The Unified Enterprise Modelling Language-Overview and further work

Computers in Industry

Volumn 61, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 99-111

  Anaya, Victor ^a   Berio, Giuseppe ^b   Harzallah, Mounira ^c   Heymans, Patrick ^d   Matulevičius, Raimundas ^d   Opdahl, Andreas L ^e   Panetto, Hervé ^f   Verdecho, Maria Jose ^a  

^a UNIVERSITAT POLITÈCNICA DE VALÈNCIA   (Spain)

^b UNIVERSITÉ DE BRETAGNE SUD   (France)

^c UNIVERSITÉ DE NANTES   (France)

^d UNIVERSITY OF NAMUR   (Belgium)

^e UNIVERSITY OF BERGEN   (Norway)

^f CENTRE DE RECHERCHE EN AUTOMATIQUE DE NANCY   (France)

Author keywords

Bunge Wand Weber Model; Enterprise modelling; Information Systems Modelling; Interoperability; Modelling Languages; Ontology; OWL; Unified Enterprise Modelling Language (UEML)

Indexed keywords

BUNGE-WAND-WEBER MODELS; CORRESPONDENCE ANALYSIS; ENTERPRISE MODELLING; META MODEL; MODELLING LANGUAGE; MODELLING LANGUAGES; SEMANTIC LEVELS;

COMPUTER PROGRAMMING LANGUAGES; INFORMATION SYSTEMS; INTEROPERABILITY; ONTOLOGY; QUERY LANGUAGES; SEMANTICS;

LINGUISTICS;

EID: 73649146976     PISSN: 01663615     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.compind.2009.10.013     Document Type: Article

References (51)

1. Goossenaerts J., Gruninger M., Nell J.G., Petit M., and Vernadat F. Formal semantics of enterprise models. In: Kosanke K., and Nell J.G. (Eds). Proceedings of ICEIMT'97. Springer-Verlag (1997)
2. Vernadat F. UEML: towards a unified enterprise modelling language. International Journal of Production Research 40 17 (2002) 4309-4321 Taylor & Francis Group
3. UEML-TN (Unified Enterprise Modelling Language Thematic Network) (2002-2003).
4. Jochem R. Common representation through UEML-requirement and approach. In: Kosanke K., Nell J., and Ortiz Bas A. (Eds). Proceedings of ICEIMT 2002. Polytechnic University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain, April 24-26 (2002), Kluwer IFIP TC 5/WG5.12
5. Panetto H., Berio G., Benali K., Boudjlida N., and Petit M. A unified enterprise modelling language for enhanced interoperability of enterprise models. Proceedings of the 11th IFAC INCOM2004 Symposium. Bahia, Brazil, April 5-7 (2004)
6. Mertins K., Knothe T., and Zelm M. User oriented enterprise modeling for interoperability with UEML. Proceedings of EMMSAD'04 (Evaluating Modeling Methods for Systems Analysis and Design). joint with CAiSE*04, Riga, Latvia, June 7-8 (2004) 25-36
7. Berio G., Anaya V., and Ortiz A. Supporting enterprise integration through a unified enterprise modeling language. In: Grundspenkis J., and Kirikova M. (Eds). Proceedings of EMOI 2004 (Enterprise Modelling and Ontologies for Interoperability), Joint with CAiSE*04. vol. 3, Riga Technical University (2004) 165-176
8. INTEROP-NoE. Interop Network of Excellence (2003-2007). http://www.inteop-noe.org/ www.inteop-noe.org
9. Berio G., Opdahl A., Anaya V., and Dassisti M. Deliverable DEM1 (2005). http://www.inteop-noe.org/ publicly available at www.inteop-noe.org
10. Berio G., Opdahl A., Anaya V., and Dassisti M. Deliverable DEM2 (2005). http://www.inteop-noe.org/ publicly available at www.inteop-noe.org
11. Berio G., Opdahl A., Anaya V., and Dassisti M. Deliverable DEM3 (2006). http://www.inteop-noe.org/ publicly available at www.inteop-noe.org
12. Brinkkemper S., Saeki M., and Harmsen F. Assembly techniques for method engineering. Proceedings of CAiSE'98. LNCS, Springer (1998) 381-400
13. Henderson-Sellers B., Gonzalez-Perez C., Serour M.K., and Firesmith D.G. Method engineering and COTS evaluation. Proceedings of the 2nd International W'shop on Models and Processes for the Evaluation of Off-the-shelf Components (MPEC'05). ACM (2005)
14. Ralyté J., and Rolland C. An assembly process model for method engineering. Proceedings of CAiSE'01. LNCS, Springer (2001) 267-283
15. T. Berners-Lee, J. Hendler, O. Lassila, The semantic web, Scientific American Magazine, May 2001.
16. Opdahl A.L. The UEML approach to modelling construct description. Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Interoperability for Enterprise Software and Applications I-ESA (2006)
17. Opdahl A.L., and Henderson-Sellers B. A template for defining enterprise modelling constructs. Journal of Database Management 15 2 (2004)
18. Opdahl A.L., and Henderson-Sellers B. Template-based definition of information systems and enterprise modelling constructs. In: Green P., and Rosemann M. (Eds). Ontologies and Business System Analysis (2005), Idea Group Publishing
19. Opdahl A.L., and Henderson-Sellers B. A unified modeling language without referential redundancy. Data and Knowledge Engineering (DKE) 55 3 (2005) Elsevier
20. Yu E. Towards modeling and reasoning support for early-phase requirements engineering. Proceedings of the 3rd IEEE International Symposium on Requirements Engineering (RE'97). IEEE Computer Society (1997)
21. van Lamsweerde A., and Willemet L. Inferring declarative requirements specifications from operational scenarios. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 24 12 (1998) 1089-1114
22. Matulevičius R., Heymans P., and Opdahl A.L. Comparison of Goal-oriented languages using the UEML approach. In: Panetto H., and Boudjlida N. (Eds). Interoperability for enterprise software applications (2006), ISTE 37-48
23. Matulevičius R., Heymans P., and Opdahl A.L. Comparing GRL and KAOS using the UEML approach. In: Concalves R.J., Muller J.P., Mertins K., and Zelm M. (Eds). Enterprise Interoperability II. New Challenges and Approaches (2007), Springer-Verlag 77-88
24. Matulevičius R., Heymans P., and Opdahl A.L. In: Siau K. (Ed). Ontological Analysis of KAOS Using Separation of Reference, Contemporary Issues in Database Design and Information Systems Development (2007), IGI Publishing 37-54
25. Bunge M. Treatise on Basic Philosophy: Vol. 3 Ontology I: The Furniture of the World (1977), Reidel, Boston
26. Bunge M. Treatise on Basic Philosophy: Vol. 4 Ontology II: A World of Systems (1979), Reidel, Boston
27. Wand Y., and Weber R. An ontological analysis of some fundamental information systems concepts. In: DeGross J.I., and Olson M.H. (Eds). Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Information Systems. Minneapolis, USA, November 30-December 3, 1988 (1988) 213-225
28. Wand Y., and Weber R. An ontological model of an information system. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 16 11 (1988) 1282-1292 IEEE Press
29. Wand Y., and Weber R. On the ontological expressiveness of information systems analysis and design grammars. Journal of Information Systems 3 (1993) 217-237
30. Wand Y., and Weber R. On the deep structure of information systems. Information Systems Journal 5 (1995) 203-223
31. A. Dossogne, C. Jeanmart, Evaluation of ARIS and BPMN using the UEML approach, Master Thesis, University of Namur (2007).
32. C. Tu, Ontological evaluation of BMM and i* with the UEML approach, Master Thesis, University of Namur (2007).
33. Dallons G., Heymans P., and Pollet I. A template-based analysis of GRL. Proceedings of EMMSAD'05 (CAiSE*05), Tenth International Workshop on Exploring Modeling Methods in Systems Analysis and Design (2005) 493-504
34. Heymans P., Saval G., Dallons G., and Pollet I. A template-based analysis of GRL: Book chapter. Advanced Topic in Database Research vol. 5 (2005), Idea Group Publishing
35. Harzallah M., Berio G., and Opdahl A.L. Incorporating IDEF3 into the Unified Enterprise Modelling Language (UEML). Proceedings of VORTE 2007, Joint with EDOC07 (2007)
36. OMG-UML. UML Resource Page (2009), OMG-Object Management Group. http://www.uml.org/ http://www.uml.org/ (accessed 16.04.09)
37. Gower J.C., and Legendre P. Metric and Euclidean properties of dissimilarity coefficients'. Journal of Classification 3 (1986) 5-48
38. Lin D. An information-theoretic definition of similarity. Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Machine Learning. Morgan Kaufmann (1998) 296-304
39. Rodrýguez M., and Egenhofer M. Determining semantic similarity among entity classes from different ontologies. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering 15 2 (2003) 442-456
40. Blanchard E., Kuntz P., Harzallah M., and Briand H. A tree-based similarity for evaluating concept proximities in an ontology. Proceedings of the 10th Conference of the International Federation of Classification Society. Springer (2006) 3-11
41. A. Budanitsky, Lexical semantic relatedness and its application in natural language processing, Technical Report, Univ. of Toronto (1999).
42. Anaya V., Berio G., and Verdecho M.J. Evaluating quality of enterprise modelling languages: The UEML Solution. Proceedings of I-ESA 2007. Funchal, Portugal (2007)
43. Krogstie J. Using a Semiotic Framework to Evaluate UML for the Development for Models of High Quality. In: Siau K., and Halpin T. (Eds). Unified Modelling Language: System Analysis, Design and Development Issues (1998), IDEA Group Publishing 89-106
44. Krogstie J. Evaluating UML using a generic quality framework. In: Khosrow-Pour M. (Ed). Encyclopaedia of Information Science and Technology, (2005), IDEA Group Publishing
45. Moody D.L. Measuring the quality of data models: an empirical evaluation of the use of quality metrics in practice. Proceedings of ECIS'2003. Naples, Italy (2003)
46. ISO/IEC Standard 9126. Software Product Quality, International Standards Organisation (ISO) (2001), International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC)
47. M.J. Verdecho, R. Matulevičius, Language Evaluation Questionnaire for Enterprise Modelling Languages, Unpublished (2007).
48. OMG-MOF. OMG's MetaObject Facility (2009), OMG-Object Management Group. http://www.omg.org/mof/ http://www.omg.org/mof/ (accessed 16.04.09)
49. J. Mahiat, A Validation tool for the UEML approach, Master Thesis, University of Namur (2006).
50. Shadbolt N., Hall W., and Berners-Lee T. The Semantic Web Revisited. IEEE Intelligent Systems May/June (2006)
51. Opdahl A.L., and Berio G. A Roadmap for the UEML. Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Interoperability for Enterprise Software and Applications (I-ESA 2006) (2006)