Category-Theoretic Formulation of the Model-Based Systems Architecting Cognitive-Computational Cycle
Source abstract
Abstract
We introduce the Concept→Model→Graph→View Cycle (CMGVC). The CMGVC facilitates coherent architecture analysis, reasoning, insight, and decision making based on conceptual models that are transformed into a generic, robust graph data structure (GDS). The GDS is then transformed into multiple views of the model, which inform stakeholders in various ways. This GDS-based approach decouples the view from the model and constitutes a powerful enhancement of model-based systems engineering (MBSE). The CMGVC applies the rigorous foundations of Category Theory, a mathematical framework of representations and transformations. We show that modeling languages are categories, drawing an analogy to programming languages. The CMGVC architecture is superior to direct transformations and language-coupled common representations. We demonstrate the CMGVC to transform a conceptual system architecture model built with the Object Process Modeling Language (OPM) into dual graphs and a stakeholder-informing matrix that stimulates system architecture insight.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Systems Engineering Methodologies and Applications · Product Development and Customization · Software Engineering Techniques and Practices
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Engineering Systems Laboratory, Aeronautics and Astronautics Department, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA 02139, USA
Department of Computer & Information Science and Engineering, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611, USA
Funding
Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency · Technion-Israel Institute of Technology
References (91)
Show source-provided references
1. Are conceptual models concept models?
2. Bailer-Jones, D.M. (2009). Scientific Models in Philosophy of Science, University of Pittsburgh Pre.10.2307/j.ctt5vkdnq ↗
3. System Function and Architecture: OPM-Based Definitions and Operational Templates10.1145/944217.944241 ↗
4. Dori, D. (2016). Model-Based Systems Engineering with OPM and SysML, Springer.10.1007/978-1-4939-3295-5 ↗
5. McDermott, T.A., Hutchinson, N., Clifford, M., Van Aken, E., Slado, A., and Henderson, K. (2020). Benchmarking the Benefits and Current Maturity of Model-Based Systems Engineering across the Enterprise, Systems Engineering Research Center (SERC).
6. Agile digital transformation of System-of-Systems architecture models using Zachman framework
7. Hale, J.P., Zimmerman, P., Kukkala, G., Guerrero, J., Kobryn, P., Puchek, B., Bisconti, M., Baldwin, C., and Mulpuri, M. (2017). Digital Model-Based Engineering: Expectations, Prerequisites, and Challenges of Infusion, NASA.
8. Bone, M., Blackburn, M., Kruse, B., Dzielski, J., Hagedorn, T., and Grosse, I. (2018). Toward an Interoperability and Integration Framework to Enable Digital Thread. Systems, 6.10.3390/systems6040046 ↗
9. Knowledge Representation with Ontologies and Semantic Web Technologies to Promote Augmented and Artificial Intelligence in Systems Engineering10.1002/inst.12279 ↗
10. Mordecai, Y., de Weck, O.L., and Crawley, E.F. (2020, January 8–10). Towards an Enterprise Architecture for a Digital Systems Engineering Ecosystem. Proceedings of the Conference on Systems Engineering Research (CSER), Virtual, Redondo Beach, CA, USA.
11. Equations aren’t enough: Informal modeling in design10.1017/S0890060400000354 ↗
12. Sharpe, J.E.E., and Bracewell, R.H. (1993, January 17–20). Application of bond graph methodology to concurrent conceptual design of interdisciplinary systems. Proceedings of the IEEE Systems Man and Cybernetics Conference—SMC, Le Touquet, France.
13. Ernadote, D. (2015, January 28–30). An ontology mindset for system engineering. Proceedings of the 2015 IEEE International Symposium on Systems Engineering (ISSE), Rome, Italy.10.1109/SysEng.2015.7302797 ↗
14. Cotter, M., Hadjimichael, M., Markina-khusid, A., and York, B. (2020, January 8–10). Automated Detection of Architecture Patterns in MBSE Models. Proceedings of the Conference on Systems Engineering Research (CSER), Redondo Beach, CA, USA.
15. Building agility for developing agile design information systems
16. Dennis, A.R., Hayes, G.S., and Daniels, R.M. (1994, January 4–7). Re-engineering business process modeling. Proceedings of the 1994 Proceedings of the Twenty-Seventh Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Maui, HI, USA.10.1109/HICSS.1994.323490 ↗
17. Object Management Group (OMG) (2015). OMG Unified Modeling Language (OMG UML), OMG.
18. United States Department of Defense (DoD) (2020, December 03). The DoDAF Architecture Framework Version 2, Available online: https://dodcio.defense.gov/Library/DoD-Architecture-Framework/.
19. Fong, B., and Spivak, D.I. (2018). Seven Sketches in Compositionality: An Invitation to Applied Category Theory. arXiv.10.1017/9781108668804 ↗
20. Chakraborty, S. (2011). Curry-Howard-Lambek Correspondence, University of Calgary. Available online: http://pages.cpsc.ucalgary.ca/~robin/class/617/projects-10/Subashis.pdf.
21. Hamilton, M. (2016). Category Theory and the Curry-Howard-Lambek Correspondence, Yale University. Available online: https://mhamilton.net/files/chl.pdf2016.
22. Programming as theory building10.1016/0165-6074(85)90032-8 ↗
23. (2015). ISO/TC 184: ISO 19450 Automation Systems and Integration—Object-Process Methodology, International Organization for Standardization (ISO).
24. Crawley, E., Cameron, B., and Selva, D. (2016). Systems Architecture: Strategy and Product Development for Complex Systems, Pearson Higher Education.
25. Mordecai, Y., and Dori, D. (2016, January 18–21). Model-Based Operational-Functional Unified Specification for Mission Systems. Proceedings of the 10th Annual IEEE International Systems Conference (SysCon), Orlando, FL, USA.10.1109/SYSCON.2016.7490662 ↗
26. Mordecai, Y., and Dori, D. (2017, January 11–13). Model-based requirements engineering: Architecting for system requirements with stakeholders in mind. Proceedings of the IEEE International Symposium on Systems Engineering, ISSE, Vienna, Austria.10.1109/SysEng.2017.8088273 ↗
27. Osorio, C.A., Dori, D., and Sussman, J. (2011). COIM: An Object-Process Based Method for Analyzing Architectures of Complex, Interconnected, Large-Scale Socio-Technical Systems. Syst. Eng., 14.10.1002/sys.20185 ↗
28. Dori, D., Jbara, A., Levi, N., and Wengrowicz, N. (2020, December 03). Object-Process Methodology, OPM ISO 19450—OPCloud and the Evolution of OPM Modeling Tools. Systems Engineering Newsletter (PPI SyEn), 61, 30 January 2018. Available online: https://www.ppi-int.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/SyEN-061.pdf.
29. Wrycza, S., and Maślankowski, J. (2019). Model-Based Diagnosis with FTTell: Assessing the Potential for Pediatric Failure to Thrive (FTT) During the Perinatal Stage. SIGSAND/PLAIS, LNBIP 359, Springer Nature.
30. Kenett, R.S., Swarz, R.S., and Zonnenshain, A. (2020). OPCloud: An OPM Integrated Conceptual-Executable Modeling Environment for Industry 4. Systems Engineering in the Fourth Industrial Revolution: Big Data, Novel Technologies, and Modern Systems Engineering, Wiley.10.1002/9781119513957 ↗
31. Mordecai, Y., James, N.K., and Crawley, E.F. (2020, January 7–14). Object-Process Model-Based Operational Viewpoint Specification for Aerospace Architectures. Proceedings of the IEEE Aerospace Conference, Big Sky, MT, USA.10.1109/AERO47225.2020.9172685 ↗
32. Ford Motor Company (2020, November 20). Lane-Keeping System. Available online: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8O3u20MBmsE.
33. Object Management Group (2019). Unified Architecture Framework Profile (UAFP), Object Management Group.
34. Design Structure Matrix Extensions and Innovations: A Survey and New Opportunities10.1109/TEM.2015.2491283 ↗
35. Sharon, A., Dori, D., and de Weck, O. (2009, January 15–17). Model-Based Design Structure Matrix: Deriving a DSM from an Object-Process Model. Proceedings of the Second International Symposium on Engineering Systems, Cambridge, MA, USA.
36. A Project–Product Model–Based Approach to Planning Work Breakdown Structures of Complex System Projects10.1109/JSYST.2013.2297491 ↗
37. Do, S., and Weck, O. (2014, January 13–17). De: A Grammar for Encoding and Synthesizing Life Support. Proceedings of the 44th International Conference on Environmental Systems, Tucson, AZ, USA.
38. Generation of a function-component-parameter multi-domain matrix from structured textual function specifications10.1007/s00163-018-0284-9 ↗
39. Specifying Process Activities for Multi-Domain Matrix Analysis Using a Structured Textual Format10.1017/dsi.2019.167 ↗
40. Object Management Group (2015). OMG Systems Modeling Language (OMG SysMLTM), Object Management Group (OMG). Version 1.4.
41. Present and future languages—How innovation has changed us10.4067/S0718-27242015000200012 ↗
42. Johnson, J.M. (2017). Analysis of Mission Effectiveness: Modern System Architectures Tools for Project Developers, Naval Postgraduate School.
43. Kong, P.O. (2014). Spreadsheet-Based Graphical User Interface for Modeling of Products Using the Systems Engineering Process. (8,626,477), US Patent.
44. Wymore, W.A. (1993). Model-Based Systems Engineering, CRC Press.
45. Breiner, S., Subrahmanian, E., and Jones, A. (2017). Categorical foundations for system engineering. Discip. Converg. Syst. Eng. Res., 449–463.10.1007/978-3-319-62217-0_32 ↗
46. Subrahmanian, E., Reich, Y., and Krishnan, S. (2020). The Story of n-Dim. We Are Not Users: Dialogues, Diversity, and Design, MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/11931.001.0001 ↗
47. Breiner, S., Pollard, B., and Subrahmanian, E. (2020). Workshop on Applied Category Theory: Bridging Theory and Practice, NIST.10.6028/NIST.SP.1249 ↗
48. Patterson, E. (2020). Hausdorff and Wasserstein metrics on graphs and other structured data. Inf. Inference A J. IMA., iaaa025.10.1093/imaiai/iaaa025 ↗
49. Koo, H.-Y.B. (2005). A Meta-Language for Systems Architecting, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
50. Koo, B., Hurd, A., Loda, D., Dori, D., and Crawley, E.F. (2004, January 16–24). Architecting Systems Under Uncertainty with Object-Process Networks. Proceedings of the International Conference on Complex Systems (ICCS’04), Boston, MA, USA.
51. Spivak, D.I., and Kent, R.E. (2012). Ologs: A categorical framework for knowledge representation. PLoS ONE, 7.10.1371/journal.pone.0024274 ↗
52. Category theory as a formal mathematical foundation for model-based systems engineering10.18576/amis/110106 ↗
53. Uncertainty in Monotone Codesign Problems10.1109/LRA.2017.2674970 ↗
54. A Class of Co-Design Problems with Cyclic Constraints and Their Solution10.1109/LRA.2016.2535127 ↗
55. Legatiuk, D., Dragos, K., and Smarsly, K. (2017). Modeling and evaluation of cyber-physical systems in civil engineering. Proc. Appl. Math. Mech., 17.10.1002/pamm.201710371 ↗
56. Compositional Cyber-Physical Systems Modeling
57. Kibret, N., Edmonson, W., and Gebreyohannes, S. (2019, January 8–11). Category theoretic based formalization of the verifiable design process. Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE International Systems Conference (SysCon), Orlando, FL, USA.10.1109/SYSCON.2019.8836804 ↗
58. Formal behavioral requirements management10.1109/JSYST.2017.2775740 ↗
59. Breiner, S., Sriram, R.D., and Subrahmanian, E. (2019). Compositional Models for Complex Systems. Artificial Intelligence for the Internet of Everything, Academic Press.10.1016/B978-0-12-817636-8.00013-2 ↗
60. Leveraging category theory in model based enterprise
61. Foley, J.D., Breiner, S., Subrahmanian, E., and Dusel, J.M. (2021). Operads for complex system design specification, analysis and synthesis. arXiv.10.1098/rspa.2021.0099 ↗
62. Breiner, S., Pollard, B., Subrahmanian, E., and Marie-Rose, O. (2020). Modeling hierarchical system with operads. Proc. ACT.10.4204/EPTCS.323.5 ↗
63. Diskin, Z., and Maibaum, T. (2012). Category theory and model-driven engineering: From formal semantics to design patterns and beyond. Proc. Seventh ACCAT Work. Appl. Comput. Categ. Theory.10.4204/EPTCS.93.1 ↗
64. Diskin, Z., Gómez, A., and Cabot, J. (2017). Traceability mappings as a fundamental instrument in model transformations. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Proceedings of the International Conference on Fundamental Approaches to Software Engineering, Uppsala, Sweden, 22–29 April 2017, Springer.10.1007/978-3-662-54494-5_14 ↗
65. Development of conceptual modeling method to solve the tasks of computer-aided design of difficult technical complexes on the basis of category theory
66. Cafezeiro, I., and Haeusler, E.H. (2007, January 5–9). Semantic interoperability via category theory. Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on Conceptual Modeling, Auckland, New Zealand.
67. Boulanger, F., Krob, D., Morel, G., and Roussel, J.C. (2015). A Formal Foundation of Systems Engineering. Complex Systems Design & Management, Springer International Publishing.10.1007/978-3-319-11617-4 ↗
68. Libkind, S. (2020). An Algebra of Resource Sharing Machines. arXiv.
69. Baez, J.C., Fong, B., and Pollard, B.S. (2016). A compositional framework for Markov processes. J. Math. Phys., 57.10.1063/1.4941578 ↗
70. Halter, M., Herlihy, C., and Fairbanks, J. (2019). A Compositional Framework for Scientific Model Augmentation. arXiv.10.4204/EPTCS.323.12 ↗
71. Herlihy, C., Cao, K., Reparti, S., Briscoe, E., and Fairbanks, J. (2019). Semantic Program Analysis for Scientific Model Augmentation. Modeling the World’s Systems, Georgia Tech Research Institute.
72. Halter, M., Patterson, E., Baas, A., and Fairbanks, J.P. (2020). Compositional Scientific Computing with Catlab and SemanticModels. arXiv.
73. New roles for machine learning in design10.1016/0954-1810(93)90003-X ↗
74. Needham, M., and Hodler, A.E. (2019). Graph Algorithms—Practical Examples in Apache Spark & Neo4j, O’Reilly Media, Inc.
75. Webber, J., and Van Bruggen, R. (2020). Graph Databases, John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
76. Medvedev, D., Shani, U., and Dori, D. (2021). Gaining Insights into Conceptual Models: A Graph-Theoretic Querying Approach. Appl. Sci., 11.10.3390/app11020765 ↗
77. ViSWeb—The Visual Semantic Web: Unifying human and machine knowledge representations with Object-Process Methodology10.1007/s00778-004-0120-x ↗
78. Shani, U., Jacobs, S., Wengrowicz, N., and Dori, D. (2016, January 22–24). Engaging ontologies to break MBSE tools boundaries through Semantic Mediation. Proceedings of the Conference on Systems Engineering Research, Huntsville, AL, USA.
79. Zhu, Y., Wan, J., Zhou, Z., Chen, L., Qiu, L., Zhang, W., Jiang, X., and Yu, Y. (2019, January 21–25). Triple-to-text: Converting RDF triples into high-quality natural languages via optimizing an inverse KL divergence. Proceedings of the 42nd International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, Paris, France.10.1145/3331184.3331232 ↗
80. Complex systems analysis of hybrid warfare10.1016/j.procs.2019.05.072 ↗
81. Model-Based Interoperability Engineering in Systems-of-Systems and Civil Aviation10.1109/TSMC.2016.2602543 ↗
82. Embley, D.W., and Thalheim, B. (2011). The Theory of Conceptual Models, the Theory of Conceptual Modelling and Foundations of Conceptual Modelling. Handbook of Conceptual Modeling, Springer.10.1007/978-3-642-15865-0 ↗
83. Object Management Group (2019). OMG Systems Modeling Language, Object Management Group. Version 1.6.
84. Booch, G., Rumbaugh, J., and Jacobson, I. (1998). The Unified Modeling Language User Guide, Addison Wesley.
85. (2020, November 26). MathWorks: Graph with Directed Edges—MATLAB. Available online: https://www.mathworks.com/help/matlab/ref/digraph.html.
86. Spivak, D.I. (2010). Databases are Categories. Galois Connections, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
87. Grand challenges in model-driven engineering: An analysis of the state of the research10.1007/s10270-019-00773-6 ↗
88. Zeigler, B., Mittal, S., and Traore, M. (2018). MBSE with/out Simulation: State of the Art and Way Forward. Systems, 6.10.3390/systems6040040 ↗
89. NAFEMS, and INCOSE (2019). What Is Systems Modeling and Simulation?. NAFEMS. Available online: https://www.nafems.org/community/working-groups/systems-modeling-simulation/.
90. Implementation of formal standard for interoperability in M&S/systems of systems integration with DEVS/SOA
91. Agent Based Modelling and Simulation tools: A review of the state-of-art software10.1016/j.cosrev.2017.03.001 ↗