Antithesis of Object Orientation: Occurrence-Only Modeling Applied in Engineering and Medicine

This paper has a dual character, combining a philosophical ontological exploration with a conceptual modeling approach in systems and software engineering. Such duality is already practiced in software engineering, in which the current dominant modeling thesis is object orientation. This work embraces an anti-thesis that centers solely on the process rather than emphasizing the object. The approach is called occurrence-only modeling, in which an occurrence means an event or process where a process is defined as an orchestrated net of events that form a semantical whole. In contrast to object orientation, in this occurrence-only modeling objects are nothing more than long events. We apply this paradigm to (1) a UML/BPMN inventory system in simulation engineering and (2) an event-based system that represents medical occurrences that occur on a timeline. The aim of such a venture is to enhance the field of conceptual modeling by adding yet a new alternative methodology and clarifying differences among approaches. Conceptual modeling s importance has been recognized in many research areas. An active research community in simulation engineering demonstrates the growing interest in conceptual modeling. In the clinical domains, temporal information elucidates the occurrence of medical events (e.g., visits, laboratory tests). These applications give an opportunity to propose a new approach that includes (a) a Stoic ontology that has two types of being, existence and subsistence; (b) Thinging machines that limit activities to five generic actions; and (c) Lupascian logic, which handles negative events. With such a study, we aim to substantiate the assertion that the occurrence only approach is a genuine philosophical base for conceptual modeling. The results in this paper seem to support such a claim.Comment: 13 pages, 16 figure

Antithesis of Object Orientation: Occurrence-Only Modeling Applied in Engineering and Medicine

This paper has a dual character, combining a philosophical ontological exploration with a conceptual modeling approach in systems and software engineering. Such duality is already practiced in software engineering, in which the current dominant modeling thesis is object orientation. This work embraces an anti-thesis that centers solely on the process rather than emphasizing the object. The approach is called occurrence-only modeling, in which an occurrence means an event or process where a process is defined as an orchestrated net of events that form a semantical whole. In contrast to object orientation, in this occurrence-only modeling objects are nothing more than long events. We apply this paradigm to (1) a UML/BPMN inventory system in simulation engineering and (2) an event-based system that represents medical occurrences that occur on a timeline. The aim of such a venture is to enhance the field of conceptual modeling by adding yet a new alternative methodology and clarifying differences among approaches. Conceptual modeling’s importance has been recognized in many research areas. An active research community in simulation engineering demonstrates the growing interest in conceptual modeling. In the clinical domains, temporal information elucidates the occurrence of medical events (e.g., visits, laboratory tests). These applications give an opportunity to propose a new approach that includes (a) a Stoic ontology that has two types of being, existence and subsistence; (b) Thinging machines that limit activities to five generic actions; and (c) Lupascian logic, which handles negative events. With such a study, we aim to substantiate the assertion that the “occurrence only” approach is a genuine philosophical base for conceptual modeling. The results in this paper seem to support such a claim

Proceedings of the First NASA Formal Methods Symposium

Topics covered include: Model Checking - My 27-Year Quest to Overcome the State Explosion Problem; Applying Formal Methods to NASA Projects: Transition from Research to Practice; TLA+: Whence, Wherefore, and Whither; Formal Methods Applications in Air Transportation; Theorem Proving in Intel Hardware Design; Building a Formal Model of a Human-Interactive System: Insights into the Integration of Formal Methods and Human Factors Engineering; Model Checking for Autonomic Systems Specified with ASSL; A Game-Theoretic Approach to Branching Time Abstract-Check-Refine Process; Software Model Checking Without Source Code; Generalized Abstract Symbolic Summaries; A Comparative Study of Randomized Constraint Solvers for Random-Symbolic Testing; Component-Oriented Behavior Extraction for Autonomic System Design; Automated Verification of Design Patterns with LePUS3; A Module Language for Typing by Contracts; From Goal-Oriented Requirements to Event-B Specifications; Introduction of Virtualization Technology to Multi-Process Model Checking; Comparing Techniques for Certified Static Analysis; Towards a Framework for Generating Tests to Satisfy Complex Code Coverage in Java Pathfinder; jFuzz: A Concolic Whitebox Fuzzer for Java; Machine-Checkable Timed CSP; Stochastic Formal Correctness of Numerical Algorithms; Deductive Verification of Cryptographic Software; Coloured Petri Net Refinement Specification and Correctness Proof with Coq; Modeling Guidelines for Code Generation in the Railway Signaling Context; Tactical Synthesis Of Efficient Global Search Algorithms; Towards Co-Engineering Communicating Autonomous Cyber-Physical Systems; and Formal Methods for Automated Diagnosis of Autosub 6000

Enterprise Modeling in the context of Enterprise Engineering: State of the art and outlook

[EN] Enterprise Modeling is a central activity in Enterprise Engineering and can facilitate Production Management activities. This state-of-the-art paper first recalls definitions and fundamental principles of enterprise modelling, which goes far beyond process modeling. The CIMOSA modeling framework, which is based on an event-driven process-based modeling language suitable for enterprise system analysis and model enactment, is used as a reference conceptual framework because of its generality. Next, the focus is on new features of enterprise modeling languages including risk, value, competency modeling and service orientation. Extensions for modeling collaborative aspects of networked organizations are suggested as research outlook. Major approaches used in enterprise modeling are recalled before concluding.Vernadat, F. (2014). Enterprise Modeling in the context of Enterprise Engineering: State of the art and outlook. International Journal of Production Management and Engineering. 2(2):57-73. doi:10.4995/ijpme.2014.2326SWORD577322AMICE. (1993). CIMOSA: Open System Architecture for CIM, 2nd revised and extended edition. Berlin: Springer-Verlag. 234 pages.Camarinha-Matos, L. M., & Afsarmanesh, H. (2007). A comprehensive modeling framework for collaborative networked organizations. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, 18(5), 529-542. doi:10.1007/s10845-007-0063-3Camarinha-Matos, L. M., Afsarmanesh, H., Galeano, N., & Molina, A. (2009). Collaborative networked organizations – Concepts and practice in manufacturing enterprises. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 57(1), 46-60. doi:10.1016/j.cie.2008.11.024Chakravarthy, S. (1989). Rule management and evaluation: an active DBMS perspective. ACM SIGMOD Record, 18(3), 20-28. doi:10.1145/71031.71034Chen, H. (2010). Editorial. ACM Transactions on Management Information Systems, 1(1), 1-5. doi:10.1145/1877725.1877726Clivillé, V., Berrah, L., & Mauris, G. (2007). Quantitative expression and aggregation of performance measurements based on the MACBETH multi-criteria method. International Journal of Production Economics, 105(1), 171-189. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2006.03.002Curtis, B., Kellner, M. I., & Over, J. (1992). Process modeling. Communications of the ACM, 35(9), 75-90. doi:10.1145/130994.130998Dalal, N. P., Kamath, M., Kolarik, W. J., & Sivaraman, E. (2004). Toward an integrated framework for modeling enterprise processes. Communications of the ACM, 47(3), 83-87. doi:10.1145/971617.971620Doumeingts, G., & Vallespir, B. (1995). A methodology supporting design and implementation of CIM systems including economic evaluation. In P. Brandimarte & A. Villa, Eds. Optimization Models and Concepts in Produc-tion Management (pp. 307-331). New-York, NY: Gordon and Breach Science Publishers.Doumeingts, G., & Ducq, Y. (2001). Enterprise modelling techniques to improve efficiency of enterprises. Production Planning & Control, 12(2), 146-163. doi:10.1080/09537280150501257Harzallah, M., Berio, G., & Vernadat, F. (2006). Analysis and modeling of individual competencies: toward better management of human resources. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics - Part A: Systems and Humans, 36(1), 187-207. doi:10.1109/tsmca.2005.859093Jagdev, H. S., & Thoben, K.-D. (2001). Anatomy of enterprise collaborations. Production Planning & Control, 12(5), 437-451. doi:10.1080/09537280110042675JORYSZ, H. R., & VERNADAT, F. B. (1990). CIM-OSA Part 1: total enterprise modelling and function view. International Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing, 3(3-4), 144-156. doi:10.1080/09511929008944444Khalaf, R., Curbera, F., Nagy, W.A., Mukhi, N., Tai, S., & Duftler, M. (2005). Understanding Web Services. In M. Singh, Ed. Practical Handbook of Internet Computing (Chap. 27). Boca Raton, FL: Chapman & Hall/CRC Press.Kosanke, K., & Nell, J. G. (Eds.). (1997). Enterprise Engineering and Integration. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-60889-6Kosanke, K., Vernadat, F.B., & Zelm, M. (2014). Means to enable Enterprise Interoperation: CIMOSA Object Capa-bility Profiles and CIMOSA Collaboration View, Proc. of the 19th World Congress of the IFAC, Cape Town, South Africa, 24-19 August 2014.Larson, N., & Kusiak, A. (1996). Managing design processes: a risk assessment approach. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics - Part A: Systems and Humans, 26(6), 749-759. doi:10.1109/3468.541335Li, Q., Wang, Z., Li, W., Li, J., Wang, C., & Du, R. (2013). Applications integration in a hybrid cloud computing environment: modelling and platform. Enterprise Information Systems, 7(3), 237-271. doi:10.1080/17517575.2012.677479Owen, S., & Walker, Z. (2013). Enterprise Modelling and Architecture. New Dehli, India: Ocean Media Pvt. Ltd.Roboam, M., Zanettin, M., & Pun, L. (1989). GRAI-IDEF0-Merise (GIM): Integrated methodology to analyse and design manufacturing systems. Computer Integrated Manufacturing Systems, 2(2), 82-98. doi:10.1016/0951-5240(89)90021-9Ross, D. T., & Schoman, K. E. (1977). Structured Analysis for Requirements Definition. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, SE-3(1), 6-15. doi:10.1109/tse.1977.229899Shah, L.A., Etienne, A., Siadat, A., & Vernadat, F. (2014). Decision-making in the manufacturing environment using a value-risk graph. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, 25, 2.Scheer, A.-W. (1992). Architecture of Integrated Information Systems. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-97389-5Scheer, A.-W. (1999). ARIS — Business Process Modeling. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-97998-9Vernadat, F.B. (1996). Enterprise Modeling and Integration: Principles and Applications. London: Chapman & Hall. 528 pages.Vernadat, F. B. (2007). Interoperable enterprise systems: Principles, concepts, and methods. Annual Reviews in Control, 31(1), 137-145. doi:10.1016/j.arcontrol.2007.03.00

A Static Verification Framework for Secure Peer-to-Peer Applications

In this paper we present a static verification framework to support the design and verification of secure peer-to-peer applications. The framework supports the specification, modeling, and analysis of security aspects together with the general characteristics of the system, during early stages of the development life-cycle. The approach avoids security issues to be taken into consideration as a separate layer that is added to the system as an afterthought by the use of security protocols. The main functionality supported by the framework are concerned with the modeling of the system together with its security aspects by using an extension of UML, modeling of abuse cases to represent scenarios of attackers and assist with the identification of properties to be verified, specification of properties to be verified in a graphical template language, verification of the models against the properties, and visualization of the results of the verification process

Embedding object-oriented design in system engineering

The Unified Modeling Language (UML) is a collection of techniques intended to document design decisions about software. This contrasts with systems engineering approaches such as for exampleStatemate and the Yourdon Systems Method (YSM), in which the design of an entire system consisting of software and hardware can be documented. The difference between the system- and the software level is reflected in differences between execution semantics as well as in methodology. In this paper, I show how the UML can be used as a system-level design technique. I give a conceptual framework for engineering design that accommodates the system- as well as the software level and show how techniques from the UML and YSM can be classified within this framework, and how this allows a coherent use of these techniques in a system engineering approach. These ideas are illustrated by a case study in which software for a compact dynamic bus station is designed. Finally, I discuss the consequences of this approach for a semantics of UML constructs that would be appropriate for system-level design

Model-driven Enterprise Systems Configuration

Enterprise Systems potentially lead to significant efficiency gains but require a well-conducted configuration process. A promising idea to manage and simplify the configuration process is based on the premise of using reference models for this task. Our paper continues along this idea and delivers a two-fold contribution: first, we present a generic process for the task of model-driven Enterprise Systems configuration including the steps of (a) Specification of configurable reference models, (b) Configuration of configurable reference models, (c) Transformation of configured reference models to regular build time models, (d) Deployment of the generated build time models, (e) Controlling of implementation models to provide input to the configuration, and (f) Consolidation of implementation models to provide input to reference model specification. We discuss inputs and outputs as well as the involvement of different roles and validation mechanisms. Second, we present an instantiation case of this generic process for Enterprise Systems configuration based on Configurable EPCs