Skip to main content

Are Conceptual Models Concept Models?

  • Conference paper
Conceptual Modeling (ER 2013)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNISA,volume 8217))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

The conceptual modelling community not only has no clear, general agreement on what its models model, it also has no clear picture of what the available options and their implications are. One common claim is that models represent concepts, but there is no clear articulation of what the concepts are. This creates theoretical problems; for example, it is difficult to justify the accuracy of meta-models. It also creates practical problems; practitioners building a model of the ‘concept’ of a business will rationalise their decisions differently from those modelling the business itself, making resolving disagreement difficult. In contrast, philosophy has been researching this area for millennia and has developed, at the high level, a clear picture of the semantic landscape, particularly for concepts. This presents an opportunity to provide the conceptual modelling community with a ready-made framework for its semantic options. We start exploiting this opportunity, developing here an initial framework.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Partridge, C.: Business Objects: Re - Engineering for Re - Use. Butterworth Heinemann, Oxford (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Smith, B.: Beyond Concepts: Ontology as Reality Representation. In: Proceedings of the Third International Conference (FOIS 2004), pp. 73–84. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Guizzardi, G.: Ontological Foundations for Structural Conceptual Models, CTIT PhD Thesis Series, no. 05-74 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Mylopoulos, J.: Conceptual Modelling and Telos. In: Loucopoulos, P., Zicari, R. (eds.) Conceptual Modeling, Databases, and Case: An Integrated View of Information Systems Development, pp. 49–68. John Wiley & Sons, New York (1992)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Lycett, M., Partridge, C.: The Challenge of Epistemic Divergence in IS Development. Commun. ACM 52, 127–131 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Lewis, D.: General Semantics. Synthese 22, 18–67 (1970)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  7. Frege, G.: Conceptual Notation, and Related Articles. Oxford Scholarly Classics. Clarendon Press (1972)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Peirce, C.S.: Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce. Harvard University Press, Cambridge (1932)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Wieringa, R.: Real-World Semantics of Conceptual Models. In: Kaschek, R., Delcambre, L. (eds.) The Evolution of Conceptual Modeling. LNCS, vol. 6520, pp. 1–20. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  10. ISO: ISO 1087-1:2000 - Terminology Work – Vocabulary – Part 1: Theory and Application 41 (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  11. ISO: ISO 704:2009 Terminology work–Principles and Methods. International Organization for Standardization 65 (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Wand, Y., Storey, V.C., Weber, R.: An Ontological Analysis of the Relationship Construct in Conceptual Modeling. TODS 24, 494–528 (1999)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Henderson-Sellers, B., Eriksson, O., Gonzalez-Perez, C., Ã…gerfalk, P.J.: Ptolemaic Metamodelling? The Need for a Paradigm Shift. In: Reinhartz-Berger, I., Sturm, A., Clark, T., Cohen, S., Bettin, J. (eds.) Research Directions in Domain Engineering. Springer, Berlin (in press, 2013)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Ogden, C.K., Richards, I.A.: The Meaning of Meaning: A Study of the Influence of Language upon Thought and of the Science of Symbolism, Harcourt, Brace, New York (1923)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Aristotle: The Categories; on Interpretation. Harvard University Press; W. Heinemann, Cambridge, Mass. London (1983)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Locke, J.: An Essay Concerning Human Understanding. Clarendon Press, Oxford (1975) (First published 1690)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Dummett, M.: The Seas of Language. Clarendon press, Oxford (1993)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  18. Frege, G.: Über Sinn Und Bedeutung. Zeitschrift für Philosophie und philosophische Kritik 100, 25–50 (1892)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Davis, W.A.: Meaning, Expression and Thought. Cambridge Studies in Philosophy. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Carruthers, P.: Phenomenal Consciousness: A Naturalistic Theory. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2000)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  21. Pinker, S.: The Language Instinct: The New Science of Language and Mind. Penguin, London (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Hume, D.: A Treatise of Human Nature. John Noon, London (1739)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Wittgenstein, L.: Philosophical Investigations. Blackwell Publishing, Oxford (1953)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Partridge, C., Lambert, M., Loneragan, M., Mitchell, A., Garbacz, P.: A Novel Ontological Approach to Semantic Interoperability between Legacy Air Defence Command and Control Systems. International Journal of Intelligent Defence Support Systems 4, 232–262 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Peacocke, C.: Rationale and Maxims in the Study of Concepts. Noûs 39, 167–178 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Peacocke, C.: A Study of Concepts. Representation and Mind. The MIT Press, Cambridge (1992)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Field, H.H.: Science without Numbers: A Defence of Nominalism. Princeton University Press, Princeton (1980)

    Google Scholar 

  28. Benacerraf, P.: Mathematical Truth. The Journal of Philosophy 70(19), 661–679 (1973)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  29. Yablo, S.: Go Figure: A Path through Fictionalism. Midwest Studies in Philosophy 25, 72–102 (2001)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Clark, A.: Supersizing the Mind: Embodiment, Action, and Cognitive Extension. Oxford University Press, New York (2008)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  31. Goldman, A.I.: Foundations of Social Epistemics. Synthese 73, 109–144 (1987)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Kaschek, R.: A Little Theory of Abstraction. In: Proceedings of Modellierung 2004, pp. 75–92. Gesellschaft fűr Informatik, Bonn (2004)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Partridge, C., Gonzalez-Perez, C., Henderson-Sellers, B. (2013). Are Conceptual Models Concept Models? . In: Ng, W., Storey, V.C., Trujillo, J.C. (eds) Conceptual Modeling. ER 2013. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 8217. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-41924-9_9

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-41924-9_9

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-41923-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-41924-9

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics