We aim to lay the basis for a unified architecture for enterprise computer nomenclatures by providing the grounding ontology based upon the BORO Foundational Ontology. We start to lower two significant barriers within the computing community to making progress in this area; a lack of a broad appreciation of the nature and practice of nomenclature and a lack of recognition of some specific technical, philosophical issues that nomenclatures raise. We provide an overview of the grounding ontology and how it can be implemented in a system. We focus on the issue that arises when tokens lead to the overlap of the represented domain and its system representation – system-domain-overlap – and how this can be resolved.

We aim to lay the basis for a unified architecture for nomenclatures in enterprise computer systems by providing the grounding for an ontology of en-terprise computing nomenclatures within a foundational ontology. We look at the way in which nomenclatures are tools both shaped by and shaping the prevailing technology. In the era of printing technology, nomenclatures in lists and tables were ‘paper tools’ deployed alongside scientific taxonomic and bureaucratic clas-sifications. These tools were subsequently embedded in computer enterprise sys-tems. In this paper we develop an ontology that can be used as a basis for nomen-clature ‘computer tools’ engineered for computing technology.

The system building process should start with a model of the relevant part of the real world, but most O-O systems work is concerned with the later stages, taking O-O languages as a given and looking at how to use them to build the system. This article discusses the origin of the object paradigm, and demonstrates the value of beginning with real-world modeling using an O-O approach.

Several foundational ontologies have been developed recently. We examine two of these from the point of view of their quality in representing temporal changes, focusing on the example of roles. We discuss how these are modelled in two foundational ontologies: the Unified Foundational Ontology and the BORO foundational ontology. These exhibit two different approaches, endurantist and perdurantist respectively. We illustrate the differences using a running example in the university student domain, wherein one individual is not only a registered student but also, for part of this period, was elected the President of the Student Union. The metaphysical choices made by UFO and BORO lead to different representations of roles. Two key differences which affect the way roles are modelled are exemplified in this paper: (1) different criteria of identity and (2) differences in the way individual objects extend over time and possible worlds. These differences impact upon the quality of the models produced in terms of their respective explanatory power. The UFO model concentrates on the notion of validity in “all possible worlds” and is unable to accurately represent the way particulars are extended in time. The perdurantist approach is best able to describe temporal changes wherein roles are spatio-temporal extents of individuals.

In the multi-level type modeling community, claims that most enterprise application systems use ontologically multi-level types are ubiquitous. To be able to empirically verify this claim one needs to be able to expose the (often underlying) ontological structure and show that it does, indeed, make a commitment to multi-level types. We have not been able to find any published data showing this being done. From a top-level ontology requirements perspective, checking this multi-level type claim is worthwhile. If the datasets for which the top-level ontology is required are ontologically committed to multi-level types, then this is a requirement for the top-level ontology. In this paper, we both present some empirical evidence that this ubiquitous claim is correct as well as describing the process we used to expose the underlying ontological commitments and examine them. We describe how we use the bCLEARer process to analyse the UNICLASS classifications making their implicit ontological commitments explicit. We show how this reveals the requirements for two general ontological commitments; higher-order types and first-class relations. This establishes a requirement for a top-level ontology that includes the UNICLASS classification to be able to accommodate these requirements. From a multi-level type perspective, we have established that the bCLEARer entification process can identify underlying ontological commitments to multi-level type that do not exist in the surface linguistic structure. So, we have a process that we can reuse on other datasets and application systems to help empirically verify the claim that ontological multi-level types are ubiquitous.

Within the surface ship community, there is a significant amount of content describing Geospatial and Temporal References (G&TR); Def Stan 22-61 is the prime example. However, from an information modelling perspective, much of this is unstructured. And where it is structured, it reflects a data implementation rather than an information modelling perspective; in MDA terms, a platform-specific model rather than a computation-independent model perspective. It aims at describing how G&TR data should be used, but has not been so directly aimed at describing what G&TR is – the target of an information model. This has led to a situation where a solid foundation for the information model is missing and there is no clear articulation of the fundamental components for the information model. This analysis provides a sketch that can be developed into an information model that would provide the foundation for the ‘how’ model in Def Stan 21-66. The combined models would provide a better, more accurate, overall model.

Double entry bookkeeping lies at the core of modern accounting. It is shaped by a fundamental conceptual pattern; a design decision that was popularised by Pacioli some 500 years ago and subsequently institutionalised into accounting practice and systems. Debits and credits are core components of this conceptual pattern. This paper suggests that a different conceptual pattern, one that does not have debits and credits as its components, may be more suited to some modern accounting information systems. It makes the case by looking at two conceptual design choices that permeate the Pacioli pattern; de se and directional terms - leading to a de se directional conceptual pattern. It suggests alternative design choices - de re and non-directional terms, leading to a de re non-directional conceptual pattern - have some advantages in modern complex, computer-based, business environments.

The Centre for Digital Built Britain has been tasked through the Digital Framework Task Group to develop an Information Management Framework (IMF) to support the development of a National Digital Twin (NDT) as set out in “The Pathway to an Information Management Framework” (Hetherington, 2020). A key component of the IMF is a Foundation Data Model (FDM), built upon a top-level ontology (TLO), as a basis for ensuring consistent data across the NDT.

This document captures the results collected from a broad survey of top-level ontologies, conducted by the IMF technical team. It focuses on the core ontological choices made in their foundations and the pragmatic engineering consequences these have on how the ontologies can be applied and further scaled. This document will provide the basis for discussions on a suitable TLO for the FDM. It is also expected that these top-level ontologies will provide a resource whose components can be harvested and adapted for inclusion in the FDM.

Following the publication of this document, the programme will perform a structured assessment of the TLOs identified herein, with a view to selecting one or more TLOs that will form the kernel around which the FDM will evolve. A further report – The FDM TLO Selection Paper – will be issued to describe this process in late 2020.

The review of existing industry data models and reference data libraries will support the development of the National Digital Twin Information Management Framework. The review will have different roles during the development. The envisaged roles are as follows:

- existing industry data models and reference data libraries are identified

- the structure of the models and libraries is summarised

- the extensibility of the models is described

- the documentation of the models is described

- the maintenance and usage of the models is described

Introduction: A presentation of the background for the work concerning MODEM, its origins as part of the IDEAS group effort and the reasons behind starting the work as an effort funded by the Swedish Armed Forces. Discussions around the goal of harmonization and the difficulties presented by having multiple, different, national frameworks.

The starting point: MODAF in its current form: A brief introduction of the MODAF meta-model as well as the IDEAS foundation model and the reasons for modifying MODAF based on a UML profile based meta-model to a non-UML meta-model based on the IDEAS foundation model.

Semantic technology, the road ahead: The semantic basis for IDEAS is presented and how this can improve the utility of framework usage. Examples from the reengineering work are presented as well as how a semantic approach cleared up various areas within the MODAF meta-model.

MODEM, what was done, patterns and examples: The work that resulted in MODEM is presented. The use of semantic patterns is presented as a crucial part of the MODEM reengineering effort. Some of these patterns are presented as well as exemplified. Some examples of MODEM used to model the standard search and rescue example used extensively in framework development are also presented.

Relationship between this effort and other IDEAS foundation based models: The US DoD architecture framework DoDAF 2 DMM has also used the IDEAS foundation model as a basis for development and similarities as well as differences are presented.

Conclusions: Conclusions as well as future directions of this work effort are presented.

Contracts are fundamental toward characterising the very nature of a firm (or enterprise). The firm is considered by some economic theories as a bundle of contracts and contracts in turn are considered also as bundles of rights and obligations (commitments). As such it can be argued that the ontological relationships between the firm and its contracts an be explained through a set of mereological (or whole-part) relationships. Specifically, the relationships between a contract and its parties and between the parties and their rights/commitments are all mereological. This view of what contracts are may appear at first surprising but a perdurantist interpretation of contracts results in such an ontology. The main contribution of this paper is a perdurantist ontology of contracts which introduces the following distinctive features: (1) a differentiation between contract specification and contract execution, (2) contract executions as objects whose spatio-temporal extents intersect those of its parties and (3) a generic model of contractual commitments and fulfilment events impacting the economics of the enterprise. The ontology proposed in this paper is applied to an example scenario to demonstrate its benefits in enterprise modelling.

Component breakdowns are a vital multi-purpose tool and hence ubiquitous across a range of disciplines. Information systems need to be capable of storing reasonably accurate representations of these breakdowns. Most current information systems have been designed around specific breakdowns, without considering their general underlying formal structure. This is understandable, given the focus on devising the breakdown and that there is not a readily available formal structure to build upon. We make a step towards providing this structure here.

At the core of the notion of a component breakdown is the component as an integral (dependent) part of the composite whole. This leads to a rich formal structure, one that requires careful consideration to capture well enough to support the range of specific breakdowns. If one is not sufficiently aware of this structure, it is difficult to determine what is required to produce a reasonably accurate representation – in particular, one that is sufficiently accurate to support interoperability.

In this report, enabled by the Construction Innovation Hub, we describe this rich formal structure and develop a framework for assessing how well a data model (or ontology) has captured the main elements of the structure. This will enable people to both assess existing models as well as design new models. As a separate exercise, as an illustration, we develop a data model that captures these elements.

Associated with the notion of component (as an integral, dependent part) is the notion of replaceable part (see Appendix A for more details). We do not characterise this here but will do so in a later report.

An overview of the digitalisation levels being used in the Nation Digital Twin (NDT) programme.

Situating domain ontologies in a general, long-term, diachronic information technology framework helps us to understand better their role in the evolution of information. This perspective provides some innovative insights into how they should be built.

This presentation describes the Top level Ontology (TLO) that is being developed for the Information Management framework (IMF). It starts with a brief outline of how the TLO emerged from the work on the IMF. It notes the initial focus on providing a foundation for Euclidean standards. It touches on the foundation - the core constructional ontology - built from a unified constructor theory with three elements: set, sum and tuple constructors. It then looks at the data components of the TLO and how these are used to build four-dimensional space time: taking in mereotopology, chronology and worldlines.
Presentation Structure:

• Introducing the IMF Team
• Background
  • Information Management Framework
  • Choice-based framework
• TLO Initial Use
• Situating the TLO in the IMF
• Data Section: Core Constructional Ontology
• Data Section: Top Level Ontology