Model Centered Architecture

  • Heinrich C. MayrEmail author
  • Judith Michael
  • Suneth Ranasinghe
  • Vladimir A. Shekhovtsov
  • Claudia Steinberger


This paper advocates a rigorous model focused paradigm of information system development and use. We introduce the concept of “Model Centered Architecture” that sees an information system to be a compound of various networked models, each of which is formed with the means of a Domain Specific Modeling Language. This languages are tailored to the particular circumstances of the respective system aspect. I.e., from a MOF perspective, MCA focuses on the MOF levels M2 (definitions of the DSMLs to be used for the specification of the system and it’s contexts), M1 (Specification of all System and Data Components using the DSMLs) and M0 (the instances, i.e. models of concrete objects, functions and processes). The transformation of M0 citizens to the respective implementation concepts (Structure → Data, Function→ Program, Process→ Workflow) is delegated to mapping functions defined on M2, restricted on M1 to the particular schemata (in the sense of mappings between the respective sets of schema instances), and instantiated on M0 for the concrete instances. The paper shows how such model centered approach may be applied in practice using two real development projects as running examples.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Al Machot, F., Mayr, H.C., Michael, J.: Behavior Modeling and Reasoning for Ambient Support: HCM-L Modeler. In: Proc. of the International Conference on Industrial, Engineering and Other Applications of Applied Intelligent Systems, IEA-AIE (2014)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Baresi, L., Ghezzi, C.: The Disappearing Boundary Between Development-Time and Run-Time. In: Proceedings of the FSE/SDP workshop on Future of software engineering research, pp. 17–22. ACM (2010)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bencomo, N., France, R.B., Cheng, B.H., Aßmann, U.: Models@ run. time: Foundations, Applications, and Roadmaps, LNCS, Vol. 8378. Springer (2014)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Blair, G., Bencomo, N., France, R.: Models@ run. time. Computer 10, 22–27 (2009)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Czarnecki, K., Eisenecker, U.: Generative Programming: Methods, Tools,and Applications. Addison-Wesley Professional, Boston, Massachussets, USA (2000)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Embley, D.W., Kurtz, B.D., Woodfield, S.N.: Object-oriented Systems Analysis: A Model-Driven Approach. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey (1992)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Embley, D.W., Liddle, S.W., Pastor, O.: Conceptual-Model Programming: a Manifesto. In: Handbook of Conceptual Modeling, pp. 3–16. Springer (2011)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    von Foerster, H.: Perception of the Future and the Future of Perception. Instructional Science 1, 31–43 (1972)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Frank, U.: Domain-Specific Modeling Languages: Requirements Analysis and Design Guidelines. In: Reinhartz-Berger, I. et al. (eds.): Domain Engineering. pp. 133–157, Springer (2013)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Heinrich, R. et al.: Runtime Architecture Models for Dynamic Adaptation and Evolution of Cloud Applications. Universität Kiel (2015)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hesse, W., Mayr, H.C.: Modellierung in der Softwaretechnik. eine Bestandsaufnahme. Informatik-Spektrum, 31, 377–393 (2008)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hoareau, C., Satoh, I.: Modeling and Processing Information for Context-Aware Computing. A Survey. New Gener. Comput. 27(3), pp. 177–196 (2009)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Karagiannis, D., Kühn. H.: Metamodelling Platforms. In E-Commerce andWeb Technologies, K. Bauknecht, A. M. Tjoa and G. Quirchmayr, Eds. LNCS. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, p. 182 (2002)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Karagiannis, D., Mayr, H.C., Mylopoulos, J. (eds.): Domain-Specific Conceptual Modeling: Concepts, Methods and Tools. Springer (2016)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kaschek, R., Mayr, H.C.: A Characterization of OOA Tools. Assessment of Software Tools, 1996., Proceedings of the Fourth International Symposium on, pp. 59–67. IEEE (1996)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kleppe, A.G.,Warmer, J.B., Bast,W.: MDA Explained: The Model Driven Architecture: Practice and Promise. Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc. (2003)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lewis, P.R. et al.: Architectural Aspects of Self-Aware and Self-Expressive Computing Systems: From psychology to engineering. Computer 48, 62–70 (2015)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Leymann, F., Altenhuber,W.: Managing Business Processes as an Information Resource. IBM systems journal 33, 326–348 (1994)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Liddle, S.W.: Model-Driven Software Development. In Handbook of Conceptual Modeling, pp. 17-54. Springer Berlin Heidelberg (2011)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Mayr, H. C. et al.: HCM-L: Domain-Specific Modeling for Active and Assisted Living. In: Karagiannis, D.; Mayr, H. C.; Mylopoulos, J. (eds.): Domain-specific conceptual modeling. Concepts, methods and tools. pp. 527–552, Springer (2016)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Mens, T.; Czarnecki, K.; van Gorp, P.: A Taxonomy of Model Transformation. Proc. Dagstuhl Seminar on Language Engineering for Model-Driven Software Development. Internationales Begegnungs- und Forschungszentrum (IBFI), Schloss Dagstuhl (2005)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Michael, J., Mayr, H.C.: Conceptual Modeling for Ambient Assistance. In: Ng, W., Storey, V.C., Trujillo, J. (eds.): Conceptual Modeling - ER 2013, pp. 403–413. Springer (2013)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Michael, J., Mayr, H.C.: Creating a Domain Specific Modeling Method for Ambient Assistance. In: International Conference on Advances in ICT for Emerging Regions (ICTer2015). IEEE (2015)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Michael, J., Mayr, H.C.: Intuitive Understanding of a Modeling Language. In: Proc. of the Australasian Computer ScienceWeek Multi-conference (ACSW’17), Asia Pacific Conference on Conceptual Modeling (APCCM), pp. 1–10. ACM (2017)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Michael, J., Steinberger, C.: Context Modeling for Active Assistance, submitted for publicationGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Object Management Group OMG: Meta Object Facility (MOF) Core, URL:, last accessed 09.08.2016
  27. 27.
    Olivé, A., Cabot, J.: A Research Agenda for Conceptual Schema-Centric Development. In: Conceptual Modelling in Information Systems Engineering, pp. 319–334. Springer (2007)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Ranasinghe, S., Al Machot, F., Mayr, H.C.: A Review on Applications of Activity Recognition Systems with Regard to Performance and Evaluation. International Journal of Distributed Sensor Networks 12, (2016)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Shekhovtsov, V.A., Mayr, H.C., Kop C.: Facilitating Effective Stakeholder Communication in Software Development Processes. In: Nurcan, S., Pimenidis, E. (eds.): Information Systems Engineering in Complex Environments, LNBIP, Vol. 204, pp. 116–132. Springer (2015)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Shekhovtsov, V.A., Mayr, H.C.: View Harmonization in Software Processes: from the Idea to QuASE. In: Mayr, H.C., Pinzger, M. (Hrsg.). INFORMATIK 2016, 26.âĂŞ30. September 2016. Proceedings, pp. 111–123, LNI, Vol. P-259, GI, (2016)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Steinberger, C., Michael, J.: Semantic Mark-Up of Operating Instructions for Active Assistance, submitted for publicationGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Štuikys, V., Damaševičius, R.: Meta-Programming and Model-Driven Meta-Program Development: Principles, Processes and Techniques, Springer (2012)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Heinrich C. Mayr
    • 1
    Email author
  • Judith Michael
    • 1
  • Suneth Ranasinghe
    • 1
  • Vladimir A. Shekhovtsov
    • 1
  • Claudia Steinberger
    • 1
  1. 1.Alpen-Adria-Universität KlagenfurtKlagenfurt am WörtherseeAustria

Personalised recommendations