Misplaced Pages

#676323

61-451: The most-widely recognized and used components of the IDEF family are IDEF0, a functional modeling language building on SADT, and IDEF1X, which addresses information models and database design issues. IDEF refers to a family of modeling language , which cover a wide range of uses, from functional modeling to data, simulation, object-oriented analysis/design and knowledge acquisition. Eventually

122-482: A structure that is defined by a consistent set of rules. The rules are used for interpretation of the meaning of components in the structure of a programming language. A modeling language can be graphical or textual. An example of a graphical modeling language and a corresponding textual modeling language is EXPRESS . Not all modeling languages are executable, and for those that are, the use of them doesn't necessarily mean that programmers are no longer required. On

183-470: A framework for specification of math model based simulations. It was the intent of the methodology program within ICAM to rectify this situation but limitation of funding did not allow this to happen. As a result, the lack of a method which would support the structuring of descriptions of the user view of a system has been a major shortcoming of the IDEF system. The basic problem from a methodology point of view

244-506: A graphical domain-specific language (DSL) to represent the various facets of a system. DSM languages tend to support higher-level abstractions than General-purpose modeling languages, so they require less effort and fewer low-level details to specify a given system. A framework-specific modeling language (FSML) is a kind of domain-specific modeling language which is designed for an object-oriented application framework. FSMLs define framework-provided abstractions as FSML concepts and decompose

305-456: A license to the logical database design technique (LDDT) and its supporting software (ADAM). LDDT had been developed in 1982 by Robert G. Brown of The Database Design Group entirely outside the IDEF program and with no knowledge of IDEF1. LDDT combined elements of the relational data model, the E–R model, and generalization in a way specifically intended to support data modeling and the transformation of

366-404: A marketable product but IBM , which had served as a support contractor during development, subsequently took over the product and was successful in further developing it for market. Brown credits his Hughes colleague Timothy Ramey as the inventor of IDEF1 as a viable formalism for modeling information structures. The two Hughes researchers built on ideas from and interactions with many luminaries in

427-404: A modeling language is visual and at a higher-level of abstraction than code, using models encourages the generation of a shared vision that may prevent problems of differing interpretation later in development. Often software modeling tools are used to construct these models, which may then be capable of automatic translation to code. Virtual Reality Modeling Language (VRML), before 1995 known as

488-495: A predictable manner, however, the knowledge of these constraints is as critical as knowledge of genetics is to the genetic engineer. IDEF14, or integrated definition for network design method, is a method that targets the modeling and design of computer and communication networks . It can be used to model existing ("as is") or envisioned ("to be") networks. It helps the network designer to investigate potential network designs and to document design rationale. The fundamental goals of

549-673: A result of the experience gained from applications of the new modeling techniques. The intent of the IISS efforts was to create 'generic subsystems' that could be used by a large number of collaborating enterprises, such as U.S. defense contractors and the armed forces of friendly nations. At the time of the ICAM 1102 effort there were numerous, mostly incompatible, data model methods for storing computer data — sequential ( VSAM ), hierarchical ( IMS ), network ( Cincom 's TOTAL and CODASYL , and Cullinet 's IDMS ). The relational data model

610-409: A specific software development life cycle stage. Therefore, such language offers a distinct vocabulary, syntax, and notation for each stage, such as discovery, analysis, design, architecture, contraction, etc. For example, for the analysis phase of a project, the modeler employs specific analysis notation to deliver an analysis proposition diagram. During the design phase, however, logical design notation

671-451: A structured text language for detailed ontology characterization, and a systematic procedure that provides guidelines for effective ontology capture. IDEF6 , or integrated definition for design rationale capture, is a method to facilitate the acquisition, representation, and manipulation of the design rationale used in the development of enterprise systems . Rationale is the reason, justification, underlying motivation, or excuse that moved

SECTION 10

#1732797405677

732-502: A training course and accompanying materials for the IDEF1 modeling technique. Experience with IDEF1 revealed that the translation of information requirements into database designs was more difficult than had originally been anticipated. The most beneficial value of the IDEF1 information modeling technique was its ability to represent data independent of how those data were to be stored and used. It provided data modelers and data analysts with

793-435: A variety of arrows to relate boxes. These boxes and arrows have an associated informal semantics . SADT can be used as a functional analysis tool of a given process, using successive levels of details. The SADT method not only allows one to define user needs for IT developments, which is often used in the industrial Information Systems, but also to explain and present an activity's manufacturing processes and procedures. SADT

854-465: A way that closely reflects human understanding of the specific domain. In the IDEF5 method, an ontology is constructed by capturing the content of certain assertions about real-world objects, their properties and their interrelationships, and representing that content in an intuitive and natural form. The IDEF5 method has three main components: A graphical language to support conceptual ontology analysis,

915-596: A way to help manage large and complex software. SADT was among a series of similar structured methods, which had emerged since the 1960 such as: In 1981 the IDEF0 formalism was published, based on SADT. The structured analysis and design technique uses a decomposition with the top-down approach . This decomposition is conducted only in the physical domain from an axiomatic design viewpoint. SADT uses two types of diagrams: activity models and data models . It uses arrows to build these diagrams. The SADT's representation

976-469: A way to represent data requirements during the requirements-gathering process. This allowed designers to decide which DBMS to use after the nature of the data requirements was understood and thus reduced the "misfit" between data requirements and the capabilities and limitations of the DBMS. The translation of IDEF1 models to database designs, however, proved to be difficult. The IDEF0 functional modeling method

1037-447: Is a structured analysis modelling language, which uses two types of diagrams: activity models and data models . It was developed in the late 1960s by Douglas T. Ross , and was formalized and published as IDEF0 in 1981. Structured analysis and design technique (SADT) is a diagrammatic notation designed specifically to help people describe and understand systems . It offers building blocks to represent entities and activities, and

1098-478: Is a common example of such reasoning. Object modeling languages are modeling languages based on a standardized set of symbols and ways of arranging them to model (part of) an object oriented software design or system design. Some organizations use them extensively in combination with a software development methodology to progress from initial specification to an implementation plan and to communicate that plan to an entire team of developers and stakeholders. Because

1159-451: Is a framework that connects the language quality to a framework for general model quality. Five areas are used in this framework to describe language quality and these are supposed to express both the conceptual as well as the visual notation of the language. We will not go into a thorough explanation of the underlying quality framework of models but concentrate on the areas used to explain the language quality framework. The framework states

1220-484: Is a method for producing high-quality designs of interactions between users and the systems they operate. Systems are characterized as a collection of objects that perform functions to accomplish a particular goal. The system with which the user interacts can be any system, not necessarily a computer program. Human-system interactions are designed at three levels of specification within the IDEF8 method. The first level defines

1281-486: Is a software engineering method to develop and maintain usable, accurate, domain ontologies . In the field of computer science ontologies are used to capture the concept and objects in a specific domain , along with associated relationships and meanings. In addition, ontology capture helps coordinate projects by standardizing terminology and creates opportunities for information reuse. The IDEF5 Ontology Capture Method has been developed to reliably construct ontologies in

SECTION 20

#1732797405677

1342-563: Is an information representation language or semantic modeling language that is defined in the Gellish English Dictionary-Taxonomy, which has the form of a Taxonomy-Ontology (similarly for Dutch). Gellish Formal English is not only suitable to express knowledge, requirements and dictionaries, taxonomies and ontologies, but also information about individual things. All that information is expressed in one language and therefore it can all be integrated, independent of

1403-473: Is applicable to all phases of the information system development process, from initial conceptualization through both preliminary and detailed design activities. To the extent that detailed design decisions for software systems are relegated to the coding phase, the IDEF6 technique should be usable during the software construction process as well. IDEF8, or integrated definition for human-system interaction design,

1464-424: Is appropriate for the organizational context, e.g. that the language is standardized within the organization, or that it is supported by tools that are chosen as standard in the organization. Structured Analysis and Design Technique Structured analysis and design technique ( SADT ) is a systems engineering and software engineering methodology for describing systems as a hierarchy of functions. SADT

1525-469: Is designed to model the decisions, actions, and activities of an organization or system. It was derived from the established graphic modeling language structured analysis and design technique (SADT) developed by Douglas T. Ross and SofTech, Inc. In its original form, IDEF0 includes both a definition of a graphical modeling language ( syntax and semantics ) and a description of a comprehensive methodology for developing models. The US Air Force commissioned

1586-435: Is generally poorly defined. The knowledge of what constraints exist and how those constraints interact is incomplete, disjoint, distributed, and often completely unknown. Just as living organisms do not need to be aware of the genetic or autonomous constraints that govern certain behaviors, organizations can (and most do) perform well without explicit knowledge of the glue that structures the system. In order to modify business in

1647-423: Is more familiar. Metaphors provide a model of abstract concepts in terms of familiar, concrete objects and experiences. IDEF9, or integrated definition for business constraint discovery, is designed to assist in the discovery and analysis of constraints in a business system . A primary motivation driving the development of IDEF9 was an acknowledgment that the collection of constraints that forge an enterprise system

1708-513: Is the need to distinguish between a description of what a system (existing or proposed) is supposed to do and a representative simulation model that predicts what a system will do. The latter was the focus of IDEF2 , the former is the focus of IDEF3 . The development of IDEF4 came from the recognition that the modularity, maintainability and code reusability that results from the object-oriented programming paradigm can be realized in traditional data processing applications. The proven ability of

1769-491: Is the similarity of its syntax to the mathematical notation of optimization problems. This allows for a very concise and readable definition of problems in the domain of optimization, which is supported by certain language elements like sets, indices, algebraic expressions, powerful sparse index and data handling variables, constraints with arbitrary names. The algebraic formulation of a model does not contain any hints how to process it. Behavioral languages are designed to describe

1830-404: Is usable for analyzing and further processing, the language has to ensure that it is possible to reason in an automatic way. To achieve this it has to include formal syntax and semantics. Another advantage by formalizing is the ability to discover errors in an early stage. It is not always that the language best fitted for the technical actors is the same as for the social actors. The language used

1891-415: Is used to depict the relationship between software entities. In addition, the discipline-specific modeling language best practices does not preclude practitioners from combining the various notations in a single diagram. Domain-specific modeling (DSM) is a software engineering methodology for designing and developing systems, most often IT systems such as computer software. It involves the systematic use of

IDEF - Misplaced Pages Continue

1952-931: The 1970s at the US Air Force Materials Laboratory, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base in Ohio by Dennis E. Wisnosky , Dan L. Shunk, and others. and completed in the 1980s. IDEF was a product of the ICAM initiative of the United States Air Force . The IEEE recast the IDEF abbreviation as Integration Definition." The specific projects that produced IDEF were ICAM project priorities 111 and 112 (later renumbered 1102). The subsequent Integrated Information Support System (IISS) project priorities 6201, 6202, and 6203 attempted to create an information processing environment that could be run in heterogeneous physical computing environments. Further development of IDEF occurred under those projects as

2013-877: The Gellish English Dictionary-Taxonomy (or of your own domain dictionary). The Gellish English Dictionary-Taxonomy enables the creation of semantically rich information models, because the dictionary contains more than 600 standard relation types and contains definitions of more than 40000 concepts. An information model in Gellish can express facts or make statements, queries and answers. In the field of computer science recently more specific types of modeling languages have emerged. Algebraic Modeling Languages (AML) are high-level programming languages for describing and solving high complexity problems for large scale mathematical computation (i.e. large scale optimization type problems). One particular advantage of AMLs like AIMMS , AMPL , GAMS , Gekko , Mosel , OPL , MiniZinc , and OptimJ

2074-633: The IDEF methods have been defined up to IDEF14: In 1995 only the IDEF0 , IDEF1X , IDEF2 , IDEF3 and IDEF4 had been developed in full. Some of the other IDEF concepts had some preliminary design. Some of the last efforts were new IDEF developments in 1995 toward establishing reliable methods for business constraint discovery IDEF9 , design rationale capture IDEF6 , human system, interaction design IDEF8 , and network design IDEF14 . The methods IDEF7, IDEF10, IDEF11, IDEF 12 and IDEF13 haven't been developed any further than their initial definition. IDEF originally stood for ICAM Definition, initiated in

2135-537: The IDEF program was funded by the government, the techniques are in the public domain . In addition to the ADAM software, sold by DACOM under the name Leverage, a number of CASE tools use IDEF1X as their representation technique for data modeling. The IISS projects actually produced working prototypes of an information processing environment that would run in heterogeneous computing environments. Current advancements in such techniques as Java and JDBC are now achieving

2196-484: The IDEF14 research project developed from a perceived need for good network designs that can be implemented quickly and accurately. [REDACTED]  This article incorporates public domain material from the National Institute of Standards and Technology Modeling language A modeling language is any artificial language that can be used to express data , information or knowledge or systems in

2257-538: The SADT developers to develop a function model method for analyzing and communicating the functional perspective of a system. IDEF0 should assist in organizing system analysis and promote effective communication between the analyst and the customer through simplified graphical devices. To satisfy the data modeling enhancement requirements that were identified in the IISS-6202 project, a sub-contractor, DACOM , obtained

2318-754: The Virtual Reality Markup Language is a standard file format for representing 3-dimensional (3D) interactive vector graphics, designed particularly with the World Wide Web in mind. Various kinds of modeling languages are applied in different disciplines, including computer science , information management , business process modeling , software engineering , and systems engineering . Modeling languages can be used to specify: Modeling languages are intended to be used to precisely specify systems so that stakeholders (e.g., customers, operators, analysts, designers) can better understand

2379-443: The ability to represent the domain as domain appropriateness. The statement appropriateness can be a bit vague, but in this particular context it means able to express . You should ideally only be able to express things that are in the domain but be powerful enough to include everything that is in the domain. This requirement might seem a bit strict, but the aim is to get a visually expressed model which includes everything relevant to

2440-505: The abstractions into features. The features represent implementation steps or choices. A FSML concept can be configured by selecting features and providing values for features. Such a concept configuration represents how the concept should be implemented in the code. In other words, concept configuration describes how the framework should be completed in order to create the implementation of the concept. Linked data and ontology engineering require 'host languages' to represent entities and

2501-722: The contrary, executable modeling languages are intended to amplify the productivity of skilled programmers, so that they can address more challenging problems, such as parallel computing and distributed systems . A large number of modeling languages appear in the literature. Example of graphical modeling languages in the field of computer science, project management and systems engineering: Examples of graphical modeling languages in other fields of science. Information models can also be expressed in formalized natural languages, such as Gellish. Gellish has natural language variants such as Gellish Formal English and Gellish Formal Dutch ( Gellish Formeel Nederlands ), etc. Gellish Formal English

IDEF - Misplaced Pages Continue

2562-424: The data models into database designs. The graphic syntax of LDDT differed from that of IDEF1 and, more importantly, LDDT contained interrelated modeling concepts not present in IDEF1. Mary E. Loomis wrote a concise summary of the syntax and semantics of a substantial subset of LDDT, using terminology compatible with IDEF1 wherever possible. DACOM labeled the result IDEF1X and supplied it to the ICAM program. Because

2623-405: The designer to select a particular strategy or design feature. More simply, rationale is interpreted as the answer to the question, “Why is this design being done in this manner?” Most design methods focus on what the design is (i.e. on the final product, rather than why the design is the way it is). IDEF6 is a method that possesses the conceptual resources and linguistic capabilities needed IDEF6

2684-421: The domain and excludes everything not appropriate for the domain. To achieve this, the language has to have a good distinction of which notations and syntaxes that are advantageous to present. To evaluate the participant appropriateness we try to identify how well the language expresses the knowledge held by the stakeholders. This involves challenges since a stakeholder's knowledge is subjective. The knowledge of

2745-489: The field at the time. In particular, IDEF1 draws on the following techniques: The effort to develop IDEF1 resulted in both a new method for information modeling and an example of its use in the form of a "reference information model of manufacturing." This latter artifact was developed by D. S. Coleman of the D. Appleton Company (DACOM) acting as a sub-contractor to Hughes and under the direction of Ramey. Personnel at DACOM became expert at IDEF1 modeling and subsequently produced

2806-524: The goals of ubiquity and versatility across computing environments which was first demonstrated by IISS. The third IDEF (IDEF2) was originally intended as a user interface modeling method. However, since the Integrated Computer-Aided Manufacturing (ICAM) program needed a simulation modeling tool, the resulting IDEF2 was a method for representing the time varying behavior of resources in a manufacturing system, providing

2867-401: The language should be able to express all possible explicit knowledge of the stakeholders. No knowledge should be left unexpressed due to lacks in the language. Comprehensibility appropriateness makes sure that the social actors understand the model due to a consistent use of the language. To achieve this the framework includes a set of criteria. The general importance that these express is that

2928-408: The language should be flexible, easy to organize and easy to distinguish different parts of the language internally as well as from other languages. In addition to this, the goal should be as simple as possible and that each symbol in the language has a unique representation. This is in connection to also to the structure of the development requirements. . To ensure that the domain actually modelled

2989-487: The object-oriented paradigm requires a different thought process than used with conventional procedural or database languages , standard methodologies such as structure charts , data flow diagrams , and traditional data design models (hierarchical, relational, and network) are not sufficient. IDEF4 seeks to provide the necessary facilities to support the object-oriented design decision making process. IDEF5 , or integrated definition for ontology description capture method,

3050-530: The object-oriented programming paradigm to support data level integration in large complex distributed systems is also a major factor in the widespread interest in this technology from the traditional data processing community. IDEF4 was developed as a design tool for software designers who use object-oriented languages such as the Common Lisp Object System , Flavors , Smalltalk , Objective-C , C++ , and others. Since effective usage of

3111-413: The observable behavior of complex systems consisting of components that execute concurrently. These languages focus on the description of key concepts such as: concurrency, nondeterminism, synchronization, and communication. The semantic foundations of Behavioral languages are process calculus or process algebra . A discipline-specific modeling (DspM) language is focused on deliverables affiliated with

SECTION 50

#1732797405677

3172-424: The philosophy of system operation and produces a set of models and textual descriptions of overall system processes. The second level of design specifies role-centered scenarios of system use. The third level of IDEF8 design is for human-system design detailing. At this level of design, IDEF8 provides a library of metaphors to help users and designers specify the desired behavior in terms of other objects whose behavior

3233-495: The problems facing the software world from the 1960s to the 1980s. In this timeframe most commercial programming was done in COBOL and Fortran , then C and BASIC . There was little guidance on "good" design and programming techniques, and there were no standard techniques for documenting requirements and designs. Systems were getting larger and more complex, and the information system development became harder and harder to do so. As

3294-768: The question whether it is stored in central or distributed or in federated databases. Information models in Gellish Formal English consists of collections of Gellish Formal English expressions, that use natural language terms and formalized phrases. For example, a geographic information model might consist of a number of Gellish Formal English expressions, such as: whereas information requirements and knowledge can be expressed for example as follows: Such Gellish Formal English expressions use names of concepts (such as "city") and phrases that represent relation types (such as ⟨is located in⟩ and ⟨is classified as a⟩ ) that should be selected from

3355-416: The relations between them , constraints between the properties of entities and relations, and metadata attributes . JSON-LD and RDF are two major (and semantically almost equivalent) languages in this context, primarily because they support statement reification and contextualisation which are essential properties to support the higher-order logic needed to reason about models. Model transformation

3416-533: The same representations. A review of modelling languages is essential to be able to assign which languages are appropriate for different modelling settings. In the term settings we include stakeholders, domain and the knowledge connected. Assessing the language quality is a means that aims to achieve better models. Here language quality is stated in accordance with the SEQUAL framework for quality of models developed by Krogstie, Sindre and Lindland (2003), since this

3477-415: The stakeholder is both tacit and explicit. Both types of knowledge are of dynamic character. In this framework only the explicit type of knowledge is taken into account. The language should to a large extent express all the explicit knowledge of the stakeholders relevant to the domain. Last paragraph stated that knowledge of the stakeholders should be presented in a good way. In addition it is imperative that

3538-552: The system being modeled. The more mature modeling languages are precise, consistent and executable. Informal diagramming techniques applied with drawing tools are expected to produce useful pictorial representations of system requirements, structures and behaviors, which can be useful for communication, design, and problem solving but cannot be used programmatically. Executable modeling languages applied with proper tool support, however, are expected to automate system verification and validation , simulation and code generation from

3599-562: The way it was physically stored . Thus the IDEF1 language was created to allow a neutral description of data structures that could be applied regardless of the storage method or file access method. IDEF1 was developed under ICAM program priority 1102 by Robert R. Brown of the Hughes Aircraft Company , under contract to SofTech, Inc. Brown had previously been responsible for the development of IMS while working at Rockwell International . Rockwell chose not to pursue IMS as

3660-690: Was developed and field-tested during the period of 1969 to 1973 by Douglas T. Ross and SofTech, Inc. The methodology was used in the MIT Automatic Programming Tool (APT) project. It received extensive use starting in 1973 by the US Air Force Integrated Computer Aided Manufacturing program. According to Levitt (2000) SADT is "part of a series of structured methods, that represent a collection of analysis, design, and programming techniques that were developed in response to

3721-446: Was just emerging as a promising way of thinking about structuring data for easy, efficient, and accurate access. Relational database management systems had not yet emerged as a general standard for data management. The ICAM program office deemed it valuable to create a "neutral" way of describing the data content of large-scale systems. The emerging academic literature suggested that methods were needed to process data independently of

SECTION 60

#1732797405677
#676323