An entity-relationship model based conceptual framework for model driven development

Proceedings of the IASTED International Conference on Software Engineering, as part of the 24th IASTED International Multi-Conference on APPLIED INFORMATICS

Volumn 2006, Issue , 2006, Pages 200-205

  Duan, Yucong ^a   Cheung, Shing Chi ^b   Fu, Xiaolan ^c   Gu, Yuqing ^a  

^a INSTITUTE OF GEOLOGY AND GEOPHYSICS   (China)

^b HONG KONG UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY   (Hong Kong)

^c INSTITUTE OF PSYCHOLOGY   (China)

Author keywords

Entity relationship model; Model driven software development; UML

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER ARCHITECTURE; HIERARCHICAL SYSTEMS; MATHEMATICAL TRANSFORMATIONS; METADATA; ONTOLOGY; SOFTWARE ENGINEERING;

ENTITY-RELATIONSHIP (ER) MODEL; MODEL DRIVEN SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT (MDSD); RUNTIME ENTITY-RELATIONSHIP MODEL (RER);

UNIFIED MODELING LANGUAGE;

EID: 34047150456     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (42)

1. OMG. MDA Guide Version 1.0.1. 2003. www.omg.org/docs/omg/03-06-01.pdf
2. J. Bettin, Model-Driven Software Development: An emerging paradigm for industrialized software asset development, http://www.softmefaware.com/mdsd-and- isad.pdf
3. Model-Driven Software Development, http://www.mdsd.info
4. A. Agrawal, A formal graph transformation based language for model-to-model transformations, Ph.D. Thesis, Vanderbilt University August, 2004.
5. A. Egyed, Heterogeneous Views Integration and its Automation, Ph.D. Thesis, Univ. of Southern California, 2000.
6. A. Egyed, Automated abstraction of class diagrams. ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. 11(4), 2002, 449-491.
7. A. Agrawal, A Metamodel based model transformation language. Proc. Conf. Object-Oriented Programming, Systems, Languages, and Applications (OOPSLA '03), 2003. 386 - 387.
8. S. Clarke, Extending standard UML with model composition semantics. Science of Computer Programming, 44(1), 2002, 71-100.
9. J.X. Pang, L. Blair, An Adaptive Run Time Manager for the Dynamic Integration and Interaction Resolution of Features. Proc. International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems Workshops, 2002, 445-450.
10. H. Giese, M. Tichy, S. Burmester, S. Flake. Towards the compositional verification of real-time UML designs. Proc. the 11th ACM SIGSOFT Symposium on Foundations of Software Engineering 2003 held jointly with 9th European Software Engineering Conf. (ESEC/FSE), Helsinki, Finland, 2003, 38-47.
11. A.S. Evans and S. Kent. Core Meta-modelling semantics of UML: the pUML approach. Proc. 2nd International Conf. on the Unified Modeling Language, Fort Collins, CO, USA, 1999, 140-155.
12. A.S. Evans, R.B. France, K.C. Lano, B. Rumpe. The UML as a formal modelling notation Proc. International Conf. on the Unified Modeling Language, Fort Collins, Mulhouse, France, 1998, 336-348.
13. Object Management Group. Unified Modeling Language: Diagram Interchange, version 2.0. 2003. Http://www.jeckle.de/files/03-07-03.pdf.
14. G. Wagner, The Agent-Object-Relationship metamodel: towards a unified view of state and behavior. Inf. Syst. 28(5), 2003, 475-504.
15. P. P. Chen: The Entity-Relationship Model - Toward a Unified View of Data. ACM Trans. Database Syst. 1(1), 1976, 9-36.
16. G. Guizzardi, G.R. Wagner, H. Herre. On the Foundations of UML as an Ontology Representation Language, Proc. 14th International Conf. on Knowledge Engineering and Knowledge Management, Whittlebury Hall, Northamptonshire, UK, 2004, 47-62.
17. Evermann, J. and Wand, Y. Towards ontologically based semantics for UML constructs. Proc. of 20th Intl. Conf. on Conceptual Modeling, Yokohama, Japan, 2001, 354-367.
18. B. Tekinerdogan, Synthesis Based Software Architecture Design, Ph.D. thesis, University of Twente, The Netherlands, 2000.
19. B. W. Boehm, Daniel Port. Conceptual Modeling Challenges for Model-Based Architecting and Software Engineering (MBASE). Proc. Symposium on Conceptual Modeling, 1997, 24-43.
20. A. Gemino, Y. Wand, A framework for empirical evaluation of conceptual modeling techniques. Requir. Eng. 9(4), 2004, 248-260.
21. Boehm, B., Egyed, A., Kwan, J., Madachy, R.Using the WinWin Spiral Model: A Case Study, IEEE Computer, 31(7), 1998, 33-44.
22. Grundy, J.C., Hosking, J.G., Mugridge, W.B., Apperley, M.D. An architecture and environment for decentralised, internet-wide software process modelling and enactment, IEEE Internet Computing: Special Issue on Software Engineering via the Internet, Vol. 2 (5), 1998, 53-62.
23. D.B. Lange and Y. Nakamura, "Interactive Visualization of Design Patterns Can Help in Framework Understanding," Proc. Conf. Object-Oriented Programming, Systems, Languages, and Applications (OOPSLA '95), 1995, 342-357.
24. G.C. Murphy, David N., K.J. Sullivan, Software Reflexion Models: Bridging the Gap between Design and Implementation. IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 27(4), 2001, 364-380.
25. R.B. Smith, David U., A Simple and Unifying Approach to Subjective Objects. TAPOS 2(3), 1996, 161-178.
26. W. Harrison, H. Ossher, R.B. Smith, David U., Subjectivity in object-oriented systems. OOPS Messenger 5(4), 1994, 131-136.
27. L.J. Osterweil, Understanding process and the quest for deeper questions in software engineering research. Proc. the 11th ACM SIGSOFT Symposium on Foundations of Software Engineering 2003 held jointly with 9th European Software Engineering Conf. (ESEC/FSE), Helsinki, Finland, 2003, 6-14.
28. B. Berenbach, The Evaluation of Large, Complex UML Analysis and Design Model. Proc. 26th International Conference on Software Engineering, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK, 2004, 232-241.
29. Rumbaugh, J., Jacobson, I., Booch, G. The Unified Modeling Language Reference Manual (Addison Wesley, 1999).
30. OMG. Unified Modeling Language: Superstructure, version 2.0, 2004, http://www.omg.org/uml/.
31. Object Management Group. UML 2.0 Infrastructure Specification, Doc.# ptc/03-09-15, 2003.
32. Kobryn C., UML 2001: a Standardization Odyssey. Communications of the ACM, 42(10), 1999, 29-37.
33. Medvidovic, N., Egyed, A., and Rosenblum, D. Round-Trip Software Engineering Using UML:From Architecture to Design and Back, Proc. the 2nd Workshop on Object-Oriented Reengineering (WOOR), 1999, Toulouse, France, 1-8.
34. OMG, Model Driven Architecture (MDA) meets Web Services. http://www.omg.org/news/meetings/workshops/presentations/WebServices_2002/ 01 -3_Iyengar_LATE_MDA-Meets-WebServices.pdf.
35. OMG. OMG-Unified Modeling Language, v1.5 March, 2003.
36. J. Yoo, J. Catanio, R. Paul, Michael Bieber. Relationship analysis in requirements engineering. Requir. Eng. 9(4), 2004, 238-247.
37. Y.C. Duan, S.C. Cheung, X.L. Fu and Y.Q. Gu, A Metamodel Based Model Transformation Approach, Proc. the 3rd ACIS International Conf. on Software Engineering Research, Management & Applications (SERA 2005), Mt. Pleasant, MI, USA, 2005, 184-191.
38. I. Yoon, S. Y. Min, D.H. Bae, Tailoring and Verifying Software Process. Proc. 8th Asia-Pacific Software Engineering Conf. Macau SAR, China, 2001, 202-209.
39. M. Heller, A. Schleicher, B. Westfechtel, A Management System for Evolving Development Processes. Proc. 2nd World Conf. on Integrated Design and Process Technology (IDPT), Austin, Texas, USA, 2003. http://www-i3.informatik.rwth-aachen.de/private/bernhard/idpt03b.pdf.
40. T. Sunetnanta and A. Finkelsteing. Automated Consistency Checking for Multiperspective Software Specifications, http://www.research.ibm.com/ hyperspace/workshops/icse2001/Papers/sunetnanta.pdf.
41. th European Conf. for Object-Oriented Programming (ECOOP), Jyväskylä, Finland, 1997, 344-366.
42. P. Shoval, R. Danoch, M. Balaban, Hierarchical entity-relationship diagrams: the model, method of creation and experimental evaluation. Requir. Eng. 9(4), 2004, 217-228.