On the Representation of Quantities and their Parts in Conceptual Modeling

In a series of publications, we have employed ontological theories and principles used to evaluate and improve the quality of conceptual modeling grammars and models. In this article, we continue this work by providing an ontological interpretation and sound modeling guidelines for a traditionally neglected notion in the conceptual modeling literature, namely, the representation of types whose instances are quantities (amounts of matter, masses). Here, we analyze different alternatives for the adequate representation of quantities as well as their parts in conceptual models. Moreover, we advance a number of metamodeling constraints that can be incorporated in a UML 2.0 metamodel extension, thus, allowing for the suitable representation of these notions.

[1]  Dean W. Zimmerman,et al.  Theories of Masses and Problems of Constitution , 1995 .

[2]  Nikolaus Wandinger,et al.  Masses of Stuff and Identity , 1998 .

[3]  Toni Mancini,et al.  Finite Satisfiability of UML Class Diagrams by Constraint Programming , 2004, Description Logics.

[4]  E.H.L. Brugmans,et al.  1959-Individuals : An Essay in Descriptive Metaphysics van Peter Strawson : fundamenten van een redelijke metafysica , 1999 .

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

[6]  Willard Van Orman Quine,et al.  Word and Object , 1960 .

[7]  Laure Vieu,et al.  Part-of relations, functionality and dependence , 2007 .

[8]  Giancarlo Guizzardi,et al.  A Model-Based Tool for Conceptual Modeling and Domain Ontology Engineering in OntoUML , 2009, ICEIS.

[9]  Ingvar Johansson,et al.  On the Transitivity of the Parthood Relations , 2004 .

[10]  E. J. Lowe,et al.  Entity, Identity and Unity , 1998 .

[11]  H. Cartwright,et al.  Heraclitus and the Bath Water , 1965 .

[12]  Gerd Wagner,et al.  An Ontologically Well-Founded Profile for UML Conceptual Models , 2004, CAiSE.

[13]  J. Burnheim.  Individuals: An Essay in Descriptive Metaphysics , 1959 .

[14]  E. J. Lowe.  Identity and Unity , 2001 .

[15]  Simone Pribbenow,et al.  Meronymic Relationships: From Classical Mereology to Complex Part-Whole Relations , 2002 .

[16]  Nicola Guarino,et al.  Understanding top-level ontological distinctions , 2001, OIS@IJCAI.

[17]  Martin Fowler,et al.  Analysis patterns - reusable object models , 1996, Addison-Wesley series in object-oriented software engineering.

[18]  Giancarlo Guizzardi,et al.  Modal Aspects of Object Types and Part-Whole Relations and the de re/de dicto Distinction , 2007, CAiSE.

[19]  Giancarlo Guizzardi,et al.  The Problem of Transitivity of Part-Whole Relations in Conceptual Modeling Revisited , 2009, CAiSE.

[20]  Fernanda Araujo Baião,et al.  On the Importance of Truly Ontological Distinctions for Ontology Representation Languages: An Industrial Case Study in the Domain of Oil and Gas , 2009, BMMDS/EMMSAD.

[21]  Douglas Herrmann,et al.  A Taxonomy of Part-Whole Relations , 1987, Cogn. Sci..

[22]  Achille C. Varzi.  Parts, Wholes, and Part-Whole Relations: The Prospects of Mereotopology , 1996, Data Knowl. Eng..

[23]  Maria M. Larrondo-Petrie,et al.  A Characterization of Aggregation , 1998 .

[24]  Simone Pribbenow,et al.  Midwinters, end games, and body parts: a classification of part-whole relations , 1995, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..