preprint Open access

Evidence-based lean logic profiles for conceptual data modelling languages

  • arXiv (Cornell University)
  • Cornell University
Research footprint

At a glance

Citations
0
References
90
Comments
0
Paper overview

Abstract

Multiple logic-based reconstructions of conceptual data modelling languages such as EER, UML Class Diagrams, and ORM exist. They mainly cover various fragments of the languages and none are formalised such that the logic applies simultaneously for all three modelling language families as unifying mechanism. This hampers interchangeability, interoperability, and tooling support. In addition, due to the lack of a systematic design process of the logic used for the formalisation, hidden choices permeate the formalisations that have rendered them incompatible. We aim to address these problems, first, by structuring the logic design process in a methodological way. We generalise and extend the DSL design process to apply to logic language design more generally and, in particular, by incorporating an ontological analysis of language features in the process. Second, we specify minimal logic profiles availing of this extended process, including the ontological commitments embedded in the languages, of evidence gathered of language feature usage, and of computational complexity insights from Description Logics (DL). The profiles characterise the essential logic structure needed to handle the semantics of conceptual models, therewith enabling the development of interoperability tools. There is no known DL language that matches exactly the features of those profiles and the common core is small (in the tractable DL $\mathcal{ALNI}$). Although hardly any inconsistencies can be derived with the profiles, it is promising for scalable runtime use of conceptual data models.

Record transparency

Publication details

DOI
10.48550/arxiv.1809.03001
OpenAlex
W2890218907
Document type
preprint
Language
EN
Source
arXiv (Cornell University)
Last metadata update
Community

Comments

Log in to join the discussion.

  1. No comments yet. Start the discussion.