skip to main content
10.1145/3411564.3411621acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagessbsiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

How can interoperability approaches impact on Systems-of-Information Systems characteristics?

Published:03 November 2020Publication History

ABSTRACT

Systems-of-Information Systems are a specific type of systems-of-systems composed of independent information systems working together to deliver new capabilities. Despite the benefits of the synergistic collaboration of IS, the establishment of interoperability links in the context of a SoIS is still a challenge, specially because of the characteristics of this type of complex systems, i.e., autonomy, belonging, connectivity, diversity, dynamism, emergent behavior, evolutionary development, interdependence. The purpose of this paper is to analyze how approaches to establish interoperability may affect these specific characteristics of SoIS. We analyzed interoperability approaches defined in ISO14258 (integrated, unified, federated) and discussed their implications in designing and managing interoperability in SoIS. We used a knowledge base containing ontological descriptions for well-known interoperability problems and their solutions to support our discussion. As a contribution, we provide a reference for SoIS architects on interoperability approaches and their impacts.

References

  1. 1990. IEEE Standard Glossary of Software Engineering Terminology. IEEE Std 610.12-1990(1990), 1–84.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Sharada Alampalli and Theresa Pardo. 2014. A study of complex systems developed through public private partnerships. In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance. ACM, Guimarães, Portugal, 442–445.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. BKCASE Editorial Board. 2017. The Guide to the Systems Engineering Body of Knowledge (SEBoK), v. 1.9.1. Technical Report.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. J. Boardman and B. Sauser. 2006. System of Systems - the meaning of ’of’. In IEEE/SMC International Conference on System of Systems Engineering. IEEE, Los Angeles, USA, 1–6.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Clodis Boscarioli, Renata Araujo, and Rita Suzana. 2017. Grand Research Challenges in Information Systems in Brazil 2016 - 2026. Brazilian Computer Society.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Susanne Busse, Ralf-Detlef Kutsche, Ulf Leser, and Herbert Weber. 1999. Federated information systems: Concepts, terminology and architectures. Forschungsberichte des Fachbereichs Informatik 99, 9(1999), 1–38.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. David Chen. 2017. Framework for Enterprise Interoperability. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, Chapter 1, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119407928.ch1Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. David Chen and Guy Doumeingts. 2004. Basic Concepts and Approaches to Develop Interoperability of Enterprise Applications. Springer US, Boston, MA, 323–330. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-35704-1_34Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Michele Dassisti, Ricardo Jardim-Goncalves, Arturo Molina, Ovidiu Noran, Hervé Panetto, and Milan M Zdravković. 2013. Sustainability and interoperability: Two facets of the same gold medal. In OTM Confederated International Conferences” On the Move to Meaningful Internet Systems”. Springer, 250–261.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. Daniel DeLaurentis and Muharrem Mane. 2009. Acquisition management for systems-of-systems: Exploratory model development and experimentation. In 6th Annual Acquisition Research Symposium of the Naval Postgraduate School: Volume I: Defense Acquisition in Transition. 42 – 58.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Juliana Fernandes, Francisco Henrique Cerdeira Ferreira, Felipe Cordeiro de Paula, Valdemar Vicente Graciano Neto, and Rodrigo Pereira dos Santos. 2019. A Conceptual Model for Systems-of-Information Systems. IEEE 20th International Conference on Information Reuse and Integration for Data Science, 364–371.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Marcelo Benites Gonçalves, Everton Cavalcante, Thais Batista, Flavio Oquendo, and Elisa Yumi Nakagawa. 2014. Towards a conceptual model for Software-intensive System-of-Systems. In IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics (SMC 2014). IEEE, San Diego, USA, 1605–1610.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. Valdemar Vicente Graciano Neto, Everton Cavalcante, Jamal El Hachem, and Daniel Soares Santos. 2017. On the Interplay of Business Process Modeling and Missions in Systems-of-Information Systems. In IEEE/ACM JSOS. IEEE, Buenos Aires, Argentina, 72–73.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Valdemar Vicente Graciano Neto, Flavio Oquendo, and Elisa Yumi Nakagawa. 2016. Systems-of-Systems: Challenges for Information Systems Research in the Next 10 Years. In Big Research Challenges in Information Systems. Florianópolis, Brazil, 1–3.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. R. Hellman. 2010. Organisational barriers to interoperability. In eChallenges e-2010 Conference. 1–9.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. ISO 14258 (1998). Industrial automation systems and integration – Concepts and rules for enterprise models. Standard. International Organization for Standardization.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Kurt Kosanke. 2006. ISO Standards for Interoperability: a comparison. In Interoperability of enterprise software and applications. Springer, 55–64.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Cristiane Aparecida Lana, Nilton Mendes Souza, Márcio Eduardo Delamaro, Elisa Yumi Nakagawa, Flávio Oquendo, and José Carlos Maldonado. 2016. Systems-of-systems development: Initiatives, trends, and challenges. In 2016 XLII Latin American Computing Conference (CLEI). 1–12.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. Ken Laudon and Jane Laudon. 2009. Management Information Systems(11 ed.). Pearson.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Kenneth C Laudon and Jane Price Laudon. 2015. Management information systems. Vol. 8. Prentice Hall.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Julio Cesar Sampaio do Prado LEITE. 1994. Organização Federativa de Sistemas de Informação. Revista de divulgação da CELEPAR–Informática do Paraná. In Portuguese(1994).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Yan Lu, Hervé Panetto, and Xinjian Gu. 2010. Ontology approach for the interoperability of networked enterprises in supply chain environment. In OTM Confederated International Conferences” On the Move to Meaningful Internet Systems”. Springer, 229–238.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. Rita Suzana P. Maciel, José Maria N. David, Daniela Barreiro Claro, and Regina Braga. 2017. Full Interoperability: Challenges and Opportunities for Future Information Systems. Brazilian Computer Society, 107–118.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Mark W. Maier. 1996. Architecting Principles for Systems-of-Systems. INCOSE International Symposium 6, 1 (1996), 565–573. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2334-5837.1996.tb02054.xGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Mark W. Maier. 1998. Architecting principles for systems-of-systems. Systems Engineering 1, 4 (1998), 267–284.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. Yannick Naudet, Thibaud Latour, Wided Guedria, and David Chen. 2010. Towards a systemic formalisation of interoperability. Computers in Industry 61, 2 (2010), 176–185.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  27. Yannick Naudet, Thibaud Latour, Kevin Hausmann, Sven Abels, Axel Hahn, and Paul Johannesson. 2006. Describing Interoperability: the OoI Ontology. In Proceedings of the Open Interop Workshop on Enterprise Modelling and Ontologies for Interoperability, Co-located with CAiSE’06 Conference. Luxembourg, Luxembourg.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Valdemar V. Graciano Neto, Flavio Horita, Everton Cavalcante, Adair Rohling, Jamal El-Hachem, Daniel Santos, and Elisa Y. Nakagawa. 2018. A Study on Goals Specification for Systems-of-Information Systems: Design Principles and a Conceptual Model. In Proceedings of the XIV Brazilian Symposium on Information Systems(SBSI’18). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article Article 21, 8 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3229345.3229369Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. Valdemar Vicente Graciano Neto, Flavio Oquendo, and Elisa Yumi Nakagawa. 2017. Smart systems-of-information systems: Foundations and an assessment model for research development. Grand Challenges in Information Systems for the next 10 (2017), 1–12.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. C.B. Nielsen, P.G. Larsen, J. Fitzgerald, J. Woodcock, and J. Peleska. 2015. Systems of systems engineering: Basic concepts, model-based techniques, and research directions. Comput. Surveys 48, 2 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1145/2794381Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. Joseph D Novak and Alberto J Cañas. 2008. The theory underlying concept maps and how to construct and use them. (2008).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Julio M Ottino. 2004. Engineering complex systems. Nature 427, 6973 (2004), 399.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Alejandro Salado. 2015. Abandonment: A natural consequence of autonomy and belonging in systems-of-systems. In 2015 10th System of Systems Engineering Conference (SoSE). IEEE, 352–357.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  34. A. Salado. 2016. Exile: A natural consequence of autonomy and belonging in systems-of-systems. In Annual IEEE Systems Conference (SysCon). 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1109/SYSCON.2016.7490598Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  35. Delfina de Sá Soares and Luis Amaral. 2014. Reflections on the concept of interoperability in information systems. In Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems, Vol. 1. SCITEPRESS–Science and Technology Publications, 331–339.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. Gabriel Teixeira, Victor Hugo L. Lopes, Rodrigo P. Santos, Mohamad Kassab, and Valdemar Vicente Graciano Neto. 2019. The Status Quo of Systems-of-Information Systems. In 7th SESoS/13th WDES. Montreal, Canada, 34–41.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. Zhiying Tu, Gregory Zacharewicz, and David Chen. 2016. A federated approach to develop enterprise interoperability. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing 27, 1 (2016), 11–31.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. Bernard Walliser. 1977. Systèmes et modèles: introduction critique à l’analyse de systèmes. Editions du Seuil.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. Georg Weichhart. 2014. Requirements for Supporting Enterprise Interoperability in Dynamic Environments. In Enterprise Interoperability VI. Springer, 479–488.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. Georg Weichhart and Dominik Wachholder. 2014. On the interoperability contributions of S-BPM. In International Conference on Subject-Oriented Business Process Management. Springer, 3–19.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Recommendations

Comments

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Sign in
  • Published in

    cover image ACM Other conferences
    SBSI '20: Proceedings of the XVI Brazilian Symposium on Information Systems
    November 2020
    371 pages

    Copyright © 2020 ACM

    Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    • Published: 3 November 2020

    Permissions

    Request permissions about this article.

    Request Permissions

    Check for updates

    Qualifiers

    • research-article
    • Research
    • Refereed limited

    Acceptance Rates

    Overall Acceptance Rate181of557submissions,32%

PDF Format

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

HTML Format

View this article in HTML Format .

View HTML Format