On the Conceptualization of a Modeling Language for Semantic Model Annotations

  • Hans-Georg Fill
Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing book series (LNBIP, volume 83)

Abstract

In this paper we describe the theoretical foundations, formal considerations, and technical characteristics that were taken into account for the conceptualization of a modeling language for the semantic annotation of visual models. Thereby it is envisaged to give insights into the underlying processes for the development of new visual modeling languages and thus provide input for a future model of the conceptualization process. To illustrate the realization of the approach we revert to the semantic annotation of a business process model using concepts from the web ontology language OWL, which allows us to show the iterations that were conducted to develop the approach. As a first evaluation the approach has been implemented on a meta modeling platform and will be made freely available to the interested community in the course of the SeMFIS project on www.openmodels.at.

Keywords

Conceptualization Design Semantic Annotation Conceptual Models Ontologies 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Object Management Group OMG: OMG Unified Modeling Language (OMG UML), Infrastructure, V2.1.2 (2007), http://www.omg.org/spec/UML/2.1.2/Infrastructure/PDF/ (accessed March 01, 2011)
  2. 2.
    Object Management Group (OMG): Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN) Version 2.0 (2011), http://www.omg.org/spec/BPMN/2.0/PDF/ (accessed March 01, 2011)
  3. 3.
    Wand, Y., Weber, R.: Research Commentary: Information Systems and Conceptual Modeling - A Research Agenda. Information Systems Research 13(4), 363–376 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Mylopoulos, J.: Conceptual Modeling and Telos. In: Loucopoulos, P., Zicari, R. (eds.) Conceptual Modelling, Databases and CASE: An Integrated View of Information Systems Development, pp. 49–68. Wiley, Chichester (1992)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Fill, H.G.: Visualisation for Semantic Information Systems. Gabler (2009)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Peleg, M., Tu, S.: Design Patterns for Clinical Guidelines. Artificial Intelligence in Medicine 47(1), 1–24 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Becker, J., Breuker, D., Pfeiffer, D., Raeckers, M.: Constructing Comparable Business Process Models with Domain Specific Languages - An Empirical Evaluation. In: 17th European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS), Verona, Italy (2009)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ehrig, M., Koschmider, A., Oberweis, A.: Measuring Similarity between Semantic Business Process Models. In: Roddick, J., Hinze, A. (eds.) Proceedings of the Fourth Asia-Pacific Conference on Conceptual Modelling (APCCM 2007). Australian Computer Science Communications, vol. 67, pp. 71–80. ACM, New York (2007)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hepp, M., Leymann, F., Domingue, J., Wahler, A., Fensel, D.: Semantic business process management: a vision towards using semantic web services for business process management. In: IEEE International Conference on e-Business Engineering, 2005, ICEBE 2005, pp. 535–540 (2005)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Governatori, G., Hoffmann, J., Sadiq, S., Weber, I.: Detecting Regulatory Compliance for Business Process Models through Semantic Annotations. In: 4th International Workshop on Business Process Design, Milan (2008)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Karagiannis, D., Kühn, H.: Metamodelling platforms. In: Bauknecht, K., Tjoa, A.M., Quirchmayr, G. (eds.) EC-Web 2002. LNCS, vol. 2455, p. 182. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    McNeill, K.: Metamodeling with EMF: Generating concrete, reusable Java snippets (2008), http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/library/os-eclipse-emfmetamodel/index.html?S_TACT=105AGX44&S_CMP=EDU
  13. 13.
    Fill, H.G.: UML Statechart Diagrams on the ADONIS Metamodeling Platform. Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science 127(1), 27–36 (2004)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    OMG, O.M.G.: Meta Object Facility (MOF) Specification 2.0 (2006)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Studer, R., Benjamins, R., Fensel, D.: Knowledge Engineering: Principles and methods. Data & Knowledge Engineering 25, 161–197 (1998)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Obrst, L.: Ontologies for semantically interoperable systems. In: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management. ACM Press, New Orleans (2003)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Horrocks, I., Patel-Schneider, P., Van Harmelen, F.: From SHIQ and RDF to OWL: The Making of a Web Ontology Language. Web Semantics: Science, Services and Agents on the World Wide Web 1(1), 7–26 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    W3C: OWL Web Ontology Language - Overview W3C Recommendation 10 February 2004 (2004), http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/ (accessed September 16, 2005)
  19. 19.
    Thomas, O., Fellmann, M.: Semantic Business Process Management: Ontology-based Process Modeling Using Event-Driven Process Chains. IBIS 2(1), 29–44 (2007)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Hoefferer, P.: Achieving Business Process Model Interoperability Using Metamodels and Ontologies. In: Oesterle, H., Schelp, J., Winter, R. (eds.) 15th European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS 2007), University of St. Gallen, St. Gallen, pp. 1620–1631 (2007)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Fill, H.G.: Design of Semantic Information Systems using a Model-based Approach. In: AAAI Spring Symposium. Stanford University, CA (2009)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Fill, H.G., Reischl, I.: An Approach for Managing Clinical Trial Applications using Semantic Information Models. In: Rinderle-Ma, S., Sadiq, S., Leymann, F. (eds.) Business Process Management Workshops - BPM 2009. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing. Springer, Ulm (2009)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    De Francisco, D., Grenon, P.: Enhancing telecommunication business process representation and integration with ontologised industry standards. In: Hepp, M., Hinkelmann, K., Stojanovic, N. (eds.) Proceedings of the 4th International Workshop on Semantic Business Process Management (SBPM 2009). ACM, New York (2009)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Horrocks, I., Patel-Schneider, P., Boley, H., Tabet, S., Grosof, B., Dean, M.: SWRL: A Semantic Web Rule Language Combining OWL and RuleML (2004), http://www.w3.org/Submission/SWRL/ (accessed September 16, 2007)
  25. 25.
    O’Connor, M., Knublauch, H., Tu, S., Musen, M.A.: Writing Rules for the Semantic Web Using SWRL and Jess. In: Protégé with Rules Workshop, Held with 8th International Protégé Conference, Madrid, Spain (2005)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    OMG, O.M.G.: Ontology Definition Metamodel, Third Revised Submission to OMG/ RFP ad/2003-03-40. Technical report (2005), http://www.omg.org/docs/ad/05-08-01.pdf (accessed September 16, 2005)
  27. 27.
    Leutgeb, A., Utz, W., Woitsch, R., Fill, H.G.: Adaptive Processes in E-Government - A Field Report about Semantic-based Approaches from the EU-Project FIT. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems (ICEIS 2007). INSTICC, Funchal, Madeira, Portugal, , pp. 264–269 (2007)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Fill, H.G., Burzynski, P.: Integrating Ontology Models and Conceptual Models using a Meta Modeling Approach. In: 11th International Protégé Conference, Amsterdam (2009)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Del Fabro, M.D., Valduriez, P.: Semi-automatic model integration using matching transformations and weaving models. In: SAC 2007 Proceedings of the 2007 ACM Symposium on Applied Computing. ACM, New York (2007)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    BPTrends: The 2005 EA, Process Modeling and Simulation Tools Report - Adonis Version 3.81 (2005), http://www.boc-group.com/info-center/downloads/detail/resource/bptrends-review-of-adonis/ (accessed March 30, 2011)
  31. 31.
    Smeets, B., Boness, U., Bankras, R.: Beginning Google Web Toolkit - From Novice to Professional. Apress (2008)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Software, I.: Smart GWT(TM) Quick Start Guide - Smart GWT v2.4 November 2010 (2010), http://www.smartclient.com/releases/SmartGWT_Quick_Start_Guide.pdf (accessed March 30, 2011)
  33. 33.
    Codd, E.: A relational model of data for large shared data banks. Communications of the ACM 13(6), 377–387 (1970)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Oesterle, H., Otto, B.: Consortium Research - A Method for Researcher-Practitioner Collaboration in Design-Oriented IS Research. Business & Information Systems Engineering 5/2010 (2010)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hans-Georg Fill
    • 1
  1. 1.Stanford University BMIR / University of Vienna DKEStanfordUSA

Personalised recommendations