Requirements Engineering

, Volume 9, Issue 4, pp 217–228 | Cite as

Hierarchical entity-relationship diagrams: the model, method of creation and experimental evaluation

Original Article

Abstract

A bottom-up method for creating a hierarchy of entity-relationship diagrams (HERD) from a given, “flat” ER diagram (ERD) is proposed. The hierarchy consists of simple and interrelated diagrams—ER structures—with external relationships to other structures. The HERD-tree diagram, which provides the most general view of the conceptual schema, is located at the top of the hierarchy. The method is based on packaging operations, which group entities and relationships according to certain criteria. These operations are applied in several steps on a given (presumably large-scale) ERD. We describe the new constructs, which are added to the ER model to enable the creation of HERD, and a bottom-up method for creating HERD. We also evaluate HERD from the point of view of user comprehension and preference, based on an experimental comparison to flat ERDs.

Keywords

Conceptual schema Data modeling Entity relationship model ER diagram Experimental evaluation User comprehension of data model 

References

  1. 1.
    Batini C, Ceri S, Navathe S (1992) Conceptual database design: an entity relationship approach. Benjamin Cummings, Redwood CityGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Batra D, Hoffer J, Bostrom R (1990) Comparing representations with relational and ER models. Commun ACM 33(2):126–139CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Blaha M, Premerlani W (1998) Object-oriented modeling and design for database applications. Prentice-Hall, Englewood CliffsGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bock D, Rian T (1993) Accuracy in modeling with extended Entity-Relationship and object-oriented data models. J Database Manag 4(4):30–39Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chen P (1976) The entity-relationship model—toward a unified view of data. ACM Trans Database Syst 1(1):9–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Danoch R, Shoval P, Balaban M (2001) Hierarchical evolution of entity-relationship diagrams—a bottom-up approach. In: Proceedings of the 6th CAISE/IFIP8.1 int’l workshop on evaluation of modeling methods in systems analysis and design (EMMSAD’01). Interlaken, SwitzerlandGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    De Marco T (1978) Structured analysis and system specification. Yourdon Press New YorkGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Feldman P, Miller D (1986) Entity model clustering: a data model by abstraction. Comput J 29(4):348–360Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gandhi M, Robertson EL, Gucht DV (1994) Leveled entity-relationship model. In: Proceedings of the 13th international conference on the entity-relationship approach. Manchester, pp 420–433Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Harel D (1988) On visual formalism. Commun ACM 31(5):514–530CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Jaeschke P, Oberweis A, Stucky W (1993) Extending ER model clustering by relationship clustering. In: Proceedings of the 12th international conference on the entity-relationship approach, Berlin, pp 451–462Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kerlinger F (1986) Foundation of behavioral research. Holt, Rinehart and Winston, OrlandoGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kim Y, March S (1995) Comparing data modeling formalisms. Commun ACM 38(6):103–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Moody D (1996) Graphical entity relationship models: toward more user understanding representation of data. In: Proceedings of the 15th international conference on conceptual modeling. Cottbus, pp 227–244Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Moody D (1997) A multi-level architecture for representing enterprise data models. In: Proceedings of the 8th international database workshop. Springer, Singapore, pp 42–61Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Moody D (1999) A methodology for clustering entity relationship models—a human information processing approach. In: Proceedings of the 18th international conference on entity-relationship approach, pp 114–130Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Najarian SE (1981) Organizational factors in human memory: implications for library organization and access systems. Libr Q 51(3):269–291Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Rauh O, Stickel E (1992) Entity tree clustering-a method for simplifying ER design. In: Proceedings of the 11th international conference on the entity-relationship approach, pp 62–78Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Shoval P, Frumermann I (1994) OO and EER conceptual schemas: a comparison of user comprehension. J Database Manag 5(4):28–38Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Shoval P, Shiran S (1997) Entity-Relationship and object-oriented data modeling – an experimental comparison of design quality. Data Knowl Eng 21:297–315CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Teory T, Wei G, Bolton D, Koenig J (1989) ER model clustering as an aid for user communication and documentation in database design. Commun ACM 32(8):975–987CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Topi H, Ramesh V (2002) Human factors research on data modeling: a review of prior research, an extended framework and future research directions. J Database Manag 13(2):3–19Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Limited 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Information Systems Engineering Ben-Gurion University of the NegevBeer-ShevaIsrael

Personalised recommendations