=Paper=
{{Paper
|id=Vol-1637/paper_2
|storemode=property
|title=Automated REA (AREA): A Software Toolset for a Machine-readable Resource-Event-Agent (REA) Ontology Specification
|pdfUrl=https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1637/paper_2.pdf
|volume=Vol-1637
|authors=Richard Fallon,Simon Polovina
|dblpUrl=https://dblp.org/rec/conf/iccs/FallonP16
}}
==Automated REA (AREA): A Software Toolset for a Machine-readable Resource-Event-Agent (REA) Ontology Specification==
https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1637/paper_2.pdf
Automated REA (AREA): A Software Toolset for a
Machine-readable Resource-Event-Agent (REA)
Ontology Specification
Richard L. Fallon
Dr. Simon Polovina
Sheffield Hallam University, Sheffield, United Kingdom
Richard.L.Fallon@student.shu.ac.uk, s.polovina@shu.ac.uk
Abstract. This paper demonstrates a toolset developed by the authors to enable
a machine-readable REA ontology specification. Information modelling tech-
niques are used to provide a unified enterprise ontology by capturing the busi-
ness semantics using Conceptual Graphs (CGs) using Common Logic (CL) and
the Conceptual Graph Interchange Format (CGIF) dialect for information ex-
change and transmission. Formal Concept Analysis (FCA) is used for model
verification, knowledge discovery and extraction. The enterprise design follows
the Open Groups definition of the TOGAF Architecture Development Method
(ADM) to define the system architecture and subsequently provide a method for
defining and automating the (REA) design models for; Business Architecture,
Information System Architecture and Technology Architecture.
Keywords: REA, ADM, Conceptual Graph, Ontology, FCA, Data integration,
Semantics, Protégé
1 Introduction
The development of an enterprise ontology is one of the first steps in
designing a knowledge base, a database or an object oriented system
[1]. In this paper we respond to the call from Gailly, Laurier, & Poels
(2008) for the development of a proof concept for the viability of hav-
ing a machine-readable REA ontology specification available for dif-
ferent REA ontology application domains. For an REA-ontology like
other business domain ontologies there is perceived to be a lack of for-
mal representation which would be useful for the representation of the
application in practice[1].
10
2 System requirements
The basis of the system requirements for AREA come from the Open
Groups definition of the TOGAF Architecture Development Method
(ADM) [2] which defines the Architecture Development Lifecycle. In
addition to the ADM above we will add four further requirements; (i) to
enable Model Automation (MA), the solution must be not only Human
readable but also Machine readable, (ii) enable Model Visualization
(MVi) and thus provide a Graphical view which can be used by domain
modelling professionals, (iii) allow for Model Verification (MVe) so
that domain modelling professionals can carry out tests against the pro-
posed Enterprise ontology, (iv) provide a working solution via Model
Implementation (MI) the point at which the model is converted into a
usable Enterprise domain database. The diagram below in Fig. 1 identi-
fies the components required for producing an Enterprise Architecture
using AREA.
Fig. 1 - ADM Components of an Enterprise Architecture using AREA
Enterprise Business Architecture
ontology (design using CGs)
Information Systems
Architecture
(REA design using CGs)
Technology Enterprise domain
Architecture database
(SQL schema) (MySQL, Oracle etc.)
2.1 Model Automation (MA)
Common Logic (CL).
The International Organisation for Standardisation (ISO) have defined
Common Logic (CL) [3] which is a first order logic intended for infor-
mation exchange and transmission. The core of the CL framework is
the definition of an abstract syntax and abstract semantics for Common
Logic, providing the structure for several concrete syntactic forms or
dialects. One of the CL dialects is the Conceptual Graph Interchange
Format (CGIF) and it is this dialect which we use for information ex-
11
change and the Automation of REA (AREA) using Conceptual Graphs
(CGs).
Conceptual Graphs (CGs).
CGs have been shown to be useful in capturing and modelling business
transactions and their semantics within an enterprise architecture [4].
Thus our solution uses CGs as the driving force behind MA providing a
tool to define the Enterprise ontology. CGs provide both accurate se-
mantic and syntactic refinement, aiding the designer in capturing se-
mantics. Whilst CG’s in CGIF format are machine readable they can
also be interpreted and edited manually (human readable) and are use-
ful for documentation and maintenance.
REA.
McCarthy (1982) proposed his REA theory as the solution to a general-
ised accounting framework in which both accountants and non-
accounts could share the same enterprise data. McCarthy’s [5] enter-
prise ontology determines that all the Economic transactions within an
enterprise can be aligned to three separate entities or concepts; (i) Eco-
nomic Resources, (ii) Economic Events and (iii) Economic Agents.
Moreover, REA has also been demonstrated to be useful for modelling
non-economic business transactions [6, 7].
2.2 Model Visualization (MVi)
Protégé.
Protégé is a free open-source contemporary ontology editor and frame-
work and was developed at the Stanford Centre for Biomedical Infor-
matics Research (BMIR) at the Stanford University School of Medicine
for building intelligent systems. Protégé is a mature solution already
used in commercial products [8] and hence has numerous add-on tools
available. There are essentially two versions of Protégé – OWL and
Frames, due to the more restrictive nature of Frames this version was
chosen as the ontology repository. For a detailed description of the
difference between Frames and OWL, refer to [9].
12
CG Import.
The Protégé plugin CGImport [10] was developed by the authors as a
tool to allow for the import of CGs defined using the CGIF Common
Logic dialect directly into the Protégé ontology repository. Thus allow-
ing the user to define both the Business Architecture and the Infor-
mation System Architecture using CGs from within a text editor or to
import the CGs designed using other available CG tools such as
CharGer [11].
CG Export.
The Protégé plugin CGexport [12] was developed by the authors as a
tool to allow for the export of CGs stored within the Protégé ontology
repository into a file using the CGIF Common Logic dialect. Thus al-
lowing for interoperability with other available CG tools such as
CharGer [11].
2.3 Model Verification (MVe)
JESS.
JESS [13] is a tool available as a Protégé plugin, used to build an expert
system which can then be used to build a set of rules which can be re-
peatedly executed against a collection of facts such as an ontology de-
scribing an enterprise system. Thus JESS is used to validate the En-
terprise Model once it is stored within Protégé.
FCA.
Several authors have shown the benefits of converting CGs into Formal
Concepts [14] to allow for Formal Concept Analysis (FCA), to find out
the hidden information and transactions within complex graphs. The
tool FCAView[15] was further developed by the authors to allow for
FCA on the enterprise model stored directly within Protégé [15-17].
2.4 Model Implementation (MI)
To complete the process and carry out MI, the final product or artefact
of the solution is the enterprise domain database in the form of an SQL
schema, for installation using one of the current database technologies
(MySql, Microsoft SQL server, Oracle etc.).
13
REAtoSQL.
The Protégé plugin REAtoSQL has been developed by the authors as a
tool to allow for the export of the Technology Architecture in the form
of an SQL schema from the REA ontology design stored within the
Protégé repository. The SQL schema can then be used to initialize the
enterprise domain database.
3 Solution demonstration
To demonstrate the solution, we use the example of a Financial Trading
(FT) case study for the purpose of simplicity and to allow for compari-
son with other solutions using this same case study.
3.1 Business Architecture
Using MA, we define the Business Architecture using CGs by import-
ing (using CGimport) models from other tools (CharGer), or models
defined manually in a text editor into Protégé for MVi. The complete
Business Architecture defined using CGs can then be reviewed (MVi)
in Protégé, further CGs can be added to define further business entities
and expand the type hierarchy. Thus Protégé allows for MVi of the
Business Architecture and to carry out further design work (Fig. 2).
Fig. 2 - Business Architecture Model Visualisation MVi (extract)
To validate the enterprise model there are then two methods for model
Verification (MVe); (i) using either JESS to ‘test’ business rules or (ii)
using FCAView [15] to view the Business Architecture and complete
FCA directly in Protégé (Fig. 3).
14
Fig. 3 - Business Architecture Model Verification FCA (MVe)
3.2 Information System Architecture
Using the CGs developed for the Business Architecture (above) we
expand the design and the type hierarchy to include the Resource Event
Agent (REA) design pattern. Using REA to define the Information Sys-
tem Architecture we focus on real things not artificial artefacts (Dunn,
Cherrington and Hollander 2005) by adding detail to each of the con-
cepts (Fig. 4).
15
Fig. 4 - Information System Architecture - Model Visualisation – REA entities, key: Resources-
green, Events-orange, Agents-lilac
The resulting design can then be used later for the basis of the Technol-
ogy Architecture in the form of an SQL schema.
3.3 Technology Architecture
Using Protégé, the Technology Architecture can be developed using the
REA ontology design from above by using the developed tool RE-
AtoSQL. Thus allowing Model Implementation (MI) by exporting
from Protégé the SQL schema, which can then be used to load the en-
terprise domain database into the chosen database software (MySQL,
Oracle etc.). The resulting database should then mimic the domain
model as closely as possible [18].
16
4 Conclusions
In this paper we have responded to the call [19] for the viability of hav-
ing a machine-readable REA ontology specification. A correct formal
representation of the REA-ontology offers great opportunities and
will facilitate the operationalization of the REA-ontology [20]. UML
modelling has also been proposed as the solution to this problem, how-
ever, the solution presented in this paper uses CG’s as an alternative
(instead of UML). Thus the AREA toolset allows the enterprise expert
to follow TOGAF [2] and define; Business Architecture, Information
System Architecture and the Technology Architecture using CGs, REA
and the SQL Enterprise Domain Database, all from within a unified
tool - Protégé.
References
1. Geerts GL, McCarthy WE (2002) An ontological analysis of the economic primi-
tives of the extended-REA enterprise information architecture 3:1-16
2. TheOpenGroup (2016) TOGAF® 9.1 > Part II: Architecture Development Method
(ADM), Introduction to the ADM. http://pubs.opengroup.org/architecture/togaf9-
doc/arch/chap05.html
3. ISO (2016) Information technology -- Common Logic (CL): a framework for a
family of logic-based languages ISO/IEC 24707:2007.
http://www.iso.org/iso/catalogue_detail.htm?csnumber=39175
4. Launders I (2012) The transaction graph: requirements in semantic enterprise archi-
tectures. LAP LAMBERT Academic, Saarbrücken.
5. McCarthy WE (1982) The REA accounting model: A generalized framework for
accounting systems in a shared data environment 57:554-578
6. O'Leary DE (2004) On the relationship between REA and SAP 5:65-81
7. Fallon RL, Polovina S (2013) REA analysis of SAP HCM; some initial findings
8. Enterprise Architecture Solutions (EAS) (2016) The Essential Project.
http://www.enterprise-architecture.org/
9. Wang H (2015) Frames and OWL side by side.
http://protege.stanford.edu/conference/2006/submissions/slides/7.2wang_protege2
006.pdf
10. Fallon RL (2015) CGImport. https://github.com/RichardFallon/CGImport
11. Delugach H (2016) CharGer Conceptual Graph and knowledge modeling tool.
http://charger.sourceforge.net/
12. Fallon RL (2015) CGExport. https://github.com/RichardFallon/CGExport
13. Friedman-Hill E (2016) JESS the rule engine for the JAVA platform.
http://www.jessrules.com/jess/index.shtml
14. Andrews S, Polovina S (2011) A mapping from conceptual graphs to formal con-
cept analysis. In: Anonymous Conceptual Structures for Discovering Knowledge,
Springer, pp 63-76.
17
15. Jiang G, Fallon RL (2016) FCAView.
https://github.com/FCAView/FCAView_V2.0
16. Andrews S (2016) CGFCA - Convertor of Conceptual Graph files to Formal Con-
text files. http://sourceforge.net/projects/cgfca/
17. Fallon RL (2016) 3to2 - Convertor of Conceptual Graph files to Formal Context
files. https://github.com/RichardFallon/3to2
18. Pavel. Hrubý, Kiehn J, Scheller CV (2006) Model-driven design using business
patterns. Springer, Berlin.
19. Gailly F, Laurier W, Poels G (2008) Positioning and Formalizing the REA Enter-
prise Ontology. J Inf Syst 22:219-248
20. Gailly F, Poels G (2005) Development of a formal REA-ontology representation
160
18