| 1. |
- Eriksson, Owen, et al.
(författare)
-
Ontological and linguistic metamodelling revisited : A language use approach
- 2013
-
Ingår i: Information and Software Technology. - : Elsevier BV. - 0950-5849 .- 1873-6025. ; 55:12, s. 2099-2124
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Context: Although metamodelling is generally accepted as important for our understanding of software and systems development, arguments about the validity and utility of ontological versus linguistic metamodelling continue. Objective: The paper examines the traditional, metamodel-focused construction of modelling languages in the context of language use, and particularly speech act theory. These concepts are then applied to the problems introduced by the "Orthogonal Classification Architecture" that is often called the ontological/linguistic paradox. The aim of the paper is to show how it is possible to overcome these problems. Method: The paper adopts a conceptual-analytical approach by revisiting the published arguments and developing an alternative metamodelling architecture based on language use. Results: The analysis shows that when we apply a language use perspective of meaning to traditional modelling concepts, a number of incongruities and misconceptions in the traditional approaches are revealed - issues that are not evident in previous work based primarily on set theory. Clearly differentiating between the extensional and intensional aspects of class concepts (as sets) and also between objects (in the social world) and things (in the physical world) allows for a deeper understanding to be gained of the relationship between the ontological and linguistic views promulgated in the modelling world. Conclusions: We propose that a viewpoint that integrates language use ideas into traditional modelling (and metamodelling) is vital, and stress that meaning is not inherent in the physical world; meaning, and thus socially valid objects, are constructed by use of language, which may or may not establish a one-to-one correspondence relationship between objects and physical things.
|
|
| 2. |
- Eriksson, Owen, et al.
(författare)
-
Ptolemaic Metamodelling?: The Need for a Paradigm Shift
- 2013
-
Ingår i: Progressions and Innovations in Model-Driven Software Engineering. - : IGI Global. - 9781466644953
-
Bokkapitel (refereegranskat)abstract
- By consideration of scientific paradigm shifts, in this chapter the authors evaluate possible parallels in the evolution of modelling, and particularly metamodelling and modelling language construction, as a basis for evaluating whether or not the time is ripe for a similar change of direction in model language development for software engineering. Having identified several inconsistencies and paradoxes in the current orthodoxy, they then introduce a number of ideas from outside software engineering (including language use, philosophy, and ontology engineering) that seem to solve many of these issues. Whether these new ideas, together, are sufficient to create a shift in mindset or whether they are simply the stimulus for others to create new and orthogonal ideas remains to be seen. The authors urge the modelling and metamodelling communities to search out that new orthodoxy (i.e. instigate a paradigm shift) that will, necessarily, ensure that the science will offer simpler and more satisfying solutions in the years to come.
|
|
| 3. |
- Henderson-Sellers, Brian, et al.
(författare)
-
On the Need for Identity in Ontology-Based Conceptual Modelling (Keynote Speech)
- 2015
-
Ingår i: <em>Proceedings of the 11th Asia-Pacific Conference on Conceptual Modelling (APCCM 2015)</em>. - Sydney, Australien : ACS. - 9781921770470
-
Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
- Conceptual modelling is often argued to be a core technique in information systems development. An important aspect of conceptual modelling is the ontological and philosophical questions of how to conceive of object existence and identity. Despite significant interest in the topic, formal agreement on how object identity should be represented in modelling languages remains an open question. In the literature, the predominant view is that an object, or entity, is a modelling construct used to represent things. Contrary to this view, we draw on theories of language use and social ontology to understand object identity based on the notion that identity cannot be limited to the identity of physical things. The emphasis is on how language is used to create conceptual entities in a way that maintains fidelity to physical reality and ensures reliable identification of entities across domains. The theoretical implications of this work are primarily the new perspective of conceptual modelling that social ontology affords and the formal introduction and ontological grounding of institutional entities, which have so far been treated rather incidentally. Practical implications include a better foundation for designing and selecting identifiers and classes.
|
|
| 4. |
- Henderson-Sellers, Brian, et al.
(författare)
-
Situational Method Engineering
- 2014
-
Bok (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- While previously available methodologies for software – like those published in the early days of object technology – claimed to be appropriate for every conceivable project, situational method engineering (SME) acknowledges that most projects typically have individual characteristics and situations. Thus, finding the most effective methodology for a particular project needs specific tailoring to that situation. Such a tailored software development methodology needs to take into account all the bits and pieces needed for an organization to develop software, including the software process, the input and output work products, the people involved, the languages used to describe requirements, design, code, and eventually also measures of success or failure.The authors have structured the book into three parts. Part I deals with all the basic concepts, terminology and overall ideas underpinning situational method engineering. As a summary of this part, they present a formal meta-model that enables readers to create their own quality methods and supporting tools. In Part II, they explain how to implement SME in practice, i.e., how to find method components and put them together and how to evaluate the resulting method. For illustration, they also include several industry case studies of customized or constructed processes, highlighting the impact that high-quality engineered methods can have on the success of an industrial software development. Finally, Part III summarizes some of the more recent and forward-looking ideas.This book presents the first summary of the state of the art for SME. For academics, it provides a comprehensive conceptual framework and discusses new research areas. For lecturers, thanks to its step-by-step explanations from basics to the customization and quality assessment of constructed methods, it serves as a solid basis for comprehensive courses on the topic. For industry methodologists, it offers a reference guide on features and technologies to consider when developing in-house software development methods or customising and adopting off-the-shelf ones.
|
|
| 5. |
- Henderson-Sellers, Brian, et al.
(författare)
-
Software Modelling Languages : A Wish List
- 2015
-
Ingår i: Proceedings of the Seventh International Workshop on Modeling in Software Engineering. - : IEEE Press. ; , s. 72-77
-
Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
- Contemporary software engineering modelling tends to rely on general-purpose languages, such as the Unified Modeling Language. However, such languages are practice-based and seldom underpinned with a solid theory – be it mathematical, ontological or concomitant with language use. The future of software modelling deserves research to evaluate whether a language base that is compatible with these various elements as well as being philosophically coherent offers practical advantages to software developers.
|
|
| 6. |
- Hollestelle, Antoinette, et al.
(författare)
-
No clinical utility of KRAS variant rs61764370 for ovarian or breast cancer
- 2016
-
Ingår i: Gynecologic Oncology. - : Elsevier BV. - 0090-8258 .- 1095-6859. ; 141:2, s. 386-401
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objective Clinical genetic testing is commercially available for rs61764370, an inherited variant residing in a KRAS 3′ UTR microRNA binding site, based on suggested associations with increased ovarian and breast cancer risk as well as with survival time. However, prior studies, emphasizing particular subgroups, were relatively small. Therefore, we comprehensively evaluated ovarian and breast cancer risks as well as clinical outcome associated with rs61764370. Methods Centralized genotyping and analysis were performed for 140,012 women enrolled in the Ovarian Cancer Association Consortium (15,357 ovarian cancer patients; 30,816 controls), the Breast Cancer Association Consortium (33,530 breast cancer patients; 37,640 controls), and the Consortium of Modifiers of BRCA1 and BRCA2 (14,765 BRCA1 and 7904 BRCA2 mutation carriers). Results We found no association with risk of ovarian cancer (OR = 0.99, 95% CI 0.94-1.04, p = 0.74) or breast cancer (OR = 0.98, 95% CI 0.94-1.01, p = 0.19) and results were consistent among mutation carriers (BRCA1, ovarian cancer HR = 1.09, 95% CI 0.97-1.23, p = 0.14, breast cancer HR = 1.04, 95% CI 0.97-1.12, p = 0.27; BRCA2, ovarian cancer HR = 0.89, 95% CI 0.71-1.13, p = 0.34, breast cancer HR = 1.06, 95% CI 0.94-1.19, p = 0.35). Null results were also obtained for associations with overall survival following ovarian cancer (HR = 0.94, 95% CI 0.83-1.07, p = 0.38), breast cancer (HR = 0.96, 95% CI 0.87-1.06, p = 0.38), and all other previously-reported associations. Conclusions rs61764370 is not associated with risk of ovarian or breast cancer nor with clinical outcome for patients with these cancers. Therefore, genotyping this variant has no clinical utility related to the prediction or management of these cancers.
|
|
| 7. |
- Szulkin, Robert, et al.
(författare)
-
Prediction of individual genetic risk to prostate cancer using a polygenic score.
- 2015
-
Ingår i: The Prostate. - : Wiley. - 0270-4137 .- 1097-0045. ; 75:13, s. 1467-74
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Polygenic risk scores comprising established susceptibility variants have shown to be informative classifiers for several complex diseases including prostate cancer. For prostate cancer it is unknown if inclusion of genetic markers that have so far not been associated with prostate cancer risk at a genome-wide significant level will improve disease prediction.METHODS: We built polygenic risk scores in a large training set comprising over 25,000 individuals. Initially 65 established prostate cancer susceptibility variants were selected. After LD pruning additional variants were prioritized based on their association with prostate cancer. Six-fold cross validation was performed to assess genetic risk scores and optimize the number of additional variants to be included. The final model was evaluated in an independent study population including 1,370 cases and 1,239 controls.RESULTS: The polygenic risk score with 65 established susceptibility variants provided an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.67. Adding an additional 68 novel variants significantly increased the AUC to 0.68 (P = 0.0012) and the net reclassification index with 0.21 (P = 8.5E-08). All novel variants were located in genomic regions established as associated with prostate cancer risk.CONCLUSIONS: Inclusion of additional genetic variants from established prostate cancer susceptibility regions improves disease prediction.
|
|
| 8. |
- Ågerfalk, Pär, et al.
(författare)
-
Modularization constructs in method engineering : towards common ground?
- 2007
-
Ingår i: Situational method engineering. - Berlin : Springer. - 9780387739465 ; , s. 359-368
-
Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
- Although the Method Engineering (ME) research community has reached considerable maturity, it has not yet been able to agree on the granularity and definition of the configurable parts of methods. This state of affairs is causing unnecessary confusion, especially with an ever increasing number of people contributing to ME research. There are several competing notions around, most significantly ‘method fragments’ and ‘method chunks’, but also ‘method components’ and ‘process components’ are used in some quarters and have also been widely published. Sometimes these terms are used interchangeably, but there appears to be important semantic and pragmatic differences. If the differences are unimportant, we should be able to come to an agreement on what construct to promote. Alternatively, the different constructs may serve different purposes and there is a need for them to coexist. If this is the case, it should be possible to pinpoint exactly how they are related and which are useful in what contexts. This panel is a step towards finding common ground in this area, which arguably is at the very core of ME.
|
|
