Abstract
The incorporation of semantics into conceptual models has for long been a goal of the data/knowledge modelling communities. Equally, conceptual models strive for a high degree of intuitiveness in order be better understood by their human users. This paper aims to go one step in this direction by introducing the part-of relation as a special case of aggregation. To do so we investigate the semantic constraints accompanying this specialization and suggest different ways of incorporating part-of semantics into data/knowledge models. Further, it is demonstrated that, in analogy with IS-A relations, part-of relations form hierarchies (dag's) which constitute an important conceptual aid in understanding complex systems. Finally, we investigate the conditions under which the part-of relation exhibits transitive behavior which can be exploited for automated inferences facilitated by the transitivity property.
Chapter PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
keywords
References
Bobrow, D.G., Stefik, M.J., “The LOOPS Manual”; Xerox Corporation, Palo Alto, December 1983.
Booch G.: “Object-Oriented Design with Applications”; Benjamin/Cummings, 1991.
Borgida A.: “Knowledge Representation, Semantic Modeling: Similarities and Differences”; H. Kangassalo (editor), Entity-Relation Approach: The Core of Conceptual Modelling, Elscvicr Science Publishers B. V. (North Holland), 1991.
Borgida A., Mylopoulos J., Wong H.K.T.: “Generalization/Specialization as a Basis for Software Specification”; in: “On Conceptual Modelling”; Brodie M.L., Mylopoulos J., Schmidt J.W., editors, Springer-Verlag 1984.
Brachman R.: “On the Epistemological Status of Semantic Networks”, in Associative Networks: Representation and Use of Knowledge by Computers, Findler, N., V., (ed.), New York, Academic Press, 1979.
Brachman R.J.: “What Is-a Is and Isn't: An Analysis of Taxonomic Links in Semantic Networks”; IEEE Computer, October 1983.
Brodie, M., L., Silva, E., “Active and Passive Component Modelling: ACM/PCM”; Information Systems Design Methodologies: A Comparative Review, Olle, Sol, Verrijn-Sluart, ed., North Holland Publ. Comp., 1982.
Brodie M.L., Mylopoulos J., Schmidt J.W., editors: “On Conceptual Modelling”; Springer, 1984.
Coad P., Yourdon E.: “Object-Oriented Analysis”, Yourdon Press Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1990.
Chen P.P.S., “The Entity-Relationship Model — Towards a Unified View of Data”; ACM TODS, Vol.1, No.1, 9–36, 1976.
Davis J., P., Bonnell R., D.: “A Framework for Constructing Visual Knowledge Representation Specifications in Acquiring Organizational Knowledge”, in Knowledge Acquisition, Vol.3, No 1, p.79–115, March 1991.
De Champeaux D., Faure P.: “A Comparative Study of Object-Oriented Analysis Methods”, Journal of Object-Oriented Programming, p. 21–33, March/April 1992.
Embley D., W., Kurtz B., D., Woodfield S., N.: “Object-Oriented Systems Analysis — A Model-Driven Approach”, Yourdon Press, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1992.
Fikes R.E., Kehler T.P.: “The Role of Frame-Based Representation in Reasoning”; in: CACM, September 1985.
Goldberg, A. and Robson, D., Smalltalk-80: The Language and its Implementation, Addison-Wesley, 1983.
Halasz, F., G., “Reflections on Notecards: Seven Issues for the Next Generation of Hypermedia Systems”; CACM, Vol.31, No.7, 836–852, July 1988.
Hammer, M., Mc Leod, D., “Database Description with SDM: A Semantic Database Model”; ACM TODS, Vol.6, No.3, 351–386, Sept. 1981.
Hull, R. and King, R., “Semantic Database Modelling: Survey, Applications and Research Issues”, ACM Computing Surveys 19(3), September 1987.
Jackson, M., “System Develpoment”; Prentice Hall, 1982.
Kim, W., Bertino, E., Garza, J., F., “Composite Objects Revisited”; OOPSLA 89', 337–347, 1989.
Koubarakis, M., Mylopoulos, J., Stanley, M, Borgida, A., “Telos: Features and Formalizalion”, KRR-TR-89-4, University of Toronto, Feb. 1989.
Lenzerini M, Nardi D., Simi M. (ed.): “Inheritance Hierarchies in Knowledge Representation and Programming Languages”, John Wiley & Sons, 1991.
Martin J., Odell J.: “Object-Oriented Analysis and Design”, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1992.
Miller, G., A., Johnson-Laird P., N., Language and Perception, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1976.
Motschnig-Pilrik R., “A Framework for the Support of a Common Structural Level for Software, Database-, and Knowledge Based Systems”; The Journal of Systems and Software, North Holland, Vol.12, No. 12, 157–165, 1990.
Motschnig-Pitrik R., “Toward a Common Structural Level for Software, Database-, and Knowledge Based Systems”; Applied Artificial Intelligence, An Int. Journal, Hemisphere Publ., Vol.3, No.4, 405–426, 1991.
Motschnig-Pitrik R., Mylopoulos, J., “Classes and Instances”; Int. Journal on Intelligent and Cooperative Information Systems, Vol.1, No.1, 1992.
Mylopoulos, J., Borgida, A., Jarke, M. and Koubarakis, M., “Telos: Representing Knowledge About Information Systems”, ACM Transactions on Information Systems, (to appear).
Mylopoulos, J., “Object-Orientation and Knowledge Representation”, in Meersman, R. and Kent W. (eds.) Proceedings of the 1FIP-TC 2 Working Conference on Database Semantics: Object-Oriented Databases-Analysis, Design and Construction, Windermere UK, July 1990.
Peekham J., Maryanski F.: “Semantic Data Models”, ACM Computing Surveys, Vol.20, No.3, p. 153–189, September 1988.
Pitrik, R., “Structuring Principles in the Design of Software Systems”, in: Advances in Computer Science; G. Lasker, ed., University of Windsor, Canada, 1989.
Rosch, E, “On the Internal Structure of Perceptual and Semantic Categories”, in T. E. Moore (ed.), Cognitive Development in the Acquisition of Language, New York: Academic Press, 1973.
Ross, D.T., “Structured Analysis (SA): A Language for Communicating Ideas”; IEEE TSE Vol. SE-3, No.1, 1977.
Storey, V., “Understanding Semantic Relationships”; Working Paper, University of Rochester, NY, January 1992; to appear in the Journal on Very Large Data Bases.
Smith J., Smith D.: “Data Abstractions: Aggregation and Generalization”, TODS, Vol.2, No.2, p. 105–133, June 1986.
Teorey, T., J., Yang, D., Fry, J., P., “A Logical Design Methodology for Relational Databases Using the Extended Entity-Relationship Model”; ACM Computing Surveys, Vol.18, No.2, 197–222, June 1986.
Tversky B., Hemenway K.,: “Objects, Parts, and Categories”; Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, Vol.113, No.2, 169–191, June 1984.
Ugagawa, Y., “Implementation and Evaluation of a Browsing Algorihm for Design Applications”; Proc. of the 7 th Int. Conf. on Data Engineering, IEEE, 70–78, Kobe, Japan, April 8–12, 1991.
Wand Y., Weber R.: “A Unified Model of Software and Data Decomposition”, Working Paper, Fac. of Commerce and Business Administration, The University of British Columbia, March 1991.
Winston M. E., Chaffin R., Herrmann D.: “A Taxonomy of Part-Whole Relations”; Cognitive Science, Vol.11, 417–444, 1987.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1993 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Motschnig-Pitrik, R. (1993). The semantics of parts versus aggregates in data/knowledge modelling. In: Rolland, C., Bodart, F., Cauvet, C. (eds) Advanced Information Systems Engineering. CAiSE 1993. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 685. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-56777-1_19
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-56777-1_19
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-56777-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-47735-8
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive