Why philosophize; why not just model?

Henderson-Sellers, B

Why philosophize; why not just model?

Henderson-Sellers, B

Permalink

Publication Type:: Conference Proceeding
Citation:: Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics), 2015, 9381 pp. 3 - 17
Issue Date:: 2015-01-01

Closed Access

	Filename	Description	Size
	ER2015 keynote.pdf	Published version	2.61 MB	Adobe PDF	View/Open

Copyright Clearance Process

Recently Added
In Progress
Closed Access

This item is closed access and not available.

Full metadata record

Field	Value	Language
dc.contributor.author	Henderson-Sellers, B	en_US
dc.date.issued	2015-01-01	en_US
dc.identifier.citation	Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics), 2015, 9381 pp. 3 - 17	en_US
dc.identifier.isbn	9783319252636	en_US
dc.identifier.issn	0302-9743	en_US
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/10453/37839
dc.description.abstract	© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015. Conceptual modelling relies on the availability of good quality modelling languages (MLs). However, many of these MLs have not been created in any well-organized and consistent manner leading to identified flaws and ambiguities. These result, in part, from the lack of an ontological commitment, the neglect of language use and speech act theory and possibly incoherent philosophical underpinnings. These various disciplines are examined in the context of their potential integration into the creation of the next generation of modelling languages.	en_US
dc.relation.ispartof	Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics)	en_US
dc.relation.isbasedon	10.1007/978-3-319-25264-3_1	en_US
dc.subject.classification	Artificial Intelligence & Image Processing	en_US
dc.title	Why philosophize; why not just model?	en_US
dc.type	Conference Proceeding
utslib.citation.volume	9381	en_US
pubs.embargo.period	Not known	en_US
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Engineering and Information Technology
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Engineering and Information Technology/School of Software
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Strength - HCTD - Human Centred Technology Design
utslib.copyright.status	closed_access
pubs.publication-status	Published	en_US
pubs.volume	9381	en_US

Abstract:

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015. Conceptual modelling relies on the availability of good quality modelling languages (MLs). However, many of these MLs have not been created in any well-organized and consistent manner leading to identified flaws and ambiguities. These result, in part, from the lack of an ontological commitment, the neglect of language use and speech act theory and possibly incoherent philosophical underpinnings. These various disciplines are examined in the context of their potential integration into the creation of the next generation of modelling languages.

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

http://hdl.handle.net/10453/37839