Informational equivalence, computational equivalence, and the evaluation of conceptual modelling

Burton-Jones, Andrew, Yand, Wand and Weber, Ron (2007). Informational equivalence, computational equivalence, and the evaluation of conceptual modelling. In: Proceedings of the Sixth Annual Symposium on Research in Systems Analysis and Design. Annual Workshop of the AIS Special Interest Group on Systems Analysis and Design (SIGSAND), Tulsa, OK, United States, (35-42). 12-13 May 2007.

Attached Files (Some files may be inaccessible until you login with your UQ eSpace credentials)
Name Description MIMEType Size Downloads
SIGSAND2007_proceedings.pdf Evidence - not publicly available application/pdf 1.48MB 1
Author Burton-Jones, Andrew
Yand, Wand
Weber, Ron
Title of paper Informational equivalence, computational equivalence, and the evaluation of conceptual modelling
Conference name Annual Workshop of the AIS Special Interest Group on Systems Analysis and Design (SIGSAND)
Conference location Tulsa, OK, United States
Conference dates 12-13 May 2007
Proceedings title Proceedings of the Sixth Annual Symposium on Research in Systems Analysis and Design
Place of Publication Atlanta, GA, United States
Publisher Association for Information Systems
Publication Year 2007
Sub-type Fully published paper
Start page 35
End page 42
Total pages 8
Language eng
Formatted Abstract/Summary
A number of researchers have proposed guidelines for the design of empirical research to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of alternative conceptual modelling grammars and scripts. Some guidelines have been founded on the argument that a comparison of alternative conceptual modelling scripts generated via the same or different conceptual modelling grammars requires the scripts to be “informationally equivalent.” In other words, the scripts should provide alternative representations of the same semantics in a domain. Otherwise, differences in a user’s ability to comprehend the scripts are confounded by differences in the semantics represented by the scripts. We present a contrary view. When empirical comparisons of conceptual modelling grammars and scripts are motivated by an ontological benchmark, we argue that the goal is often to show that informational equivalence does not exist in the script and that users’ understanding of the scripts is thereby undermined.
Keyword Information equivalence
Computational equivalence
Conceptual modelling
Ontology
Q-Index Code E1
Q-Index Status Provisional Code
Institutional Status Non-UQ

Document type: Conference Paper
Collection: UQ Business School Publications
 
Versions
Version Filter Type
Citation counts: Google Scholar Search Google Scholar
Created: Fri, 29 Jun 2012, 14:05:42 EST by Karen Morgan on behalf of UQ Business School