Process modelling for information system description

My previous experiences and some preliminary studies of the relevant technical literature allowed me to identify several reasons for which the current state of the database theory seemed unsatisfactory and required further research. These reasons included: insufficient formalism of data semantics, misinterpretation of NULL values, inconsistencies in the concept of the universal relation, certain ambiguities in domain definition, and inadequate representation of facts and constraints. The commonly accepted ’sequentiality’ principle in most of the current system design methodologies imposes strong restrictions on the processes that a target system is composed of. They must be algorithmic and must not be interrupted during execution; neither may they have any parallel subprocesses as their own components. This principle can no longer be considered acceptable. In very many existing systems multiple processors perform many concurrent actions that can interact with each other. The overconcentration on data models is another disadvantage of the majority of system design methods. Many techniques pay little (or no) attention to process definition. They assume that the model of the Real World consists only of data elements and relationships among them. However, the way the processes are related to each other (in terms of precedence relation) may have considerable impact on the data model. It has been assumed that the Real World is discretisable, i.e. it may be modelled by a structure of objects. The word object is to be interpreted in a wide sense so it can mean anything within the boundaries of this part of the Real World that is to be represented in the target system. An object may then denote a fact or a physical or abstract entity, or relationships between any of these, or relationships between relationships, or even a still more complex structure. The fundamental hypothesis was formulated stating the necessity of considering the three aspects of modelling - syntax, semantics and behaviour, and these to be considered integrally. A syntactic representation of an object within a target system is called a construct A construct which cannot be decomposed further (either syntactically or semantically) is defined to be an atom. Any construct is a result of the following production rules: construct ::= atom I function construct; function ::= atom I construct. This syntax forms a sentential notation. The sentential notation allows for extensive use of denotational semantics. The meaning of a construct may be defined as a function mapping from a set of syntactic constructs to the appropriate semantic domains; these in turn appear to be sets of functions since a construct may have a meaning in more than one class of objects. Because of its functional form the meaning of a construct may be derived from the meaning of its components. The issue of system behaviour needed further investigation and a revision of the conventional model of computing. The sequentiality principle has been rejected, concurrency being regarded as a natural property of processes. A postulate has been formulated that any potential parallelism should be constructively used for data/process design and that the process structure would affect the data model. An important distinction has been made between a process declaration - considered as a form of data or an abstraction of knowledge - and a process application that corresponds to a physical action performed by a processor, according to a specific process declaration. In principle, a process may be applied to any construct - including its own representation - and it is a matter of semantics to state whether or not it is sensible to do so. The process application mechanism has been explained in terms of formal systems theory by introducing an abstract machine with two input and two output types of channels. The system behaviour has been described by defining a process calculus. It is based on logical and functional properties of a discrete time model and provides a means to handle expressions composed of process-variables connected by logical functors. Basic terms of the calculus are: constructs and operations (equivalence, approximation, precedence, incidence, free-parallelism, strict-parallelism). Certain properties of these operations (e.g. associativity or transitivity) allow for handling large expressions. Rules for decomposing/integrating process applications, analogous in some sense to those forming the basis for structured programming, have been derived

The limits of classical mereology: Mixed fusions and the failures of mereological hybridism

In this thesis I argue against unrestricted mereological hybridism, the view that there are absolutely no constraints on wholes having parts from many different logical or ontological categories, an exemplar of which I take to be ‘mixed fusions’. These are composite entities which have parts from at least two different categories – the membered (as in classes) and the non-membered (as in individuals). As a result, mixed fusions can also be understood to represent a variety of cross-category summation such as the abstract with the concrete, the physical with the non-physical, and the possible with the impossible, just to name a few. Proposed by David Lewis (1991) alongside his defence of classical mereology (the major theory of parthood which permits such transcategorial composites through its principle of unrestricted composition) it is my contention that mixed fusions are an under-examined consequence of indiscriminate mereological fusion which harbour a multitude of complications. In my attempt to discern their substantive character, throughout this thesis I make a case study of mixed fusions and uncover several problematic consequences which I think follow from their most plausible assessment. These include: (1) that mixed fusions’ probable membership relations may lead to dubious foundational loops in the mereological Universe, or (2) otherwise that mixed fusions oblige an implausible ontological priority of the mereological Universe as a whole; (3) that mixed fusions contradict the reductive account of set theory they are proposed within, by plausibly being seen to have the same members as their class parts, and (4) that mixed fusions therefore confound a mereological thesis of Composition as Identity, which some (including Lewis) use to support classical mereology – a consequence which is potentially self-defeating; (5) that mixed fusions as sums of abstract and concrete entities both subvert Lewis’s (1986) system of modal realism, while (6) also undermining less expansive theories of possible worlds; and finally, (7) that even where some of the foregoing is resisted, it remains implausible that mixed fusions are ontologically innocent, because their supposed distinction from their parts in this case ensures that they need to be counted as additional entities in one’s ontology. To be clear, I do not advance a theory of mereological hybrid nihilism in the sense of denying all cases of transcategorial composition. (I only cover a few select instances of mereological hybridism via mixed fusions after all.) Rather, I deny that mereological hybridism is plausible in full generality, by demonstrating that any cases of it are at least limited by the constraints that I identify. This in turn vindicates a call for a restriction on parthood theories and composition principles which allow certain types of categorially mixed entities – including restricting classical mereology with its principle of unrestricted composition. Although theories of parthood like the standard classical mereology are not ordinarily developed for the sake of mereological hybrids like mixed fusions, these and other transcategorial composites are still among the logical consequences of such parthood systems operating with sufficient generality. The significance of my thesis, then, comes from showcasing how some of these kinds of entities do not conform to the systems in which they are included as required, and hence I argue for the rejection of unrestricted mereological hybridism as well as any mereological principles which support it

Ontological foundations for structural conceptual models

In this thesis, we aim at contributing to the theory of conceptual modeling and ontology representation. Our main objective here is to provide ontological foundations for the most fundamental concepts in conceptual modeling. These foundations comprise a number of ontological theories, which are built on established work on philosophical ontology, cognitive psychology, philosophy of language and linguistics. Together these theories amount to a system of categories and formal relations known as a foundational ontolog

Engineering Systems Integration

Dreamers may envision our future, but it is the pragmatists who build it. Solve the right problem in the right way, mankind moves forward. Solve the right problem in the wrong way or the wrong problem in the right way, however clever or ingenious the solution, neither credits mankind. Instead, this misfire demonstrates a failure to appreciate a crucial step in pragmatic problem solving: systems integration. The first book to address the underlying premises of systems integration and how to exposit them in a practical and productive manner, Engineering Systems Integration: Theory, Metrics, and Methods looks at the fundamental nature of integration, exposes the subtle premises to achieve integration, and posits a substantial theoretical framework that is both simple and clear. Offering systems managers and systems engineers the framework from which to consider their decisions in light of systems integration metrics, the book isolates two basic questions, 1) Is there a way to express the interplay of human actions and the result of system interactions of a product with its environment?, and 2) Are there methods that combine to improve the integration of systems? The author applies the four axioms of General Systems Theory (holism, decomposition, isomorphism, and models) and explores the domains of history and interpretation to devise a theory of systems integration, develop practical guidance applying the three frameworks, and formulate the mathematical constructs needed for systems integration. The practicalities of integrating parts when we build or analyze systems mandate an analysis and evaluation of existing integrative frameworks of causality and knowledge. Integration is not just a word that describes a best practice, an art, or a single discipline. The act of integrating is an approach, operative in all disciplines, in all we see, in all we do