Abstract
AbstractModels have long since been used, in different shapes and forms, to understand, communicate about, and (re)shape, the world around us; including many different social, economic, biological, chemical, physical, and digital aspects. This is also the case in the context of enterprise architecture (EA), where we see a wide range of models in many different shapes and forms being used as well. Researchers in EA modeling usually introduce their own lexicon, and perspective of what a model actually is, while accepting (often implicitly) the accompanying ontological commitments. Similarly, practitioners of EA modeling implicitly also commit to (different) ontologies, resulting in models that have an uncertain ontological standing. This is because, for the subject domain of enterprise architecture models (as opposed to the content of such models), no single ontology has gained major traction. As a result, studies into aspects of enterprise architecture models, such as “model quality” and “return on modeling effort”, are fragmented, and cannot readily be compared or combined. This paper proposes a comprehensive applied ontology, specifically geared to enterprise architecture modeling. Ontologies represent structured knowledge about a particular subject domain. It allows for study into, and reasoning about, that subject domain. Our ontology is derived from a theory of modeling, while clarifying concepts such as “enterprise architecture model”, and introduces novel concepts such as “model audience” and “model objective”. Furthermore, the relevant interrelations between these different concepts are identified and defined. The resulting ontology for enterprise architecture models is represented in OntoUML, and shown to be consistent with the foundational ontology for modeling, Unified Foundational Ontology.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Modeling and Simulation,Software
Reference74 articles.
1. Abraham, R., et al.: Can boundary objects mitigate communication defects in enterprise transformation? findings from expert interviews. In: Jung, R., Reichert, M. (eds) Proceedings of the 5th International Workshop on Enterprise Modelling and Information Systems Architectures, EMISA 2013, St. Gallen, Switzerland, September 5–6, 2013, vol. 222. Lecture Notes in Informatics. Gesellschaft für Informatik Bonn, Germany, pp. 27–40 (2013) ISBN: 978-3-88579-616-9. https://dl.gi.de/handle/20.500.12116/17238
2. Abraham, R., Aier, S., Winter, R.: Crossing the line: overcoming knowledge boundaries in enterprise transformation. In: Business and Information Systems Engineering 57.1, pp. 3–13 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-014-0361-1
3. Apostel, L.: Towards the formal study of models in the non-formal sciences. In Synthese. Int. J. Epistemol. Methodol. Philos. Sci. 12, 125–161 (1960)
4. Apostel, L.: Towards the formal study of models in the non-formal sciences. In: The Concept and the Role of the Model in Mathematics and Natural and Social Sciences: Proceedings of the Colloquium Sponsored by the Division of Philosophy of Sciences of the International Union of History and Philosophy of Sciences organized at Utrecht, January 1960, by Hans Freudenthal (pp. 1–37). Springer, Dordrecht (1961) ISBN: 978-94-010-3667-2. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-3667-2_1
5. Architectural Coordination of Enterprise Transformation: In: Proper, H.A., et al. (eds.) Architectural Coordination of Enterprise Transformation. The Enterprise Engineering Series. Springer, Heidelberg (2018) 978-3-319-69583-9. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-69584-6