Patent Document

CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATION 
     This application claims the benefit under 35 U.S.C. §119(e) of U.S. Provisional Application Ser. No. 61/238,896 filed Sep. 1, 2009 the disclosure of which is incorporated herein by reference in its entirety. 
    
    
     FIELD OF THE INVENTION 
     This disclosure is generally related to modeling technology and more particularly related to data modeling of a multi-model representation of a product system. 
     BACKGROUND 
     In designing a product system, whether it be a computer system or other systems such as an aircraft, a ship, a missile, etc., incomplete product system design specifications can lead to serious problems that do not manifest themselves until very late in the product system development cycle—when the costs to repair such problems can be astronomical. Model-driven design techniques can expose design flaws early in the product system development cycle and minimize the cost of design change. 
     Invariably, multiple models are needed to comprehensively model all aspects of a product system under design, encompassing system structure and behavior, and possibly other aspects such as cost. However, general-purpose modeling languages lack the semantic precision required to model all aspects of a system. In order to capture domain-specific semantics, these general-purpose modeling languages may be extended with domain-specific extensions (e.g., the UML profile for Modeling and Analysis of Real-time and Embedded systems). Alternately, one could use Domain Specific Modeling Languages (DSMLs) that offer capabilities needed for the specific purpose—e.g., use MATLAB® for mathematical models or Simulink® for simulation models. In either case, no single modeling language can be rich enough to capture all aspects of a system under design. 
     Therefore, there is a need for model-centric systems engineering and development that does not require or depend on the existence of a single all-encompassing general-purpose model language. Multi-modeling, the use of multiple models, appears to be a better approach. However, the use of multiple models that deal with diverse aspects of the system under design presents several challenges such as data and semantic consistency. 
     SUMMARY 
     According to an embodiment of the present disclosure, a data model representing a multi-model database of a product system is disclosed. Such multi-model database comprises a multi-model repository that holds the multi-model database&#39;s artifacts under version control. The multi-model repository comprises a plurality of constituent models, wherein each model represents a discrete aspect of the system, a model registry containing a list of the constituent models in the multi-model database, a set of input and output attributes corresponding to each of the models, a set of interfaces representing a tuple corresponding to each of the models, a set of attribute constraints associated with the input and output attributes, and a set of notifications associated with each of the models for informing the models of defined events. A tuple represents the notion of an ordered list of elements. Here, the tuple contains a mapping operation and the set of input attributes and the set of output attributes. 
     The data model of a multi-model database of a system allows for integration of a wide variety of modeling tools using a uniform representation of models and data model. The modelers (system designers) can freely construct multiple models using a suite of diverse domain-specific modeling languages (DSMLs) or general purpose modeling languages where each modeling language allows specific aspects of a system to be precisely modeled and interrelate the various models into a composition as a multi-model database. 
     According to another embodiment, a computer database system is disclosed. The computer database system comprises a processing unit and data storage that is accessible by the processing unit. The data storage stores a multi-model database of a product system therein. The multi-model database comprises a multi-model repository that holds the multi-model database&#39;s artifacts under version control, wherein the multi-model repository comprises a plurality of models (where each model represents a discrete aspect of the system), a model registry containing a list of the models in the multi-model database, a set of input and output attributes corresponding to each of the models, a set of interfaces representing a tuple corresponding to each of the models (wherein said tuple containing a mapping operation and said set of input attributes and set of output attributes), a set of attribute constraints associated with the input and output attributes, and a set of notifications associated with each of the models for informing the models of defined events. 
    
    
     
       BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS 
       These and other features and advantages of the present invention will be more fully disclosed in the following detailed description of a preferred embodiment of the invention, which is to be considered together with the accompanying drawings wherein like numbers refer to like parts, and further wherein: 
         FIG. 1  is a schematic representation of the organization of the multi-model repository according to an embodiment of the present disclosure. 
         FIG. 2  is a graphic representation of the multi-model repository&#39;s layout. 
         FIG. 3  is a graphic representation of the attributes directory repository layout. 
         FIG. 4  is a graphic representation of the execution directory repository layout. 
         FIG. 5  is a graphic representation of the interfaces directory repository layout. 
         FIG. 6  is a graphic representation of the models directory repository layout. 
         FIG. 7  is a graphic representation of the notifications directory repository layout. 
         FIG. 8  shows the schema for simple attributes. 
         FIG. 9  shows a sample of a simple attribute file in XML format. 
         FIG. 10  shows the schema for model interfaces. 
         FIG. 11  shows a sample of XML interface file. 
         FIG. 12  shows the schema for the model registry. 
         FIG. 13  shows an example of XML model registry file. 
         FIG. 14  shows a computer database system according to an embodiment of the present disclosure. 
     
    
    
     All drawings are schematic and are not intended to show any dimensions to scale. 
     DETAILED DESCRIPTION 
     This description of the preferred embodiments is intended to be read in conjunction with the accompanying drawings, which are to be considered part of the entire written description of this invention. 
     Referring to the schematic diagram of  FIG. 1 , a data model representing a multi-model database  100  of a computer system according to an embodiment of the present disclosure is described. The multi-model database  100  is constructed from models data dataset  111  for a plurality of constituent models using DSMLs and can represent a wide variety of modeling paradigms. The multi-model database  100  can be constructed by treating each of the constituent models  111  as black boxes that can operate with a set of data items as inputs and produce a set of data items as outputs. 
     The multi-model database  100  is comprised of various entities or datasets. We use the term artifacts to describe these datasets that define the multi-model database  100 . These artifacts include a model registry dataset  112 , the constituent models data dataset  111 , model interfaces dataset  114 , model attributes dataset  113 , model attribute constraints dataset  115 , model data editing tools dataset  122  (e.g. DSML tools), notifications dataset  124 , and multi-model execution control dataset  126 . All of the artifacts are stored in a multi-model repository  110  which is preferably version controlled using a version control system  130 . This allows the entire multi-model database  100  to be reconstructed at any point during the evolution and for distributed collaboration via modifications to artifacts in the multi-model repository  110 . 
     The model registry dataset  112  is used to determine membership in the multi-model database  100 . The model registry dataset  112  is a list of a plurality of constituent DSML models that are participating in the multi-model. If a constituent model is removed from the model registry dataset  112 , the artifacts that correspond to that model remain in the multi-model repository  110 , but that model will not participate in the multi-model. Each entry in the model registry dataset  112  is a proxy for a corresponding models data dataset  111 . The models data dataset  111  comprises the plurality of the DSML models and is stored in whatever format the model data editing tools dataset  122  choose to maintain the data. Although not required, by storing the models data dataset  111  and model editing tools dataset  122  in the multi-model repository  110 , a more complete set of operations is possible. 
     Each of the constituent models in the models data dataset  111  can be considered as essentially a mapping operation written in a modeling language, L i , over a set of inputs, that produces a set of outputs. A model, M j , is associated with a set of attributes that are inputs I j ={a 1 , a 2 , . . . , a n }, which may be empty, and a set of attributes that are outputs O j ={a′ 1 , a′ 2 , . . . , a′ n }, which may also be empty. We can then represent the model, M j  by the tuple M j (L i , I j , O j ) containing a mapping operation, L i , and the set of input, I j , output, O j , model attributes. This tuple is the interface data that the model exposes to the system by adding it to the model interface dataset  114  of the multi-model repository  110 . A multi-model database  100 , M, can then be defined as a set of models M={M 1 , M 2 , . . . , M m }. To synchronize execution of the multi-model, we require that an attribute is owned by a single constituent model and can only be written by the model that owns it. That is, if a i ∈O j , then a i ∉O n ∀O n≠j ∈M. 
     The constituent models can have an attribute constraints dataset  115  associated with their input attributes and output attributes. These attribute constraints can be thought of as triggers on the value of the associated attribute. If a first constituent model has a constraint on input attribute a i  associated with or owned by a second model, then the first model is notified when the second model that owns a i  outputs a value that violates this constraint. Output constraints are used by a model to ensure that the attributes that are written are valid from the point of view of the model that writes them. 
     The model data editing tool dataset  122  artifacts are model-editing tools, or references to them, that correspond to the constituent models. For example, in case of a MATLAB® model, the model data editing tool can be either the actual MATLAB® software, or a reference to the specific version of MATLAB® program used to create the model. 
     A set of notifications dataset  124  artifacts are messages that are sent to the constituent models to inform them of occurrence of defined events. For example, when a modeler edits one of the plurality of DSML models which generates a change to an output attribute that violates some attribute constraint, a notification is sent to the affected models. 
     Multi-model execution control dataset  126  artifacts consist of multi-model execution plan, its modifications, and message queues. When a multi-model administrator, who maintains the multi-model repository  110 , makes a change to the execution plan, the resulting plan and the changes are stored in these artifacts. Moreover, when the execution co-ordination engine orchestrates the execution, it needs to send and receive messages from the individual models. These artifacts also capture the queues containing those messages. 
     The multi-model database  100  incorporates a version control system  130 , thus incorporating the commonly used basic version control system operations such as check-in, check-out and history examination into the multi-model repository  110 . This can be realized by using a commonly available open source version control system, such as a Subversion repository. The use of a source code version control system such as Subversion enables versioning of models and their shared concepts (attributes) so that exploration of the design space can be accomplished in a systematic and controlled manner. 
     The multi-model database  100  of the present disclosure can provide a sandbox feature so that modelers can interact with the multi-model repository  110  through local copies of the multi-model repository  110  in sandboxes. Sandboxes allow modelers to work on local copies of their constituent models without being affected by concurrent changes to the multi-model from other modelers. To interact with a project, modelers checkout local copies of the repository and make modifications. The modifications are communicated to other models by synchronization with the global version of the repository. 
     The concept of the sandbox, sometimes also called a working directory, a test server or a development server, is typically built into version control software such as CVS and Subversion, in which developers “check out” a copy of the source code tree, or a branch thereof, to examine and work on. 
     The term sandbox generally refers to a testing environment that isolates untested code changes and outright experimentation from the production environment or repository, in the context of software development and revision control. Sandboxing protects “live” servers and their data, vetted source code distributions, and other collections of code, data and/or content, proprietary or public, from changes that could be damaging to a mission-critical system or which could simply be difficult to revert. Sandboxes replicate at least the minimal functionality needed to accurately test the programs or other code under development (e.g. usage of the same environment variables as, or access to an identical database to that used by, the stable prior implementation intended to be modified). There are many other possibilities, as the specific functionality needs vary widely with the nature of the code and the application[s] for which it is intended. 
     Only after the developer has fully tested the code changes in their own sandbox should the changes be checked back into and merged with the multi-model repository  110  and thereby made available to other developers or end users of the software. 
     Although the embodiment of the multi-model database  100  shown in  FIG. 1  is described in the context of multiple models for a computer system, the scope of the present disclosure is also applicable to other systems that a modeler may design using one of the one or more remote-client computers  10   (1)  . . .  10   (n) . For example, a product system can be a glider with no computer system on it. The modeler may design the glider using multiple models, e.g. 
     an aerodynamic model, a reliability model, and a cost model, etc. to help design the glider. The multiple models for the glider would be stored in the multi-model database  100  implemented on a computer database system (see  FIG. 14 ), although the system (the glider) being modeled is not a computer system. 
       FIG. 2  shows the organization of the multi-model repository  110  in a file tree format.  FIGS. 3 through 7  show the layout of the sub-directories of the multi-model repository  110 . The DSML models are preferably stored in separate directories under the “models” subdirectory  111  of the multi-model repository  110  as shown in  FIG. 6 . 
     Attributes are pieces of data that are shared between the constituent models such as the input and output attributes discussed above. Attributes are saved in XML files  113   b  in the model attributes dataset  113  as shown in  FIG. 3 . Each attribute uses a schema that defines what kind of data it holds. Schema generally refers to a structure of a database system or a data set described in a formal language supported by the database management system.  FIG. 8  shows an attribute schema  113   a  for simple attributes. The attribute schema  113   a  is required at a minimum to support the concept of ownership and a field that holds the value of the attribute. As discussed earlier, although attributes hold data that is shared between the constituent models, an attribute can only be written by a model that owns it and the attribute schema  113   a  maintains the ownership information. An example of an attribute file  113   b  is shown in  FIG. 9 . Table 1 describes an example of the fields in a minimal attribute file  113   b . 
     
       
         
               
               
               
               
             
           
               
                   
                 TABLE 1 
               
               
                   
                   
               
               
                   
                 Field 
                 Required 
                 Description 
               
               
                   
                   
               
             
             
               
                   
                 owner 
                 yes 
                 Model that created the attribute 
               
               
                   
                 value 
                 yes 
                 Value of the attribute 
               
               
                   
                 units 
                 no 
                 Units of the attribute 
               
               
                   
                 documentation 
                 no 
                 Description of the attribute 
               
               
                   
                   
               
             
          
         
       
     
     There is no inherent restriction on the types of data an attribute can hold. Custom attribute types can be defined with their own schemas, and as long as models that read and write them can understand those schemas. This implies that attributes could hold compound values that contained attributes owned by foreign models. If this is the case, then the attribute schema should be rich enough to also contain the first level dependencies of the attribute. For example, if an attribute contains an entire UML diagram, then any embedded attributes read by the owning model should be included as dependencies. 
     Following our basic premise of treating each model as a black box with its own input and output attributes, each model has an interface file that describes which attributes are inputs to the model and which are outputs.  FIG. 10  shows the schema  114   b  for model interfaces. The interface schema  114   b  is kept in a file named “interface.xsd” in the interfaces dataset directory  114 , as shown in  FIG. 5 . An example XML interface file  114   aa  is shown in  FIG. 11 . The XML interface file  114   aa  is for an Excel model named “test” that reads the “system.reliability” attribute and writes the “carsignalling.checkpointing.frequency” attribute. 
     Separate directories are kept for each model interface. These directories can optionally hold private XML schemas that may be used to further validate the contents of attribute files. For example, if the interfaces/test directory held a file named “foo.xsd”, then the test connector could validate the “foo” attribute when reading it. The schema could check for attribute values that are out of bounds for the test model, even though the values were valid for other models. 
     The models registry dataset  112  maintains a list of models participating in a multi-model database. This file  111   b  is located in the models data dataset subdirectory  111  along with the schema  111   c.    
       FIG. 12  and  FIG. 13  show the representative schema and a corresponding sample of the model registry dataset file  112 . The model registry dataset file  112  maintains information of each model. Examples of elements in the model registry file include the name, type and aliases of the model, whether or not it is executable, and a reference to the interfaces file. In the illustrated example, the model registry file contains information on two Excel models named “test model” and “test model2.” 
       FIG. 14  shows an example of a computer database system in which the multi-model database  100  according to the present disclosure is implemented. The computer database system includes one or more remote client computers  10   (1)  . . .  10   (n)  connected to a server  30  via a communication medium  20 . The communication medium  20  can be a communications link such as the Internet, a local-area or wide-area network (wired or wireless), or other similar communications link that can provide the function of communication link between the server  30  and the one or more remote client computers  10   (1)  . . .  10   (n)  for allowing exchange of data. 
     The server  30  comprises a processing unit  32  and a data storage  35  that is accessible by the processing unit  32 . The processing unit  32  executes and coordinates the operation of the server  30  including the communication of data between the server  30  and the one or more remote client computers  10 ( (1) ) . . .  10 ( (n) ) and storing data into and accessing the data from the data storage  35 . The data storage  35  can be any of the storage devices that are available in the industry such as hard drives, RAM, ROM, or any other appropriate memory devices for storing large quantity of data. In this embodiment, the multi-model database  100  is stored in the data storage unit  32 . The contents and structure of the multi-model database  100  is as described above. 
     The server  30  and the one or more remote client computers  10   (1)  . . .  10   (n)  typically include other common components of a computer, such as a display, user interface devices (e.g. mouse, keyboard, touch-screen interface), etc., that are not explicitly shown here for sake of simplicity because they are well known to one of ordinary skill in the art. 
     Although the invention has been described in terms of exemplary embodiments, it is not limited thereto. Rather, the appended claims should be construed broadly, to include other variants and embodiments of the invention, which may be made by those skilled in the art without departing from the scope and range of equivalents of the invention.

Technology Category: g