Advertisement

“Is It a Fleet or a Collection of Ships?”: Ontological Anti-patterns in the Modeling of Part-Whole Relations

  • Tiago Prince Sales
  • Giancarlo GuizzardiEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10509)

Abstract

Over the years, there is a growing interest in employing theories from philosophical ontology, cognitive science and linguistics to devise theoretical, methodological and computational tools for information systems engineering, in general, and for conceptual modeling, in particular. In this paper, we discuss one particular kind of such tools, namely, ontological anti-patterns. Ontological anti-patterns are error-problem modeling structures that can create a deviation between the possible and the intended interpretations of a model. In this paper, we present two empirically elicited ontological anti-patterns related to the modeling of part-whole relations. In particular, these anti-patterns identify possible mistakes in the modeling of collectives (complex entities that have a uniform role-based structure) and functional complexes (complex entities composed of functional parts). Besides identifying these anti-patterns, the paper presents a series of rectification plans that can be used to eliminate their occurrence in models. Finally, we present a model-based computational tool that supports the automated detection, analysis and elimination of these anti-patterns.

Keywords

Ontology-based conceptual modeling Anti-patterns Parthood 

References

  1. 1.
    Guizzardi, G.: Ontological patterns, anti-patterns and pattern languages for next-generation conceptual modeling. In: Yu, E., Dobbie, G., Jarke, M., Purao, S. (eds.) ER 2014. LNCS, vol. 8824, pp. 13–27. Springer, Cham (2014). doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-12206-9_2 Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Verdonck, M., Gailly, F.: Insights on the use and application of ontology and conceptual modeling languages in ontology-driven conceptual modeling. In: Comyn-Wattiau, I., Tanaka, K., Song, I.-Y., Yamamoto, S., Saeki, M. (eds.) ER 2016. LNCS, vol. 9974, pp. 83–97. Springer, Cham (2016). doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-46397-1_7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Nardi, J.C., Falbo, R.A., Almeida, J.P.A.: Foundational ontologies for semantic integration in EAI: a systematic literature. Review. I3E(2013), 238–249 (2014)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Guizzardi, G.: Theoretical foundations and engineering tools for building ontologies as reference conceptual models. Semant. Web J. 1, 3–10 (2010). Editors-in-Chief: Pascal Hitzler and Krzysztof Janowicz, IOS Press, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Koenig, A.: Patterns and antipatterns. J. Object-Oriented Prog. 8(1), 46–48 (1995)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Benevides, A.B., et al.: Validating modal aspects of OntoUML conceptual models using automatically generated visual world structures. J. Univers. Comput. Sci. Special Issue Evolving Theories Concept. Model. 16, 2904–2933 (2010). Editors: Klaus-Dieter Schewe and Markus KirchbergGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Guizzardi, G.: Ontological Foundations for Structural Conceptual Modeling. Telematics Institute Fundamental Research Series, Enschede, The Netherlands (2005)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Guizzardi, G., et al.: Towards ontological foundation for conceptual modeling: the unified foundational ontology (UFO) story. Appl. Ontol. 10 (2015). IOS PressGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sales, T.P., Guizzardi, G.: Ontological anti-patterns: Empirically uncovered error-prone structures in ontology-driven conceptual models. DKE 99, 72–104 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sales, T.P., Guizzardi, G.: Anti-patterns in ontology-driven conceptual modeling: the case of role modeling in OntoUML. In: Gangemi, A., Hizler, P., Janowicz, K., Krisnadhi, A., Presutti, V. (eds.) Ontology Engineering with Ontology Design Patterns: Foundations and Applications. IOS Press, The Netherlands (2016)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Pribbenow, S.: Meronymic Relationships: From Classical Mereology to Complex Part-Whole Relations, The Semantics of Relationships. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (2002)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gerstl, P., Pribbenow, S.: Midwinters, end games, and bodyparts: A classification of part-whole relations. Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Stud. 43, 865–889 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Varzi, A.C.: Parts, wholes, and part-whole relations: the prospects of mereotopology. J. Data Knowl. Eng. 20, 259–286 (1996)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Simons, P.M.: Parts: An Essay in Ontology. Clarendon Press, Oxford (1987)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Guizzardi, G.: Ontological foundations for conceptual part-whole relations: the case of collectives and their parts. In: 23rd International Conference on Advanced Information System Engineering (CAiSE 2011), London, UK (2011)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Guizzardi, G.: The problem of transitivity of part-whole relations in conceptual modeling revisited. In: 21st International Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering (CAISE 2009), Amsterdam, The Netherlands (2009)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Guizzardi, G.: On the representation of quantities and their parts in conceptual modeling. In: Proceedings of FOIS 2010. IOS Press, Toronto (2010)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ravin, Y., Leacock, C.: Polysemy: Theoretical and Computational Approaches, p. 240. Oxford University Press, USA (2002)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Jackson, D.: Software Abstractions: Logic, Language, and Analysis. MIT press, Cambridge (2012)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Calhau, R.F., Falbo, R.A.: A configuration management task ontology for semantic integration. In: Proceedings of the 27th Symposium on Applied Computing, SAC 2012, pp. 348–353. ACM, New York (2012)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Bastos, C.A.M., et al.: Building up a model for management information and knowledge: the case-study for a Brazilian regulatory agency. In: International Workshop on Software Knowledge (SKY) (2011)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Nardi, J.C., et al.: Towards a commitment-based reference ontology for services. In: Proceedings of the 17th International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference (EDOC 2013), pp. 175–184. IEEE (2013)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ferrandis, A.M.M., et al.: Applying the principles of an ontology-based approach to a conceptual schema of human genome. In: Proceedings of ER 2013, Hong KongGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Costal, D., et al.: Formal semantics and ontological analysis for understanding subsetting, specialization and redefinition of associations in UML. In: 30th International Conference on Conceptual Modeling (ER 2011), Brussels, Belgium (2011)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    e Silva, H.C., Cassia Cordeiro de Castro, R., Gomes, M.J.N., Garcia, A.S.: Well-founded IT architecture ontology: an approach from a service continuity perspective. In: Benlamri, R. (ed.) NDT 2012. CCIS, vol. 294, pp. 136–150. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-30567-2_12 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Information Engineering and Computer ScienceUniversity of TrentoTrentoItaly
  2. 2.Laboratory for Applied OntologyISTC-CNRTrentoItaly
  3. 3.NEMO GroupFederal University of Espírito SantoVitóriaBrazil
  4. 4.Faculty of Computer ScienceFree University of Bozen-BolzanoBolzanoItaly

Personalised recommendations