How Complex Is the Unified Modeling Language?

Unified Modeling Language (UML)has emerged as the software industry's dominant modeling language. It is the de facto modeling language standard for specifying, visualizing, constructing, and documenting the components of software systems. Despite its prominence and status as the standard modeling language, UML has its critics. Opponents argue that it is complex and difficult to learn. Some question the rationale of having nine diagramming techniques in UML and the raison d'etre of those nine techniques in UML. Others point out that UML lacks a comprehensive methodology to guide its users, which makes the language even more convoluted. A few studies on UML can be found in the literature. However, no study exists to provide a quantitative measure of UML complexity or to compare UML with other object-oriented techniques. In this research, we evaluate the complexity of UML using complexity metrics. The objective is to provide a reliable and accurate quantitative measure of UML complexity. A comparison of the complexity metrical values of UML with other object-oriented techniques was also carried out. Our findings suggest that each diagram in UML is not distinctly more complex than techniques in other modeling methods. But as a whole, UML is very complex-2-11 times more complex than other modeling methods.

[1]  Ron Weber,et al.  On the ontological expressiveness of information systems analysis and design grammars , 1993, Inf. Syst. J..

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

[3]  Bill C. Hardgrave,et al.  Object-oriented methods: current practices and attitudes , 1999, J. Syst. Softw..

[4]  Keng Siau,et al.  The Effects of Conceptual and Logical Interfaces on Visual Query Performance of End Users , 1995, ICIS.

[5]  Stephen S. Yau,et al.  Some Stability Measures for Software Maintenance , 1980, IEEE Trans. Software Eng..

[6]  Elaine J. Weyuker,et al.  Evaluating Software Complexity Measures , 2010, IEEE Trans. Software Eng..

[7]  Maurice H. Halstead,et al.  Elements of software science (Operating and programming systems series) , 1977 .

[8]  Carol Withrow,et al.  Error density and size in Ada software , 1990, IEEE Software.

[9]  A. Moore,et al.  UML'S SHORTFALLS IN MODELING COMPLEX REAL-TIME SYSTEMS , 1998 .

[10]  Laszlo A. Belady,et al.  System partitioning and its measure , 1981, J. Syst. Softw..

[11]  Hock Chuan Chan,et al.  Database Interfaces: A Conceptual Framework and a Meta-Analysis on Natural Language Studies , 1998, J. Database Manag..

[12]  Cris Kobryn.  UML 2001: a standardization odyssey , 1999, CACM.

[13]  Keng Siau,et al.  Evaluation of information modeling methods-a review , 1998, Proceedings of the Thirty-First Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[14]  Anthony C. Bloesch,et al.  Data Modeling in UML and ORM: A Comparison , 1999, J. Database Manag..

[15]  Izak Benbasat,et al.  A Psychological Study on the Use of Relationship Concept - Some Preliminary Findings , 1995, CAiSE.

[16]  Sjaak Brinkkemper,et al.  Complexity Metrics for Systems Development Methods and Techniques , 1996, Inf. Syst..

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

[18]  Keng Siau.  L.E.O.: The Incredible Story of the World's First Business Computer , 1997 .

[19]  Keng Siau,et al.  The effect of data model, system and task characteristics on user query performance: an empirical study , 1997, DATB.

[20]  Anas N. Al-Rabadi,et al.  A comparison of modified reconstructability analysis and Ashenhurst‐Curtis decomposition of Boolean functions , 2004 .

[21]  Grady Booch.  UML in action , 1999, CACM.

[22]  Keng Siau,et al.  User-Database Interface: The Effect of Abstraction Levels on Query Performance , 1993, MIS Q..

[23]  B. P. Douglass.  UML FOR SYSTEMS ENGINEERING , 1998 .

[24]  Jane Fedorowicz,et al.  Surveying object technology usage and benefits: A test of conventional wisdom , 1999, Inf. Manag..

[25]  Stephen H. Kan,et al.  Metrics and Models in Software Quality Engineering , 1994, SOEN.

[26]  Izak Benbasat,et al.  The Relative Importance of Structural Constraints and Surface Semantics in Information Modeling , 1997, Inf. Syst..

[27]  Izak Benbasat,et al.  When Parents Need Not Have Children - Cognitive Biases in Information Modeling , 1996, CAiSE.

[28]  Sallie M. Henry,et al.  Software Structure Metrics Based on Information Flow , 1981, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering.