EDP Sciences logo
Web of Conferences logo
Search
Menu
All issues Volume 252 (2019) MATEC Web Conf., 252 (2019) 02011 References
Open Access
Issue
MATEC Web Conf.
Volume 252, 2019
III International Conference of Computational Methods in Engineering Science (CMES’18)
Article Number 02011
Number of page(s) 6
Section Application of Computer Programs in Technology
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/201925202011
Published online 14 January 2019
  1. D.A. Gustafson, Theory and Problems of Software Engineering (McGraw-Hill, 2002) [Google Scholar]
  2. B. Boehm, A Spiral Model for Software Development and Enhancement (IEEE Computer, May 1988) [Google Scholar]
  3. D.E. Strode, Information Systems Frontiers 18, 23 (2016) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  4. I. Sommerville, Software Engineering. 7th edn. International Computer Science (Pearson Education Limited, 2004) [Google Scholar]
  5. Object Management Group: Unified Modeling Language version 2.5.1 (OMG, 2017) [Google Scholar]
  6. D. Pilone, N. Pitman, UML 2.0 in a Nutshell (O’Reilly, 2005) [Google Scholar]
  7. OMG, Tech. Rep. formal/2015-09-01, Object Management Group (2015) [Google Scholar]
  8. OMG, Tech. Rep. formal/2011-01-03, Object Management Group (2011) [Google Scholar]
  9. OMG, Tech. Rep. formal/16-12-01, Object Management Group (2016) [Google Scholar]
  10. OMG: MDA Guide version 1.0.1, Object Management Group (2003) [Google Scholar]
  11. D. Gasevic, D. Djuric, D. V., Model Driven Architecture and Ontology Development (Springer, 2006) [Google Scholar]
  12. A. Kleppe, J. Warmer, W. Bast, MDA Explained: The Model Driven Architecture: Practice and Promise (Addison Wesley, 2003) [Google Scholar]
  13. M. Lankhorst, Enterprise architecture at work: Modelling, communication and analysis (Springer, 2009) [Google Scholar]
  14. S. Ambler, J. Nalbone, M. Vizdos, vol., ed. city, Pearson Education 131914510 (2005) [Google Scholar]
  15. A. Fatolahi, F. Shams, Information Systems Frontiers 8, 133 (2006) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  16. D.S. Frankel, P. Harmon, J. Mukerji, J. Odell, M. Owen, P. Rivitt, M. Rosen, R.M. Soley, Business Process Trends 14, 2003 (2003) [Google Scholar]
  17. S. Mrdalj, V. Jovanovic, AMCIS 2005 Proceedings, 315 (2005) [Google Scholar]
  18. S. Khoshnevis, F.S. Aliee, P. Jamshidi, Model driven approach to service oriented enterprise architecture, In : Services Computing Conference, 2009. APSCC 2009. IEEE Asia-Pacific, 279 (IEEE, 2009) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  19. K. Kluza, P. Wisniewski, K. Jobczyk, A. Ligęza, ´ A. Suchenia, Comparison of selected modeling notations for process, decision and system modeling, In : 2017 Federated Conference on Computer Science and Information Systems (FedCSIS), 1095 (IEEE, 2017) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  20. K. Kluza, P. Wisniewski, A. Ligęza, A. Suchenia, J. Wyrobek, Knowledge Representation in Model Driven Approach in Terms of the Zachman Framework, In : International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Soft Computing, 689 (Springer, 2018) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  21. D. Torre, Y. Labiche, M. Genero, M. Elaasar, Journal of Systems and Software 144, 121 (2015) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  22. P. Wohed, W.M. van der Aalst, M. Dumas, A.H. ter Hofstede, N. Russell, On the suitability of BPMN for business process modelling, In : International conference on business process management, 161 (Springer, 2006) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  23. D. Peixoto, V. Batista, A. Atayde, E. Borges, R. Resende, C. Pádua, A comparison of BPMN and UML 2.0 activity diagrams, In VII Simposio Brasileiro de Qualidade de Software 56, 012010 (2008) [Google Scholar]
  24. M.A. Cibran, Translating BPMN models into UML activities, In : International Conference on Business Process Management, 263 (Springer, 2008) [Google Scholar]
  25. M. Indulska, M. zur Muehlen, J. Recker, BPM Center Report, 09 (2009) [Google Scholar]
  26. J.C. Recker, M. zur Muehlen, K. Siau, J. Erickson, M. Indulska, Measuring method complexity: UML versus BPMN, In 15th Americas Conference on Information Systems, (Association for Information Systems, 2009) [Google Scholar]
  27. N.Q. Bao, A proposal for a method to translate BPMN model into UML activity diagram, In : 13th International Conference on Business Information Systems (2010) [Google Scholar]
  28. C.V. Geambasu, Accounting and Management Information Systems 11, 637 (2012) [Google Scholar]
  29. M.R. Khabbazi, M.K. Hasan, R. Sulaiman, A. Shapi’i, Middle East Journal of Scientific Research 15, 516 (2013) [Google Scholar]
  30. E. Alreshidi, M. Mourshed, Y. Rezgui, Journal of Computing in Civil Engineering 30, 04015063 (2015) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  31. R. Eshuis, P. Van Gorp, Computing 98, 345 (2016) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  32. L. Aversano, C. Grasso, M. Tortorella, Information and Software Technology 72, 171 (2016) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  33. S. Perry, When is a process model not a process model: a comparison between UML and BPMN, In : IEE Seminar on Process Modelling Using UML, 51 (IET, 2006) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  34. A. Kalnins, V. Vitolins, arXiv preprint cs/0607044 (2006) [Google Scholar]
  35. O. Nicolae, M. Cosulschi, A. Giurca, G. Wagner, Towards a BPMN semantics using UML models, In : International Conference on Business Process Management, 585 (Springer, 2008) [Google Scholar]
  36. D. Birkmeier, S. Kloeckner, S. Overhage, An Empirical Comparison of the Usability of BPMN and UML Activity Diagrams for Business Users., in ECIS 2010, 2 (2010). [Google Scholar]
  37. M.A. López-Campos, A.C. Marquez, J.F.G. Fernández, Computers in industry 64, 524 (2013) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  38. D. Badura, Modelling business processes in logistics with the use of diagrams BPMN and UML, In : Forum Sci Oecon 2, 35 (2014) [Google Scholar]
  39. A. Herden, P.P.M. Farias, A.B. Albuquerque, An approach based on BPMN to detail use cases, In : New Trends in Networking, Computing, E-learning, Systems Sciences, and Engineering, 537 (Springer, 2015) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  40. K. Salma, B. Khalid et al., Journal of Theoretical and Applied Information Technology 79, 279 (2015) [Google Scholar]
  41. A. Suchenia, K. Kluza, K. Jobczyk, P. Wisniewski, M. Wypych, A. Ligęza, Supporting BPMN Process Models with UML Sequence Diagrams for Representing Time Issues and Testing Models, In : International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Soft Computing, 589 (Springer, 2017). [Google Scholar]
  42. Y. Wautelet, S. Poelmans, An Integrated Enterprise Modeling Framework Using the RUP/UML Business Use-Case Model and BPMN, In : IFIP Working Conference on The Practice of Enterprise Modeling, 299 (Springer, 2017) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  43. U. Zafar, M. Bhuiyan, P. Prasad, F. Haque, Journal of Computers 13, 212 (2018) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  44. T. Debevoise, J. Taylor, J. Sinur, R. Geneva, The MicroGuide to Process and Decision Modeling in BPMN/DMN: Building More Effective Processes by Integrating Process Modeling with Decision Modeling (CreateSpace, 2014) [Google Scholar]
  45. F. Hasic, J. De Smedt, J. Vanthienen, An Illustration of Five Principles for Integrated Process and Decision Modelling (5PDM) (KU Leuven, 2017) [Google Scholar]
  46. F. Hasic, J. De Smedt, J. Vanthienen, Decision Support Systems 107, 1 (2018) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  47. W. Wei, M. Indulska, S. Sadiq, Journal of Computer Information Systems 58, 363 (2017) [Google Scholar]
  48. M. Wiemuth, D. Junger, M. Leitritz, J. Neumann, T. Neumuth, O. Burgert, International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery 12, 1439 (2017) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  49. J. Feldman, Business Decision Modeling with DMN and OpenRules, in RulesML+RR+DecisionCAMP (2017) [Google Scholar]
  50. K. Kluza, G.J. Nalepa, Information Systems Frontiers (2018) [Google Scholar]
  51. M. Dumas, M. La Rosa, J. Mendling, H.A. Reijers, Fundamentals of Business Process Management (Springer, 2018) [Google Scholar]
  52. M. Linehan, C. de Sainte Marie, Business Rules Journal 12 (2011) [Google Scholar]
  53. H. van der Aa, H. Leopold, K. Batoulis, M. Weske, H.A. Reijers, Integrated process and decision modeling for data-driven processes, In : International Conference on Business Process Management, 405 (Springer, 2015) [Google Scholar]
  54. L. Janssens, E. Bazhenova, J. De Smedt, J. Vanthienen, M. Denecker, Consistent integration of decision (DMN) and process (BPMN) models, In Proceedings of the CAiSE’16 Forum, at the 28th International Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering (CAiSE 2016) 1612, 121 (2016) [Google Scholar]
  55. D. Munante, F.M. Kifetew, O. Albrecht, Modelling Prioritisation Decision-making in Software Evolution, In : REFSQ Workshops (2017) [Google Scholar]
  56. K. Batoulis, M. Weske, A Tool for Checking Soundness of Decision-Aware Business Processes, In : BPM Demos (2017) [Google Scholar]
  57. F. Hasic, J. De Smedt, J. Vanthienen, Towards assessing the theoretical complexity of the decision model and notation (DMN), In : 8th International Workshop on Enterprise Modeling and Information Systems Architectures (EMISA), 64 (2017) [Google Scholar]
  58. K. Hinkelmann, A. Pierfranceschi, Combining process modelling and case modeling, In : 8th International Conference on Methodologies, Technologies and Tools enabling e-Government (2014) [Google Scholar]
  59. K. Hinkelmann, in Domain-Specific Conceptual Modeling, 397 (Springer, 2016) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  60. M.A. López-Campos, A.C. Márquez, J.F.G. Fernández, In : Advanced Maintenance Modelling for Asset Management, 43 (Springer, 2018) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  61. M.A. Marin, H. Lotriet, J.A. Van Der Poll, Measuring method complexity of the case management modeling and notation (CMMN), In : Proceedings of the Annual Conference on Southern African Institute for Computer Scientist and Information Technologists (SAICSIT 2014), 209 (ACM, 2014) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  62. R. Breitenmoser, T. Keller, European Scientific Journal, ESJ 11 (2015) [Google Scholar]
  63. S. Neškovic, K. Kirchner, Using Context Information and CMMN to Model Knowledge-Intensive Business Processes, In : 6th International Conference on Information Society and Technology, 17 (2016) [Google Scholar]
  64. I. Stanev, M. Koleva, Method For Information Systems Automated Programming, In : Mediterranean Conference on Information Systems (MCIS) (2017) [Google Scholar]
  65. F. Hasic, L. Vanwijck, J. Vanthienen, Integrating Processes, Cases, and Decisions for Knowledge Intensive Process Modelling, In : International Workshop on Practicing Open Enterprise Modeling. CEUR (2017) [Google Scholar]
  66. J. Freund, B. Rücker, Real-Life BPMN. With introductions to CMMN and DMN. Analyze, Improve, and Automate Processes in Your Company (CreateSpace, 2016) [Google Scholar]
  67. G. Adamo, S. Borgo, C. Di Francescomarino, C. Ghidini, N. Guarino, E.M. Sanfilippo, Business processes and their participants: An ontological perspective, In : Conference of the Italian Association for Artificial Intelligence, 217 (Springer, 2017) [Google Scholar]
  68. M.A. Marin, H. Lotriet, J.A. Van Der Poll, Metrics for the Case Management Modeling and Notation (CMMN) Specification, In : Proceedings of the 2015 Annual Research Conference on South African Institute of Computer Scientists and Information Technologists, 28 (ACM, 2015) [Google Scholar]
  69. N.H. Ouali, M. Tmar, Efficiency of Artifact-Centric Paradigm: A Literature Study, In : Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Information Management and Engineering, 50 (ACM, 2017) [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.