Encyclopedia of Database Systems

2018 Edition
| Editors: Ling Liu, M. Tamer Özsu

Multilevel Modeling

  • Bernd Neumayr
  • Christoph G. Schuetz
Reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-8265-9_80807

Synonyms

Deep metamodeling; Deep modeling; Multilevel metamodeling

Definition

Multilevel modeling extends object-oriented modeling with multiple levels of instantiation as well as deep characterization. As opposed to traditional two-level modeling, multilevel modeling overcomes the strict separation of class and object. The clabject, with class facet and object facet, becomes the central modeling element. Multilevel modeling arranges clabjects in arbitrary-depth hierarchies combining aspects of instantiation and specialization. A clabject not only specifies the schema of its members at the instantiation level immediately below but may also specify the schema of the members of its members, and so forth, at arbitrary instantiation levels below, which is referred to as deep characterization.

Historical Background

In object-oriented modeling, a class describes the common attributes of its many instances. An instance of a class is also referred to as object. A class, however, may itself be...

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

References

  1. 1.
    Atkinson C, Kühne T. The essence of multilevel metamodeling. In: Gogolla M, Kobryn C, editors. UML 2001. LNCS, vol. 2185. Springer; 2001. p. 19–33.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Atkinson C, Kühne T. Model-driven development: a metamodeling foundation. IEEE Softw. 2003;20(5):36–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Atkinson C, Kühne T. In defence of deep modelling. Inf Softw Technol. 2015;64(C):36–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Carvalho VA, Almeida JPA, Fonseca CM, Guizzardi G. Extending the foundations of ontology-based conceptual modeling with a multi-level theory. In: Johannesson P, Lee M, Liddle SW, Opdahl AL, López OP, editors. ER 2015. LNCS, vol. 9381. Springer; 2015. p. 119–33.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Eriksson O, Henderson-Sellers B, Ågerfalk PJ. Ontological and linguistic metamodelling revisited: a language use approach. Inf Softw Technol. 2013;55(12):2099–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gonzalez-Perez C, Henderson-Sellers B. A powertype-based metamodelling framework. Softw Syst Model. 2006;5(1):72–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Klas W, Neuhold EJ, Schrefl M. Metaclasses in VODAK and their application in database integration. GMD Technical Report (Arbeitspapiere der GMD); 1990.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    de Lara J, Guerra E, Cobos R, Moreno-Llorena J. Extending deep meta-modelling for practical model-driven engineering. Comput J. 2014;57(1): 36–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    de Lara J, Guerra E, Cuadrado JS. When and how to use multilevel modelling. ACM Trans Softw Eng Methodol. 2014;24(2):12:1–12:46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Neumayr B, Grün K, Schrefl M. Multi-level domain modeling with m-objects and m-relationships. In: Link S, Kirchberg M, editors. Proceedings of the 6th Asia-Pacific Conference on Conceptual Modeling; 2009. p. 107–16.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Neumayr B, Jeusfeld MA, Schrefl M, Schütz C. Dual deep instantiation and its ConceptBase implementation. In: Jarke M, Mylopoulos J, Quix C, Rolland C, Manolopoulos Y, Mouratidis H, Horkoff J, editors. CAiSE 2014. LNCS, vol. 8484. Springer; 2014. p. 503–17.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Odell J. Power types. J Object-Oriented Prog. 1994;7(2):8–12.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Pirotte A, Zimányi E, Massart D, Yakusheva T. Materialization: a powerful and ubiquitous abstraction pattern. In: Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Very Large Data Bases; 1994. p. 630–641.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Schuetz CG. Multilevel business processes – modeling and data analysis. Springer Vieweg Wiesbaden; 2015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Selway M, Stumptner M, Mayer W, Jordan A, Grossmann G, Schrefl M. A conceptual framework for large-scale ecosystem interoperability. In: Johannesson P, Lee M, Liddle SW, Opdahl AL, López OP, editors. ER 2015. LNCS, vol. 9381. Springer; 2015. p. 287–301.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department for Business Informatics – Data and Knowledge EngineeringJohannes Kepler University LinzLinzAustria