A Modeling Language for Interoperability Assessments

  • Johan Ullberg
  • Pontus Johnson
  • Markus Buschle
Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing book series (LNBIP, volume 76)


Decision-making on issues related to interoperability can be furthered by the use of models of the organization or information system where interoperability is of concern. In order to provide decision-making support, the models should be amenable to analyses. This paper presents a modeling language specifically for interoperability issues where interoperability is defined as the probability that two more actors will be able to exchange information and use that information. The language is coupled with a probabilistic mechanism for automated interoperability assessments of the models created. The paper also presents an example of how the language can be applied.


Interoperability Modeling Language Interoperability Assessment 


  1. 1.
    Ullberg, J., Chen, D., Johnson, P.: Barriers to Enterprise Interoperability. In: Poler, R., van Sinderen, M., Sanchis, R. (eds.) IWEI 2009. LNBIP, vol. 38, pp. 13–24. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    IEEE: Standard Glossary of Software Engineering Terminology. Std 610.12. The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, New York (1990)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chen, D., Doumeingts, G., Vernadat, F.: Architectures for enterprise integration and interoperability: Past, present and future. Computers in Industry 59(7), 647–659 (2008), doi:10.1016/j.compind.2007.12.016CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Getoor, L., Friedman, N., Koller, D., Pfeffer, A., Taskar, B.: Probabilistic relational models. MIT Press, Cambridge (2007)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Johnson, P., et al.: p-OCL – a language for probabilistic inference of the structure in relational models (2011) (to be submitted)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Object Management Group (OMG). OMG Unified Modeling Language (OMG UML), Superstructure Version 2.2 (2009)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Zachman, J.A.: A Framework for Information Systems Architecture. IBM Systems Journal 26(3), 454–470 (1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Department of Defense Architecture Framework Working Group. DoD Architecture Framework, version 1.0. Department of Defense, USA (2004) Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lankhorst, M., et al.: Enterprise Architecture At Work. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    IDABC, Enterprise and Industry DG. European interoperability framework for pan-European egovernment services. version 1.0, Brussels (2004)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    National E-Health Transition Authority (NEHTA). Interoperability Framework, Version 2.0. National E-Health Transition Authority, Sydney (2007)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Chen, D., Daclin, N.: Framework for Enterprise Interoperability. In: EI2N, 2nd International Workshop on Enterprise Integration, Interoperability and Networking (2006)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ruokolainen, T., Naudet, Y., Latour, T.: An ontology of interoperability in inter-enterprise communities. In: Proceedings of Interoperability for Enterprise Software and Applications, I-ESA 2007 (2007)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kasunic, M., Anderson, W.: Measuring Systems Interoperability: Challenges and Opportunities. Technical Note, CMU/SEI-2004-TN-003, Pittsburgh: Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University (2004)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Tolk, A., Muguira, J.: The Levels of Conceptual Interoperability Model. In: Proceedings of the 2003 Fall Simulation Interoperability Workshop (2003)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ford, T., Colombi, J., Graham, S., Jacques, D.: The Interoperability Score. In: Proceedings of the Fifth Annual Conference on Systems Engineering Research (2007)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Johnson, P., Lagerström, R., Närman, P., Simonsson, M.: Enterprise Architecture Analysis with Extended Influence Diagrams. Information Systems Frontiers 9(2) (2007)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Object Management Group (OMG). Object Constraint Language specification, version 2.0 formal/06-05-01 (2006)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ullberg, J.: P-OCL expressions for interoperability analysis (2010),
  20. 20.
    Sommestad, T., Ekstedt, M., Johnson, P.: A Probabilistic Relational Model for Security Risk Analysis. Computers & Security (2010)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Buschle, M., Ullberg, J., Franke, U., Lagerström, R., Sommestad, T.: A tool for enterprise architecture analysis using the PRM formalism. In: Soffer, P., Proper, E. (eds.) CAiSE Forum 2010. LNBIP, vol. 72, pp. 108–121. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ullberg, J., Franke, U., Buschle, M., Johnson, P.: A Tool for Interoperability Analysis of Enterprise Architecture Models using Pi-OCL. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Interoperability for Enterprise Software and Applications, I-ESA 2010 (2010)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Johan Ullberg
    • 1
  • Pontus Johnson
    • 1
  • Markus Buschle
    • 1
  1. 1.Industrial Information and Control SystemsKTH Royal Institute of TechnologyStockholmSweden

Personalised recommendations