Springer Nature is making Coronavirus research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

Matters of (Meta-) Modeling


With the recent trend to model driven engineering a common understanding of basic notions such as “model” and “metamodel” becomes a pivotal issue. Even though these notions have been in widespread use for quite a while, there is still little consensus about when exactly it is appropriate to use them. The aim of this article is to start establishing a consensus about generally acceptable terminology. Its main contributions are the distinction between two fundamentally different kinds of model roles, i.e. “token model” versus “type model” (The terms “type” and “token” have been introduced by C.S. Peirce, 1839–1914.), a formal notion of “metaness”, and the consideration of “generalization” as yet another basic relationship between models. In particular, the recognition of the fundamental difference between the above mentioned two kinds of model roles is crucial in order to enable communication among the model driven engineering community that is free of both unnoticed misunderstandings and unnecessary disagreement.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.


  1. 1.

    Bézivin, J., Gerbé, O.: Towards a precise definition of the OMG/MDA framework. In: Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Automated Software Engineering Coronado Island, pp 273–280 (2001)

  2. 2.

    Favre, J.-M.: Towards a basic theory to model driven engineering. In: Third Workshop in Software Model Engineering (WiSME@UML) (2004)

  3. 3.

    Chang C.-C. (1977). Model Theory, 2nd edn. North-Holland, Amsterdam

  4. 4.

    Rumbaugh J., Jacobson I., Booch G. (1999). The Unified Modeling Language Reference Manual. Addison-Wesley, Reading

  5. 5.

    Bézivin, J.: In search of a basic principle for model driven engineering. Special Novática Issue “UML and Model Engineering”, V(2) (2004)

  6. 6.

    Kaschek, R.: A little theory of abstraction. In: Rumpe, B. Hesse, W. (eds.) Modellierung 2004, Proceedings zur Tagung, 23.-26. März 2004, Marburg, vol. 45 of LNI, pp 75–92. GI (2004)

  7. 7.

    Stachowiak H. (1973). Allgemeine Modelltheorie. Springer, Wien

  8. 8.

    Bird, R.S.: An introduction to the theory of lists. In: Technical Report PRG-56, Oxford University (1986)

  9. 9.

    Steinmüller W. (1993). Informationstechnologie und Gesellschaft: Einführung in die Angewandte Informatik. Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, Darmstadt

  10. 10.

    Seidewitz E. (2003). What models mean. IEEE Soft. 20(5): 26–32

  11. 11.

    Harkavy, M., et al. (eds): Webster’s New Encyclopedic Dictionary. Black Dog & Leventhal publishers Inc., 151 West 19th Street, New York 10011 (1994)

  12. 12.

    Carnap R. (1947). Meaning and Necessity: A Study in Semantics and Modal Logic. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

  13. 13.

    Ludewig J. (2003). Models in software engineering – an introduction. J. Softw. Syst. Mode. 2(1): 5–14

  14. 14.

    OMG: MDA Guide Version 1.0.1 Version 1.0.1, OMG document omg/03-06-01 (2003)

  15. 15.

    OMG: Unified Modeling Language Infrastructure Specification, Version 2.0, Version 2.0, OMG document ptc/03-09-15 (2004)

  16. 16.

    Atkinson C., Kühne T. (2002). Profiles in a strict metamodeling framework. J. Sci. Comput. Program. 44(1): 5–22

  17. 17.

    Atkinson C., Kühne T. (2003). Model-driven development: a metamodeling foundation. IEEE Softw. 20(5): 36–41

  18. 18.

    Strahringer S. (1996). Metamodellierung als Instrument des Methodenvergleichs. Shaker Verlag, Aachen

Download references

Author information

Correspondence to Thomas Kühne.

Additional information

Communicated by Dr. Reiko Heckel.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kühne, T. Matters of (Meta-) Modeling. Softw Syst Model 5, 369–385 (2006).

Download citation


  • Model driven engineering
  • Modeling
  • Metamodeling
  • Token model
  • Type model