TEC-MAP: a taxonomy of evaluation criteria and its application to the multi-modelling of data and processes

IF 2 3区 计算机科学 Q3 COMPUTER SCIENCE, SOFTWARE ENGINEERING Software and Systems Modeling Pub Date : 2024-08-16 DOI:10.1007/s10270-024-01198-6
Charlotte Verbruggen, Monique Snoeck
{"title":"TEC-MAP: a taxonomy of evaluation criteria and its application to the multi-modelling of data and processes","authors":"Charlotte Verbruggen, Monique Snoeck","doi":"10.1007/s10270-024-01198-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The domain of Enterprise Information Systems Engineering uses many different conceptual modelling languages and methods to specify the requirements of a system under development. The complexity of the systems under development may require addressing different perspectives with different models, such as the data and process perspectives. The modeller will thus have to choose the appropriate (set of) modelling languages according to their specific modelling goal. Given that the different aspects relate to a single system, ideally, the models that capture the different perspectives should be aligned and consistent to ensure their integration. Each candidate (set of) modelling languages comes with advantages and disadvantages. To make an informed choice in this matter, the modeller should select a number of criteria relevant to their problem domain and compare candidate modelling languages based on these criteria. A comprehensive evaluation framework for integrated modelling approaches, that considers more general aspects such as understandability, ease of use, model quality, etc. besides the ability to model the desired aspects, does not yet exist and is therefore the focus of this paper. In recent years, several combinations of modelling languages have been investigated. Amongst these combinations, data + process modelling has attracted a lot of interest, and, interestingly, evaluation frameworks for this combination have been proposed as well. Therefore, this paper will primarily focus on the integrated multi-modelling of data and processes, including the process-related viewpoints of users and authorisations. The contribution of this paper is two-fold: on a theoretical level, the paper provides an overview of existing evaluation frameworks in the literature, builds a more complete set of evaluation criteria and proposes a unified taxonomy for the classification of these evaluation criteria (TEC-MAP); on a practical level, the paper provides guidance and support to the modeller for selecting the appropriate evaluation criteria for their problem domain and presents three examples of the application of TEC-MAP.</p>","PeriodicalId":49507,"journal":{"name":"Software and Systems Modeling","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Software and Systems Modeling","FirstCategoryId":"94","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-024-01198-6","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"计算机科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, SOFTWARE ENGINEERING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The domain of Enterprise Information Systems Engineering uses many different conceptual modelling languages and methods to specify the requirements of a system under development. The complexity of the systems under development may require addressing different perspectives with different models, such as the data and process perspectives. The modeller will thus have to choose the appropriate (set of) modelling languages according to their specific modelling goal. Given that the different aspects relate to a single system, ideally, the models that capture the different perspectives should be aligned and consistent to ensure their integration. Each candidate (set of) modelling languages comes with advantages and disadvantages. To make an informed choice in this matter, the modeller should select a number of criteria relevant to their problem domain and compare candidate modelling languages based on these criteria. A comprehensive evaluation framework for integrated modelling approaches, that considers more general aspects such as understandability, ease of use, model quality, etc. besides the ability to model the desired aspects, does not yet exist and is therefore the focus of this paper. In recent years, several combinations of modelling languages have been investigated. Amongst these combinations, data + process modelling has attracted a lot of interest, and, interestingly, evaluation frameworks for this combination have been proposed as well. Therefore, this paper will primarily focus on the integrated multi-modelling of data and processes, including the process-related viewpoints of users and authorisations. The contribution of this paper is two-fold: on a theoretical level, the paper provides an overview of existing evaluation frameworks in the literature, builds a more complete set of evaluation criteria and proposes a unified taxonomy for the classification of these evaluation criteria (TEC-MAP); on a practical level, the paper provides guidance and support to the modeller for selecting the appropriate evaluation criteria for their problem domain and presents three examples of the application of TEC-MAP.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
TEC-MAP:评价标准分类法及其在数据和流程多重建模中的应用
企业信息系统工程领域使用许多不同的概念建模语言和方法来说明开发中系统的要求。开发中系统的复杂性可能要求用不同的模型来处理不同的视角,如数据和流程视角。因此,建模者必须根据其具体的建模目标选择适当的(一组)建模语言。考虑到不同方面与单一系统相关,理想情况下,捕捉不同视角的模型应保持一致,以确保它们之间的整合。每种(套)候选建模语言都各有利弊。为了在这一问题上做出明智的选择,建模人员应选择与其问题领域相关的一些标准,并根据这些标准对候选建模语言进行比较。目前还没有一个综合建模方法的全面评估框架,它除了考虑所需的建模能力外,还考虑了可理解性、易用性、模型质量等更广泛的方面,因此是本文的重点。近年来,对建模语言的几种组合进行了研究。在这些组合中,数据+ 流程建模引起了广泛关注,有趣的是,针对这种组合的评估框架也已提出。因此,本文将主要关注数据和流程的综合多重建模,包括用户和授权的流程相关观点。本文的贡献有两个方面:在理论层面,本文概述了现有文献中的评价框架,建立了一套更完整的评价标准,并提出了一个统一的评价标准分类法(TEC-MAP);在实践层面,本文为建模者提供了指导和支持,帮助他们根据自己的问题领域选择合适的评价标准,并介绍了 TEC-MAP 的三个应用实例。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Software and Systems Modeling
Software and Systems Modeling 工程技术-计算机:软件工程
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
20.00%
发文量
104
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: We invite authors to submit papers that discuss and analyze research challenges and experiences pertaining to software and system modeling languages, techniques, tools, practices and other facets. The following are some of the topic areas that are of special interest, but the journal publishes on a wide range of software and systems modeling concerns: Domain-specific models and modeling standards; Model-based testing techniques; Model-based simulation techniques; Formal syntax and semantics of modeling languages such as the UML; Rigorous model-based analysis; Model composition, refinement and transformation; Software Language Engineering; Modeling Languages in Science and Engineering; Language Adaptation and Composition; Metamodeling techniques; Measuring quality of models and languages; Ontological approaches to model engineering; Generating test and code artifacts from models; Model synthesis; Methodology; Model development tool environments; Modeling Cyberphysical Systems; Data intensive modeling; Derivation of explicit models from data; Case studies and experience reports with significant modeling lessons learned; Comparative analyses of modeling languages and techniques; Scientific assessment of modeling practices
期刊最新文献
A model template for reachability-based containment checking of imprecise observations in timed automata Supporting method engineering with a low-code approach: the LOMET  tool A system-theoretic assurance framework for safety-driven systems engineering IAT/ML: a metamodel and modelling approach for discourse analysis Universal conceptual modeling: principles, benefits, and an agenda for conceptual modeling research
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1