Skip to main content
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: ,  ,  ,  ,   and    
Open Access
|Mar 2016
References

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:
    Search in Google Scholar
  2. [2] Jones, C., “Software Quality in 2012: A Survey of the State of the Art,”2012. Available:
    Search in Google Scholar
  3. [3] Stahl, T., Volter, M., Bettin, J., Haase, A., et al., 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, Norway, Oslo, October 3-8, II part. Berlin: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, pp. 213–227, 2010
    Search in Google Scholar
  5. [5] Sharifi, H.R., Mohsenzadeh, M., Hashemi, S.M., “CIM to PIM Transformation: An Analytical Survey,”, 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,”, 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,”, vol. 45, pp. 621–645, 2006.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  8. [8] Mens, T., Gorp, P.V., “A Taxonomy of Model Transformations,”vol. 152, pp. 125–42, 2006.
    Search in Google Scholar
  9. [9] Lano, K., Kolahdouz-Rahimi, S., Poernomo, I., “Comparative Evaluation of Model Transformation Specification Approaches,”, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 233–269, 2012.
    Search in Google Scholar
  10. [10] Chapin, N.,. New York, USA: Petrocelli Books, 1971
    Search in Google Scholar
  11. [11] Stevens, W., Myers, G., Constantine, L., “Structured Design,”, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 115–139, 1974.
    Search in Google Scholar
  12. [12] Chen, P.P., “The Entity-Relationship Model: Toward a Unified View of Data,”, vol. 1, pp. 9–36, 1976.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  13. [13] OMG,. OMG, 2014. Available:
    Search in Google Scholar
  14. [14] Guttman, M., Parodi, J.,. 1st ed. USA: Morgan Kaufmann, 224 p., 2007.
    Search in Google Scholar
  15. [15] Brambilla, M., Cabot, J., Wimmer, M.,. 1st ed. USA: Morgan & Claypool Publishers, 182 p., 2012.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  16. [16] Nikiforova, O., Kirikova, M., “Two-Hemisphere Model-Driven Approach: Engineering Based Software Development.” in, CAiSE 2004, Riga, Latvia, June 7–11, vol. 3084. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, pp. 219–233, 2004.
    Search in Google Scholar
  17. [17] Nikiforova, O., “General Framework for Object-Oriented Software Development Process,” in, vol. 13, pp. 132–144, 2002.
    Search in Google Scholar
  18. [18] Gartner Predicts 2002: Top 10 Predictions, Gartner, 2002.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  19. [19] Anderson, J.R.,, 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(Baltic DB&IS 2006), O. Vasilecas, J. Eder, A. Caplinskas (eds.), Lithuania, Vilnius, 3–6 July, IEEE, pp. 244–250, 2006.
    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, Istanbul, Turkey, October 27–29, p. 6., 2008.
    Search in Google Scholar
  22. [22] Nikiforova, O., “System Modelling in UML with Two-Hemisphere Model Driven Approach,”. 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, Lisbon, Portugal, 18-23 Novemer, IARIA, 60-69.lpp (2012)
    Search in Google Scholar
  24. [24] JGraph. jGraph-connectiong the dots. Available:
    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,”, Grundspenkis J. et al. (Eds), vol. 16, pp. 33–42, 2014.
    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, 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, Riga, Latvia, November 5, pp. 26–35, 2013.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  28. [28] Harmon, P, Wolf, C.: The State of Business Process Management, BPTrends, 2014. Available:
    Search in Google Scholar
  29. [29] Johnason, J., Henderson, A.,, 1st ed. Morgan & Claypool Publishers, 2011. 110 p.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  30. [30] Hesse, W., “Ontologies in the Software Engineering process,” in(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, Vienna, Austria, June 16–17, 2011.
    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,, Available:
    Search in Google Scholar
  34. [34] RTU,, Available:
    Search in Google Scholar
  35. [35] Dobing, B., Parsons, J., “How UML is used,”. May 2006, vol. 49, no. 5, pp. 109–113, 2006.
    Open DOISearch 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,”, 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, 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, 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 (formerly 2255-8691)
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