A Common Core for Active Conceptual Modeling for Learning from Surprises

The new field of active conceptual modeling for learning from surprises (ACM-L) may be helpful in preserving life, protecting property, and improving quality of life. The conceptual modeling community has developed sound theory and practices for conceptual modeling that, if properly applied, could help analysts model and predict more accurately. In particular, we need to associate more semantics with links, and we need fully reified high-level objects and relationships that have a clear, formal underlying semantics that follows a natural, ontological approach. We also need to capture more dynamic aspects in our conceptual models to more accurately model complex, dynamic systems. These concepts already exist, and the theory is well developed; what remains is to link them with the ideas needed to predict system evolution, thus enabling risk assessment and response planning. No single researcher or research group will be able to achieve this ambitious vision alone. As a starting point, we recommend that the nascent ACM-L community agree on a common core model that supports all aspects--static and dynamic--needed for active conceptual modeling in support of learning from surprises. A common core will more likely gain the traction needed to sustain the extended ACM-L research effort that will yield the advertised benefits of learning from surprises.

[1]  Christian S. Jensen,et al.  Temporal Entity-RelationshipModels | a Survey , 1996 .

[2]  Terry Halpin,et al.  Conceptual Schema and Relational Database Design , 1995 .

[3]  Stephen W. Liddle Object-oriented systems implementation: a model-equivalent approach , 1996 .

[4]  Michael P. Papazoglou,et al.  OOER '95: Object-Oriented and Entity-Relationship Modeling , 1995, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[5]  Bernhard Thalheim,et al.  Future Directions of Conceptual Modeling , 1997, Conceptual Modeling.

[6]  Elisa Bertino,et al.  Object-Oriented Methodologies and Systems , 1994, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[7]  Stephen W. Clyde,et al.  A Summary of the ER'97 Workshop on Behavioral modeling , 1997, Conceptual Modeling.

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

[9]  Peter P. Chen,et al.  A Proposed Preliminary Framework for Conceptual Modeling of Learning from Surprises , 2005, IC-AI.

[10]  Stephen W. Clyde,et al.  Turnable formalism in object-oriented systems analysis: meeting the needs of both theoreticians and practitioners , 1992, OOPSLA 1992.

[11]  Martin Gogolla,et al.  Detecting OCL Traps in the UML 2.0 Superstructure: An Experience Report , 2004, UML.

[12]  David W. Embley,et al.  An Active, Object-Oriented, Model-Equivalent Programming Language , 1995, Advances in Object-Oriented Data Modeling.

[13]  Stephen J. Mellor,et al.  Executable UML - A Foundation for Model-Driven Architecture , 2002, Addison Wesley object technology series.

[14]  David W. Embley Object database development - concepts and principles , 1997 .

[15]  Peter P. Chen The entity-relationship model: toward a unified view of data , 1975, VLDB '75.

[16]  Chris Auld Fundamentals of Database Design , 2002 .

[17]  C. Petri Kommunikation mit Automaten , 1962 .

[18]  Ray Bert,et al.  Book Review: \IThe World Is Flat: A Brief History of the Twenty-First Century\N by Thomas L. Friedman. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2005 , 2006 .

[19]  David W. Embley,et al.  Object-oriented systems analysis - a model-driven approach , 1991, Yourdon Press Computing series.

[20]  David W. Embley,et al.  Cardinality Constraints in Semantic Data Models , 1993, Data Knowl. Eng..

[21]  David W. Embley,et al.  A Seamless Model for Object-Oriented Systems Development , 1994, ISOOMS.

[22]  L. Mosley,et al.  The World Is Flat: A Brief History of the Twenty-First Century , 2005 .

[23]  Herbert B. Enderton,et al.  A mathematical introduction to logic , 1972 .