Abstract
Satisfiability is one of the properties that all conceptual schemas must have. Satisfiability applies to both the structural and the behavioral parts of a conceptual schema. Structurally, a conceptual schema is satisfiable if each base or derived entity and relationship type of the schema may have a non-empty population at certain time. Behaviorally, a conceptual schema is satisfiable if for each event type there is at least one consistent state of the information base and one event of that type with a set of characteristics such that the event constraints are satisfied, and the effects of the event leave the information base in a state that is consistent and satisfies the event postconditions. There has been a lot of work on automated reasoning procedures for checking satisfiability but it is well known that the problem of reasoning with integrity constraints and derivation rules in its full generality is undecidable. In this chapter, we explore an alternative approach to satisfiability checking, which can be used when conceptual schemas are developed in the context of an environment that allows their testing. The main contribution of this chapter is to show that when conceptual schemas can be tested then their satisfiability can be proved by testing.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Berardi D, Calvanese D, De Giacomo G (2005) Reasoning on UML class diagrams. Artificial Intelligence 168(1–2):70–118
Booch G, Rumbaugh J, Jacobson I (2005) The unified modeling language reference manual, 2nd edn. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA
Brambilla M, Tziviskou C (2009) An online platform for semantic validation of UML models. In: Proceedings of ICWE 2009. LNCS, vol 5648. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 477–480
Calvanese D, Lenzerini M (1994) On the interaction between ISA and cardinality constraints. In: Proceedings of ICDE 1994, IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, pp 204–213
Clavel M, Egea M, de Dios MAG (2009) Checking unsatisfiability for OCL constraints. In: Proceedings of OCL workshop MODELS 2009. http://modeling-languages.com/events/OCLWorkshop2009/papers/3.pdf. Accessed20Feb2010
Costal D, Teniente E, Urpí T, Farré C (1996) Handling conceptual model validation by planning. In: Proceedings of CAiSE 1996. LNCS, vol 1080. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 255–271
Formica A (2003) Satisfiability of object-oriented database constraints with set and bag attributes. Info Systems 28(3):213–224
Gogolla M, Kuhlmann M, Hamann L (2009) Consistency, independence and consequences in UML and OCL models. In: Proceedings of TAP 2009. LNCS, vol 5668. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 90–104
Halpin TA (2001) Information modeling and relational databases. Morgan Kaufmann, New York
Jarrar M (2007) Towards automated reasoning on ORM schemes. In: Proceedings of ER 2007. LNCS, vol 4801. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 181–197
Olivé A (2007) Conceptual modeling of information systems. Springer, Berlin
Olivé A, Raventós R (2006) Modeling events as entities in object-oriented conceptual modeling languages. Data Knowl Eng 58(3):243–262
OMG (2006) Object constraint language. Version 2.0, formal/2006-05-01. http://www.omg.org/spec/OCL/2.0/. Accessed 20 Feb 2010
Parsons J, Wand Y (1997) Choosing classes in conceptual modeling. Commun ACM 40(6):63–69
Pastor O, Molina JC (2007) Model-driven architecture in practice. Springer, Heidelberg
Pernici B, Barbic F, Maiocchi R, Fugini MG, Rames JR, Rolland C (1989) C-TODOS: an automatic tool for office system conceptual design. ACM Trans Inf Syst 7(4):378–419
Queralt A, Teniente E (2006) Reasoning on UML class diagrams with OCL constraints. In: Proceedings of ER 2006. LNCS, vol 4215. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 497–512
Queralt A, Teniente E (2008) Decidable reasoning in UML schemas with constraints. In: Proceedings of CAiSE 2008. LNCS, vol 5074. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 281–295
Queralt A, Teniente E (2009) Reasoning on UML conceptual schemas with operations. In: Proceedings of CAiSE 2009. LNCS, vol 5565. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 47–62
Rolland C, Richard C (1982) The REMORA methodology for information systems design and management. In: Olle TW, Sol HG, Verrijn-Stuart AA (eds) Information systems design methodologies: a comparative review. North-Holland, Amsterdam, pp 369–426
Rolland C, Cauvet C (1992) Trends and perspectives in conceptual modelling. In: Loucopoulus P, Zicari R (eds) Conceptual modeling, databases and CASE: an integrated view of information systems development, Wiley, pp 27–48
Rolland C, Cauvet C, Nobecourt P, Proix C, Coligon P, Lingat JY, et al (1988) The Rubis system. In: Olle TW, Verrijn-Stuart AA, Bhabuta L (eds) Computerized assistance during the information systems life cycle, North-Holland
Souveyet C, Rolland C (1990) Correction of conceptual schemas. In: Proceedings of CAiSE 1990. LNCS, vol 436. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 152–174
Tort A (2007) The osCommerce conceptual schema. http://guifre.lsi.upc.edu/OSCommerce.pdf. Accessed 20 Feb 2010
Tort A (2009) A basic set of test cases for a fragment of the osCommerce conceptual schema. Research report LSI-09-34-R, UPC. http://www.lsi.upc.edu/∼techreps/files/R09-34.zip
Tort A, Olivé A (2010) An approach to testing conceptual schemas. Data Knowl Eng. doi:10.1016/j.datak.2010.02.002. Accessed 20 Feb 2010
Van Lamsweerde A (2009) Requirements engineering: from system goals to UML models to software specifications. Wiley, New York
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2010 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Olivé, A., Tort, A. (2010). Testing Conceptual Schema Satisfiability. In: Nurcan, S., Salinesi, C., Souveyet, C., Ralyté, J. (eds) Intentional Perspectives on Information Systems Engineering. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-12544-7_15
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-12544-7_15
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-12543-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-12544-7
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)