Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Comparison of the Two-Hemisphere Model-Driven Approach to Other Methods for Model-Driven Software Development Cover

Comparison of the Two-Hemisphere Model-Driven Approach to Other Methods for Model-Driven Software Development

Applied Computer Systems
Volume 18 (2015): Issue 1 (December 2015)
By: Oksana Nikiforova,  Ludmila Kozacenko,  Dace Ahilcenoka,  Konstantins Gusarovs,  Dainis Ungurs and  Maris Jukss  
Open Access
|Mar 2016

References

  1. [1] Haigh, T., “Crisis, What Crisis? Reconsidering the Software Crisis of the 1960s and the Origins of Software Engineering,” Thomas Haigh, 2011. Available: http://www.tomandmaria.com/tom/Writing/SoftwareCrisis_SofiaDRAFT.pdf
    Search in Google Scholar
  2. [2] Jones, C., “Software Quality in 2012: A Survey of the State of the Art,” Software Quality Group of New England, 2012. Available: http://sqgne.org/2012-13.html
    Search in Google Scholar
  3. [3] Stahl, T., Volter, M., Bettin, J., Haase, A., et al. Model-Driven Software Development: Technology, Engineering, Management, 1 ed. USA: John Wiley & Sons, 2006. 446 p.
    Search in Google Scholar
  4. [4] Loniewski, G., Insfran, E., Abrah, S. “A Systematic Review of the Use of Requirements Engineering Techniques in Model-Driven Development,” in Proc. of 13th Int. Conf. MODELS 2010, Norway, Oslo, October 3-8, II part. Berlin: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, pp. 213–227, 2010 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-16129-2_16
    Search in Google Scholar
  5. [5] Sharifi, H.R., Mohsenzadeh, M., Hashemi, S.M., “CIM to PIM Transformation: An Analytical Survey,” IJ of Computer Technology & Applications, vol. 3, pp.791–796, 2012.
    Search in Google Scholar
  6. [6] Kriouile, A., Gadi, T., Balouki, Y., “IM to PIM Transformation: A criteria Based Evaluation,” IJ of Computer Technology & Applications, vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 616–625, 2013.
    Search in Google Scholar
  7. [7] Czarnecki, K., Helsen, S., “Feature-Based Survey of Model Transformation Approaches,” IBM Systems Journal-Model-driven software development, vol. 45, pp. 621–645, 2006.10.1147/sj.453.0621
    Search in Google Scholar
  8. [8] Mens, T., Gorp, P.V., “A Taxonomy of Model Transformations,” Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science (ENTCS). vol. 152, pp. 125–42, 2006. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.entcs.2005.10.021
    Search in Google Scholar
  9. [9] Lano, K., Kolahdouz-Rahimi, S., Poernomo, I., “Comparative Evaluation of Model Transformation Specification Approaches,” IJ of Software and Informatics, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 233–269, 2012.
    Search in Google Scholar
  10. [10] Chapin, N., Flowcharts. New York, USA: Petrocelli Books, 1971
    Search in Google Scholar
  11. [11] Stevens, W., Myers, G., Constantine, L., “Structured Design,” IBM Systems Journal, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 115–139, 1974. http://dx.doi.org/10.1147/sj.132.0115
    Search in Google Scholar
  12. [12] Chen, P.P., “The Entity-Relationship Model: Toward a Unified View of Data,” ACM Transactions on Database Systems, vol. 1, pp. 9–36, 1976.10.1145/320434.320440
    Search in Google Scholar
  13. [13] OMG, OMG Unified Modelling LanguageTM (OMG UML), Superstructure. OMG, 2014. Available: http://www.omg.org/spec/UML/2.4.1/Superstructure/PDF
    Search in Google Scholar
  14. [14] Guttman, M., Parodi, J., Real-Life MDA. 1st ed. USA: Morgan Kaufmann, 224 p., 2007.
    Search in Google Scholar
  15. [15] Brambilla, M., Cabot, J., Wimmer, M., Model-Driven Software Engineering in Practice. 1st ed. USA: Morgan & Claypool Publishers, 182 p., 2012.10.2200/S00441ED1V01Y201208SWE001
    Search in Google Scholar
  16. [16] Nikiforova, O., Kirikova, M., “Two-Hemisphere Model-Driven Approach: Engineering Based Software Development.” in Proc. of 16th International Conference, CAiSE 2004, Riga, Latvia, June 7–11, vol. 3084. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, pp. 219–233, 2004. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-25975-6_17
    Search in Google Scholar
  17. [17] Nikiforova, O., “General Framework for Object-Oriented Software Development Process,” in Scientific Proc. of RTU. Computer Sciences, vol. 13, pp. 132–144, 2002.
    Search in Google Scholar
  18. [18] Gartner Predicts 2002: Top 10 Predictions, Gartner, 2002.10.5465/apbpp.2002.7516614
    Search in Google Scholar
  19. [19] Anderson, J.R., Cognitive psychology and its implications, Worth Publishers, 469 p., 2010.
    Search in Google Scholar
  20. [20] Nikiforova, O., Kirikova, M., Pavlova, N., “Two-Hemisphere Driven Approach: Application for Knowledge Modelling,” in Proc. of the Seventh International Baltic Conf. on Databases and Information Systems, (Baltic DB&IS 2006), O. Vasilecas, J. Eder, A. Caplinskas (eds.), Lithuania, Vilnius, 3–6 July, IEEE, pp. 244–250, 2006. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/DBIS.2006.1678503
    Search in Google Scholar
  21. [21] Nikiforova, O., Pavlova, N., Grigorjevs, J., “Several Facilities of Class Diagram Generation from Two-Hemisphere Model in the Framework of MDA,” in Proc. of the 23rd International Symposium on Computer and Information Science, Istanbul, Turkey, October 27–29, p. 6., 2008. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/iscis.2008.4717956
    Search in Google Scholar
  22. [22] Nikiforova, O., “System Modelling in UML with Two-Hemisphere Model Driven Approach,” Scientific Journal of RTU. Computer Sciences. 2010, vol. 21, pp. 37–44.
    Search in Google Scholar
  23. [23] Nikiforova, O., Gusarovs, K., Gorbiks, O., Pavlova N., “BrainTool A Tool for Generation of the UML Class Diagrams,” in Proc. of the 7th International Conference on Software Engineering Advances, Lisbon, Portugal, 18-23 Novemer, IARIA, 60-69.lpp (2012)
    Search in Google Scholar
  24. [24] JGraph. jGraph-connectiong the dots. Available: http://www.jgraph.com/
    Search in Google Scholar
  25. [25] Nikiforova, O., Kozacenko, L., Ungurs, D., Ahilcenoka, D., Bajovs, A., Skindre, N., Gusarovs, K., “BrainTool for Software Modelling in UML,” Scientific Journal of RTU: Applied Computer Systems, Grundspenkis J. et al. (Eds), vol. 16, pp. 33–42, 2014. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/acss-2014-0011
    Search in Google Scholar
  26. [26] Nikiforova, O., Ahilcenoka, D., Ungurs, D., Gusarovs, K., Kozacenko, L., “Several Issues on the Layout of the UML Sequence and Class Diagram,” in Proc. of the 9th Int. Conf. on Software Eng. Advances, Mannaert H. et. al (Eds), October 12–16, Nice, France, IARIA, pp. 40–47, 2014.
    Search in Google Scholar
  27. [27] Polak, P., “BPMN Impact on Process Modelling,” in Proc. of the 2nd International Business and Systems Conference BSC, Riga, Latvia, November 5, pp. 26–35, 2013.10.7250/bsc.2013.4
    Search in Google Scholar
  28. [28] Harmon, P, Wolf, C.: The State of Business Process Management, BPTrends, 2014. Available: http://www.bptrends.com/
    Search in Google Scholar
  29. [29] Johnason, J., Henderson, A., Conceptual Models. Core to Good Design, 1st ed. Morgan & Claypool Publishers, 2011. 110 p.10.2200/S00391ED1V01Y201111HCI012
    Search in Google Scholar
  30. [30] Hesse, W., “Ontologies in the Software Engineering process,” in Proc. of the 12th Int. Workshop on Exploring Modelling Methods for Systems Analysis and Design, (EMMSAD-2007), Trondheim, Norway, 11–15 June, pp. 1–13, 2007.
    Search in Google Scholar
  31. [31] Graudina, V., Grundspenkis, J., “Algorithm of Concept Map Transformation to Ontology for Usage in Intelligent Knowledge Assessment System,” in Proc. of the 12th International Conference on Computer Systems and Technologies, Vienna, Austria, June 16–17, 2011. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2023607.2023627
    Search in Google Scholar
  32. [32] Mädche, A., Schnurr, H.P., Staab, S., Studer, R., “Representation-Language-Neutral Modelling of Ontologies,” J. Ebert, U. Frank (Hrsg.): Modelle und Modellierungssprachen in Informatik und Wirtschaftsinformatik. Proc. “Modellierung 2000”. Koblenz: Fölbach-Verlag, pp. 143–150, 2000.
    Search in Google Scholar
  33. [33] OMG, Business Process Model and Notation, Available: http://www.bpmn.org/
    Search in Google Scholar
  34. [34] RTU, BrainTool webpage, Available: http://braintool.rtu.lv
    Search in Google Scholar
  35. [35] Dobing, B., Parsons, J., “How UML is used,” Communications of the ACM. May 2006, vol. 49, no. 5, pp. 109–113, 2006.10.1145/1125944.1125949
    Search in Google Scholar
  36. [36] Eiglsperger, M., “Automatic Layout of UML Class Diagrams: A Topology-Shape-Metrics Approach,” Thesis. Tübingen, Germany: Eberhard Karls Universitat, p. 173, 2003.
    Search in Google Scholar
  37. [37] Dwyer, T., “Three dimensional UML using force directed layout. Australian Symposium on Information Visualisation,” Australian Computer Society, Inc, pp. 77–85, 2001.
    Search in Google Scholar
  38. [38] Siqueira, F. L., Silva, P. S. M., “Analyzing CIM to PIM Transformations Using the WRSPM model,” in Proc. of the 2nd Int. Conf. on Advanced Communications and Computation, Venice, Italy, October 21–26, IARIA, pp. 41–50, 2012.
    Search in Google Scholar
  39. [39] Al-Jamini, H., Ahmed, M., “Transition from Analysis to Software Design: A Review and New Perspective,” in Proc. of Int. Conf. on Soft Computing and Software Engineering, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 169–176, 2013.
    Search in Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/acss-2015-0013 | Journal eISSN: 2255-8691 | Journal ISSN: 2255-8683
Journal RSS Feed
Language: English
Page range: 5 - 14
Published on: Mar 7, 2016
Published by: Riga Technical University
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: Volume open
Keywords:
Two-Hemisphere Model,
Model-Driven Software Development,
problem domain modelling,
UML modelling
Related subjects:
Computer sciences,
Artificial intelligence,
Information technology,
Project management,
Software development

© 2016 Oksana Nikiforova, Ludmila Kozacenko, Dace Ahilcenoka, Konstantins Gusarovs, Dainis Ungurs, Maris Jukss, published by Riga Technical University
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Volume 18 (2015): Issue 1 (December 2015)Next article