Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Vocabularies, Ontologies and Rules for The Enterprise and Business Process Modeling
and Management
Giancarlo Guizzardi
http://nemo.inf.ufes.brComputer Science Department
Federal University of
Espírito Santo (UFES),
Brazil
Workshop on Ontologies in Conceptual Modeling
Valencia, SpainJuly, 2010
We need representations of certain portions of reality in order to understand (learn), communicate and reason (problem-solving) about this portion of reality.
The need for Representations
ModelDomain
Abstractioninterpreted as
represented by
ModelingLanguage
Domain Conceptualization
interpreted as
represented by
used to compose
instance ofused to
compose
DomainOntology
Metamodel
Language
Domain Conceptualization
Admissible state of affairs according to a conceptualization C
{x Person(x), x Father(x)} (MM1)
Admissible state of affairs according to a conceptualization C
State of affairs represented by the valid models of metamodel MM1 of language L1
{x Person(x), x Father(x)} (MM1)
{x Person(x), x Father(x), x Father(x) Man(x), x Person(x) Man(x) Woman(x), x Man(x) Woman(x),…}
(MM2)
Admissible state of affairs according to a conceptualization C
State of affairs represented by the valid models of metamodel MM1 of language L1
State of affairs represented by the valid models of metamodel MM2 of language L2
{x Person(x), x Father(x)} (MM1)
{x Person(x), x Father(x), x Father(x) Man(x), x Person(x) Man(x) Woman(x), x Man(x) Woman(x),…}
(MM2)
{x Person(x), x Father(x), x Father(x) Man(x), x Person(x) Man(x) Woman(x), x Man(x) Woman(x), x
Person(x) □Person(x), x LivingPerson(x) LivingPerson(x)…} (MM3)
Admissible state of affairs according to a conceptualization C
State of affairs represented by the valid models of metamodel MM1 of language L1
State of affairs represented by the valid models of metamodel MM2 of language L2
State of affairs represented by the valid models of metamodel MM3 of language L3
Admissible state of affairs according to a conceptualization C
State of affairs represented by the valid models of metamodel MM1 of language L1
State of affairs represented by the valid models of metamodel MM2 of language L2
State of affairs represented by the valid models of metamodel MM3 of language L3
Ontology of the domain according to the conceptualization C
ModelDomain
Abstractioninterpreted as
represented by
ModelingLanguage
Domain Conceptualization
interpreted as
represented by
used to compose
instance ofused to
compose
Genealogy Ontology
Genealogy Domaininterpreted as
represented by
General Ontology
Representation Language
?interpreted as
represented by
used to compose
instance ofused to
compose
Formal Ontology
• To uncover and analyze the general categories and principles that describe reality is the very business of philosophical Formal Ontology
• Formal Ontology (Husserl): a discipline that deals with formal ontological structures (e.g. theory of parts, theory of wholes, types and instantiation, identity, dependence, unity) which apply to all material domains in reality.
Foundational Ontology
• We name a foundational ontology the product of the discipline of formal ontology in philosophy
• A foundational ontology is a formal framework of generic (i.e. domain independent) real-world concepts that can be used to talk about material domains.
Conceptual Modeling Language
Foundational Ontology
interpreted as
represented by
The alternative to philosophy is not “non-philosophy” but bad philosophy! A scientific field can either develop and make explicit its foundations or remain oblivious to its inevitable and often ad hoc ontological commitments.
UML
CognitiveFoundational
Ontology (UFO) interpreted as
represented by
OBJECT TYPES
ObjectType
Sortal Type
RoleKind
Mixin Type
Rigid Sortal Type Anti-Rigid Sortal Type
Phase RoleMixin
Anti-Rigid MixinType
Type
Distinctions Among Object Types
{Person} {Customer}{Student, Employee}
{Teenager, Living Person}
«kind»SocialBeing
«kind»Group
Organization
TheBeatles
instance of
«kind»SocialBeing
StaffOrganization
{John,Paul,George,Ringo}TheBeatles
instance of instance of
«constitution»
«kind»Group
«kind»Person
«role»Customer
Subtyping with Rigid and Anti-Rigid Types
1. x Person(x) □Person(x)
2. x Student(x) Student(x)
3. □(Person(x) Student(x))
4. Person(John)
5. Student(John)
6. □Person(John)
7. □Student(John)
8. □Student(John) Student(John)
Person
Student
Educational Institution
«role»Student
*
Educational Institution
«role»Student
1..*
«role»Customer
Person Organization
«role»Customer
Person Organization
«roleMixin»Customer
«roleMixin»Customer
«role»PersonalCustomer
«role»CorporateCustomer
«roleMixin»Customer
«role»PersonalCustomer
Person Organization
«role»CorporateCustomer
«roleMixin»Customer
«role»PrivateCustomer
«role»CorporateCustomer
«kind»Person
Organization
«kind»Social Being
«roleMixin»Participant
«role»IndividualParticipant
«role»CollectiveParticipant
«kind»Person
SIG
«kind»Social Being
Roles with Disjoint Admissible Types
«roleMixin»A
«role»B
F
D E
«role»C
1..*
1..*
The Pattern in ORM
by Terry Halpin
PART-WHOLE RELATIONS
John
part-of
John’s Heart
Person
John
John’s Brain
part-of
John
part-of
John’s Heart
□((Person,x) □((x) (!Heart,y)(y < x)))
John
John’s Brain
part-of
□((Person,x)(!Brain,y) □((x) (y < x)))
John
part-of
John’s Heart
□((Person,x) □((x) (!Heart,y)(y < x)))
Essentiality and Inseparability
• Essentiality does not imply inseparability:– Think about a Collected Works publication of some
authors. It is defined by that specific extensional collection of papers, but the papers could exist prior to and outlive the collection
• Inseparability does not imply Essentiality :– A whole in this table is an inseparable part of it, but
not an essential part of the table
part-of
part-of
John
part-of
part-of
part-of
John
part-of
John’s Brain
part-of
part-of
TOOL SUPPORT
Type
isAbstract:Boolean = false
Classifier
DirectedRelationship
Generalization
specific
1
generalization
*
general1
/general
*
isCovering:Boolean = falseisDisjoint:Boolean = true
GeneralizationSet **
Relationship
name:String[0..1]
NamedElement
Element
/relatedElement
1..*
/target1..*
/source
1..*
Class
Object Class
Anti Rigid Sortal Class
Mixin ClassSortal Class
{disjoint, complete}
Rigid Sortal Class
RolePhaseSubKindSubstance Sortal
{disjoint, complete} {disjoint, complete}
{disjoint, complete}
Non Rigid Mixin Class
{disjoint, complete}
Rigid Mixin Class
Category
{disjoint, complete}
Anti Rigid Mixin Class Semi Rigid Mixin
RoleMixin Mixin
QuantityisExtensional:Boolean
CollectiveKind
{disjoint, complete}
Tool Support
The underlying algorithm merely has to check structural properties of the diagram and not the content of involved nodes
ATL Transformation
Alloy Analyzer + OntoUML visual PluginAlloy Analyzer + OntoUML visual Plugin
Simulation and Visualization
A Software Engineering view…
Conceptual Modeling
Implementation1Implementation2 Implementation3
A Software Engineering view…
Conceptual Modeling
Implementation1Implementation2 Implementation3
DESIGN
…transported to Ontological Engineering
Ontology as a Conceptual Model
Ontology as Implementation1
(SHOIN/OWL-DL, DLRUS)
Ontology as Implementation2
(CASL)
Ontology asImplementation3
(Alloy, F-Logic…)
…transported to Ontological Engineering
Ontology as a Conceptual Model
Ontology as Implementation1
(SHOIN/OWL-DL, DLRUS)
Ontology as Implementation2
(CASL)
Ontology asImplementation3
(Alloy, F-Logic…)
DESIGN
Unified Foundational Ontology (UFO)
UFO-A (STRUCTURAL ASPECTS)(Objects, their types, their parts/wholes,
the roles they play, their intrinsic and relational properties
Property value spaces…)
UFO-B (DYNAMIC ASPECTS)(Events and their parts,
Relations between events,Object participation in events,
Temporal properties of entities, Time…)
UFO-C (SOCIAL ASPECTS)(Agents, Intentional States, Goals, Actions,
Norms, Social Commitments/Claims, Social Dependency Relations…)
Ontology-Based Analysis and (Re) Engineering based on UFO-B and UFO-C
We have analyzed, (re) engineered, integrated other reference models and tools. Examples include:ITIL, RM-ODPARIS EPC , Goal and Organizational ModelsTROPOS/i*, AORML
References1. GUIZZARDI, G.
The Problem of Transitivity of Part-Whole Relations in Conceptual Modeling Revisited, 21st International Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering (CAISE’09), Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2009.
2. Guizzardi, G. Modal Aspects of Object Types and Part-Whole Relations and the de re/de dicto distinction, 19th International Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering (CAISE’07), Trondheim, 2007, Lecture Notes in Computer Science 4495, Springer-Verlag.
3. Guizzardi, G.; Wagner, G.; Guarino, N.; van Sinderen, M. “An Ontologically Well-Founded Profile for UML Conceptual Models”, 16th International Conference on Advances in Information Systems Engineering (CAiSE), Latvia, 2004. Springer-Verlag , Berlin, Lecture Notes in Computer Science 3084, ISBN 3-540-22151-4.
4. Guizzardi, G., On Ontology, ontologies, Conceptualizations, Modeling Languages, and (Meta)Models, Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, Databases and Information Systems IV, Olegas Vasilecas, Johan Edler, Albertas Caplinskas (Editors), ISBN 978-1-58603-640-8, IOS Press, Amsterdam, 2007.
5. GUIZZARDI, G.; LOPES, M.; BAIÃO, F.; FALBO, R. On the importance of truly ontological representation languages, International Journal of Information Systems Modeling and Design (IJISMD), Information Resources Management Association (IRMA), IGI Publishing, Hershey-New York, USA, Volume 1, Issue 2, April-June 2010, ISSN: 1947-8186.
6. SANTOS, Jr., P; ALMEIDA, J.P.A.; GUIZZARDI, G., An Ontology-Based Semantic Foundation for ARIS EPCs, 25th ACM Symposium On Applied Computing (ACM SAC 2010), Sierre, Switerland, 2010.
References7. CARDOSO, E.C., SANTOS JUNIOR, P.S., ALMEIDA, J.P.A., GUIZZARDI, R.S.S., GUIZZARDI, G.
Semantic Integration of Goal and Business Process Modeling, IFIP International Conference on Research and Practical Issues of Enterprise Information Systems (CONFENIS), Rio Grande do Norte, Brazil, 2010.
8. SANTOS, Jr., P; ALMEIDA, J.P.A.; GUIZZARDI, G., An Ontology-Based Semantic Foundation for Organizational Structure Modeling in the ARIS Method, IEEE 5th Joint International Workshop on Vocabularies, Ontologies and Rules for The Enterprise (VORTE) – Metamodels, Ontologies and Semantic Technologies (MOST), together with 15th International Enterprise Computing Conference (EDOC 2010), Vitória, Brazil, 2010.
9. ALMEIDA, J.P.A.; CARDOSO, E., GUIZZARDI, G., On the Goal Domain in the RM-ODP Enterprise Language: An Initial Appraisal based on a Foundational Ontology, IEEE 6th International Workshop on ODP for Enterprise Computing (WODPEC 2010), together with 15th International Enterprise Computing Conference (EDOC 2010), Vitória, Brazil, 2010.
10. ALMEIDA, J. P. A. ; GUIZZARDI, G. ; SANTOS JR., P. S. Applying and Extending a Semantic Foundation for Role-Related Concepts in Enterprise Modelling. International Journal of Enterprise Information Systems (IJEIS), IGI-Global, 2009.
11. GONCALVES, B. N.; ZAMBORLINI, V. ; GUIZZARDI, G. An Ontological Analysis of the Electrocardiogram. ELECTRONIC JOURNAL OF COMMUNICATION, INFORMATION AND INNOVATION IN HEALTH, 2009.
References12. BENEVIDES, A.B.; GUIZZARDI, G.
A Model-Based Tool for Conceptual Modeling and Domain Ontology Engineering in OntoUML, 11th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems (ICEIS), Milan, 2009. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, Springer-Verlag.
13. Benevides, A.B.; Guizzardi, G.; Braga, B.F.B.; Almeida, J.P.A.;, Assessing Modal Aspects of OntoUML Conceptual Models in Alloy, International Workshop on Evolving Theories of Conceptual Modeling (ETheCoM 2009), at the 28th International Conference on Conceptual Modeling (ER 2009), Gramado, Brazil.
AcknowledgementsNicola GuarinoGerd Wagner
Renata S.S. GuizzardiJoão Paulo Almeida
Ricardo FalboBernardo Nunes
Alessander Botti BenevidesBernardo Braga
Paulo Sergio Santos Jr.Evellin Cardoso
Veruska Zamborlini
Acknowledgements
This research is funded by the Brazilian ResearchFunding Agencies FAPES (grant number 45444080/09) and
CNPq (grants number 481906/2009-6)
http://nemo.inf.ufes.br/[email protected]
