An algebraic framework for merging incomplete and inconsistent views

Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Requirements Engineering

Volumn , Issue , 2005, Pages 306-315

  Sabetzadeh, Mehrdad ^a   Easterbrook, Steve ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ALGORITHMS; COMPUTER PROGRAMMING LANGUAGES; GRAPH THEORY; INTEGRATION; MATHEMATICAL MODELS;

CONCEPTUAL MODELING; STAKEHOLDER; TRACEABILITY; VIEW MERGING;

REQUIREMENTS ENGINEERING;

EID: 27644568193     PISSN: 1090705X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1109/re.2005.8     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (31)

1. M. Barr and C. Wells. Category Theory for Computing Science. Les Publications CRM Montreal, third edition, 1999.
2. N. Belnap. A useful four-valued logic. In Modern Uses of Multiple-Valued Logic, pages 5-37. Reidel, 1977.
3. P. Bernstein. Applying model management to classical meta data problems. In CIDK, pages 209-220, 2003.
4. P. Buneman et al. Theoretical aspects of schema merging. In EDBT, pages 152-167,1992.
5. M. Chechik et al. Multi-valued symbolic model-checking. TOSEM, 12(4):371-408, 2003.
6. E. Clarke et al. Model checking and abstraction. TOPLAS, 19(2), 1994.
7. A. Corradini et al. Graph processes. Fundamenta Informaticae, 26(3-4):241-265, 1996.
8. B. Davey and H. Priestley. Introduction to Lattices and Order. Cambridge University Press, second edition, 2002.
9. S. Easterbrook and M. Chechik. A framework for multi-valued reasoning over inconsistent viewpoints. In ICSE, pages 411-420, 2001.
10. S. Easterbrook and B. Nuseibeh. Using viewpoints for inconsistency management. Software Eng. J., 11:31-43, 1996.
11. H. Ehrig and G. Taentzer. Computing by graph transformation, a survey and annotated bibliography. BEATCS, 59:182-226, 1996.
12. H. Ehrig et al. A combined reference model- and view-based approach to system specification. Intl. J. of Software Eng. and Knowledge Eng., 7(4):457-477, 1997.
13. A. Finkelstein et al. Inconsistency handling in multi-perspective specifications. TSE, 20:569-578, 1994.
14. M. Ginsberg. Bilattices and modal operators. In TARK, pages 273-287, 1990.
15. J. Goguen. A categorical manifesto. Mathematical Structures in Computer Science, 1:49-67, 1991.
16. The GRL ontology. http://www.cs.toronto.edu/km/GRL.
17. Handbook of graph grammars and computing by graph transformation: volumes I-III. World Scientific.
18. R. Hecket and A. Zündorf. How to specify a graph transformation approach. In ENTCS, volume 44, 2001.
19. S. Melnik. Generic Model Management: Concepts and Algorithms, volume 2967 of LNCS. Springer, 2004.
20. S. Melnik et al. Rondo: a programming platform for generic model management. In SIGMOD, pages 193-204, 2003.
21. J. Mordeson and P. Nair. Fuzzy Graphs and Fuzzy Hypergraphs. Physica-Verlag, 2000.
22. C. Nentwich et al. flexible consistency checking. TOSEM, 12:28-63, 2003.
23. R. Pottinger and P. Bernstein. Merging models based on given correspondences. In VLDB, pages 862-873., 2003.
24. E. Rahm and P. Bernstein. A survey of approaches to automatic schema matching. VLDB J., 10(4):334-350, 2001.
25. M. Sabetzadeh and S. Easterbrook. iVuBlender : A tool for merging incomplete and inconsistent views. In this proceedings.
26. M. Sabetzadeh and S. Easterbrook. Analysis of inconsistency in graph-based viewpoints. In ASE, pages 12-21, 2003.
27. M. Sabetzadeh and S. Easterbrook. An algebraic framework for merging incomplete and inconsistent views. Technical Report CSRG-496, U. of Toronto, 2004.
28. S. Uchitel and M. Chechik. Merging partial behavioural models. In FSE, pages 43-52, 2004.
29. A. van Lamsweerde et al. The meeting scheduler system - problem statement, ftp://ftp.info.ucl.ac.be/pub/publi/92.
30. A. van Lamsweerde et al. Goal-directed elaboration of requirements fora meeting scheduler. In RE, pages 194-203, 1995.
31. E. Yu. Towards modeling and reasoning support for early-phase requirements eng. In RE, pages 226-235, 1997.