition) (Addison-Wesley Object Technology Series) , 2005 .

[25]  Martin Gogolla,et al.  Expressing UML Class Diagrams Properties with OCL , 2002, Object Modeling with the OCL.

[26]  Tok Wang Ling,et al.  Conceptual Modeling – ER ’98 , 1998, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[27]  Andy Schürr,et al.  Formalising model transformation rules for UML/MOF 2 , 2008, IET Softw..

[28]  Corin A. Gurr,et al.  Effective Diagrammatic Communication: Syntactic, Semantic and Pragmatic Issues , 1999, J. Vis. Lang. Comput..

[29]  Robert P. Bostrom,et al.  Comparing representations with relational and EER models , 1990, Commun. ACM.