Knowledge Representation and Inconsistency Reasoning of Class Diagram Maintenance in Big Data

Requirements modeling and analysis are important in successful information systems' maintenance. Unified Modeling Language (UML) class diagrams are useful standards for modeling information systems. To our best knowledge, there is a lack of a systems development methodology described by the organism metaphor. The core concept of this metaphor is adaptation. Using the knowledge representation and reasoning approach and ontologies to adopt new requirements are emergent in recent years. This paper proposes an organic methodology which is based on constructivism theory. This methodology is a knowledge representation and reasoning approach to analyze new requirements in the class diagrams maintenance. The process and rules in the proposed methodology automatically analyze inconsistencies in the class diagram. In the big data era, developing an automatic tool based on the proposed methodology to analyze large amounts of class diagram data is an important research topic in the future.

• Chi-Lun Liu

• Knowledge representation
• reasoning
• ontology
• class diagram
• software engineering.

[1] J. He and W.R. King, "The Role of User Participation in Information Systems Development: Implications from a Meta-analysis," Journal of Management Information Systems, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 301–331, summer 2008.
[2] N.H. Ali, Z. Shukur, and S. Idris, "A Design of an Assessment System for UML Class Diagram," In Proc. of International Conference on Computational Science and its Application, New York, 2007, pp. 539 - 546.
[3] P. Kruchten, The Rational Unified Process: An Introduction, Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley Professional, 2004.
[4] J. E. Kendal and K. E. Kendal, "Metaphors and Methodologies: Living Beyond the Systems Machine", MIS Quarterly, Vol. 7, No. 2, pp. 149-171, 1993.
[5] L. Liu and H. L. Yang, "Applying Ontology-based Blog to Detect Information System Post-Development Change Requests Conflicts", Information Systems Frontiers, Vol. 14, No. 5, pp. 1019-1032, 2012.
[6] G. M. Bodner, "Constructivism: A Theory of Knowledge", Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 63, pp. 873-878, 1986.
[7] M. Gruninger, J. Lee, "Ontology: Applications and Design", Communications of the ACM, Vol. 45, No. 2, pp. 39–65, 2002.
[8] Richards, "A Social Software/Web 2.0 Approach to Collaborative Knowledge Engineering", Information Sciences, Vol. 179, No. 15, pp. 2515-2523, 2009.
[9] R. Kishore, R. Sharman, and R. Ramesh, "Computational Ontologies and Information Systems: I. Foundations", Communications of Association for Information Systems, Vol. 14, No. 8, pp: 158-183, 2004.
[10] D. Dermeval, J. Vilela, I. I. Bittencourt, J. Castro, S. Isotani, P. Brito, A. Silva, "Applications of Ontologies in Requirements Engineering: a Systematic Review of the Literature", Requirements Engineering, pp. 1–33, 2015.
[11] J. Savolainen and T. Männistö, "Conflict-Centric Software Architectural Views: Exposing Trade-Offs in Quality Requirements," IEEE Software, vol. 27, no. 6, pp. 33-37, Nov./Dec. 2010.
[12] Egyed, "Instant Consistency Checking for the UML," In Proc. of 28th International Conference on Software Engineering, New York, 2006, pp. 381–390.
[13] Y. Nomaguchi and K. Fujita, "DRIFT: A Framework for Ontology-based Design Support Systems," In: Proc. of Semantic Web and Web 2.0 in Architectural, Product, Engineering Design Workshop, Aachen, 2007, pp. 1-10.
[14] C. L. Liu, "CDADE: Conflict Detector in Activity Diagram Evolution Based on Speech Act and Ontology", Knowledge-Based Systems, vol. 23, no. 6, pp. 536-546, Aug. 2010.