Course Book

Introduction to ICT Knowledge Management

Block 1.4

Bachelor in Knowledge Engineering

(Version January 30th , 2019)

© 2019 Maastricht University

Behoudens uitzonderingen door de wet gesteld, mag zonder schriftelijke toestemming van de
rechthebbende op het auteursrecht, niets uit deze uitgave worden vermenigvuldigd en/of openbaar gemaakt
door middel van druk, fotocopie, internet of anderszins.

Page 1 of 22
 Table of Content

1. Introduction: course objectives 3

2. The modeling of knowledge 3
3. The evolution of modeling in ICT and Knowledge Management 6
4. Description of course and schedule 6
5. Instructional format 7
6. Assessment and attendance 8
7. Course planning group 8
8. Lectures and tutorials 9

Page 2 of 22
1. Introduction: course objectives

Knowledge Management studies how organizations can exploit, manage and retain their
knowledge resources
The educational goal of this block is to provide the students of Data Science &
Knowledge Engineering with the basics in knowledge management. We will provide the DKE
students with the basic tools for capturing the most essential elements of durable conceptual
modelling such as object types, fact types, processes and rules.
Having insight in its knowledge is important for an organization since:
1. The world changes rapidly, organizations have to be able to respond to that change in
an ever increasing pace, having all the knowledge readily available to respond.
2. Knowledge grows and changes over time.
3. Knowledge needs to be easily accessible.
4. Quite some part of knowledge is bound to persons, making organizations more and
more dependent on individuals.
5. The intellectual capital of an organization determines to a large degree the value of
the organization.

Knowledge is a fundamental prerequisite for the ability of a person to execute a task. This
ability consists of explicit knowledge or information, implicit knowledge or experiences, skills
and attitudes.
We will analyze knowledge from different perspectives, depending on which element in the
definition the emphasis is placed. In knowledge management, basically two dominant
approaches exist:
– The ICT approach, with focus on expliciting and structuring the knowledge,
to be used by computers or humans. This kind of knowledge can be
objectively shared and interrogated
– The Knowledge-friendly organization approach, with focus on providing
means to stimulate the sharing of knowledge.
Independently of the approach, a major aim of knowledge management is expliciting the
relevant knowledge as much as possible. Knowledge management is an integral approach for
the identification, the structuring, the sharing and evaluation of knowledge in the organization.
In this course we will focus on the first approach (ICT) in which we also clearly make a link to
other courses in the first year of the bachelor of Knowledge Engineering. We will use the
following definition of Knowledge Management:
Knowledge management is an integral approach for the identification, the structuring, the
sharing and interrogating of knowledge in the organization.
In block 1.5 Software Engineering a couple of lectures will be devoted to requirements analysis.
The knowledge management approach that we will introduce in this course might help you in
deriving the user requirements in future projects or in exercises, assignments and tasks in the
Software Engineering course. This is one of the applications in which applying a knowledge
management approach as presented in this course will facilitate the specification and validation
of user requirements.

2. The Modeling of Knowledge

In this course we will not only ‘talk’ about knowledge, but we will consider identifying and
structuring of knowledge as a modeling process that will result in models that represent the
structure of the knowledge. In the 2nd part of this course student will work on a semantic-
conceptual modeling exercise in work-groups.

Page 3 of 22
2.1 Course revision

In this year’s version of the course we have implemented explicitly the evaluation comments
of last year’s version of the course.. This evaluation has lead to improve the educational material
for the student team projects. We also decided to add exercises on an introductory level based
in a contemporary domain.

2.2 The bonus exercises

Students that hand in the assigned bonus-exercises are able to gain bonus points that count for
the final grade (see chapter 7 of this course manual). The bonus exercises are such that they can
be easily ‘solved’ using the protocol or ‘cook-book’ that is provided in the literature and that is
summarized in the announcements for this course after the lecture in the student portal.

2.3 Mandatory and background literature

The following literature is provided for this course. Before and after each lecture/tutorial session
we will recommend what literature in which sequence to prepare. The literature consists of
chapter prints of text books on fact-based conceptual modeling and of scientific articles on the
ICT and Knowledge Management approach in this course. Furthermore, we will provide
modeling protocols after the first three lectures lecture that will help students in preparing the
assignments for the next tutorial sessions. The literature is chosen with the following criteria in
mind: providing the scientific foundation for the conceptual modeling approach that we use in
this course and to provide a specification of a protocol or way-of-working that enable students
to acquire conceptual modeling skills and enable them to apply it to their domain of interest. A
large amount of earlier work on fact-based conceptual modeling has been published under the
label of ‘object-role modeling’ (1995-now) or ‘NIAM’ (1979-1995) or the binary model
(1980s).

The following recommended literature will be made available to students1:

Bollen, P.W.L. A derivation procedure for set-comparison constraints in fact-based modeling.

International Workshop on Fact-Oriented Modeling (ORM’11), Hersonissou, Greece, October
19-21, 2011a. Meersman, R., Herrero, P. (Eds.), OTM Workshops, Springer,
 Lecture Notes
in Computer Science 7046, pp.329-338

Bollen, P.W.L., A derivation procedure for mandatory role and set-comparison constraints in
fact-based modeling, in Meteor Research Memorandum RM/11/036. 2011b, Maastricht
University, School of Business and Economics: Maastricht.

Bollen, P.W.L. Enterprise resource Planning; The Need for Semantic verification. F.Piazolo
and M. Felderer (eds.), Innovation and Future of Enterprise Information Systems, Lecture Notes
in Information Systems and Organisation 4, pp. 53-67, Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg,
2013.

Bollen, P.W.L. The relevance of concept definitions in conceptual modeling s. (2018a)

Bollen, P.W.L. A primer on derivation rules (2018b)

1
In the 2nd part of the course additional literature will be made available that is related to the domain of the
conceptual modeling group exercise

Page 4 of 22
Halpin. Conceptual Schema and relational Database Design. 2 nd edition. Prentice-Hall. (1995),
(p. 69-75, 79-121)

Halpin. Information Modeling and Relational Databases. Morgan-Kaufmann (2001), (p. 78-90,
p. 216-244)

Halpin, T, Morgan, T. Information Modeling and Relational Databases. 2 nd edition. Morgan-

Kaufmann (2008), (p. 159-173, 271-277)

Lecture slides for lectures 1, 2, and 3

Modeling protocols 1 and 2 (Available after lectures 1 and 2 on the student portal).

Nijssen and Halpin. Conceptual schema and relational database design: a fact oriented
approach. Prentice-Hall (1989) (p.29-47, p.216-234, p 291-302)

Ontorule Consortium.The ONTORULE: Ontologies meet Business Rules report, 2010 p. 9-60.

Page 5 of 22
3. The evolution of Modeling in ICT and Knowledge Management

In this first-year course we will provide the introductory concepts and methodology of
knowledge modeling and with the skills to model domains of interest on an introductory level
by providing them with ‘state-of-the-art’ methodologies for conceptual modeling. We will not
only provide them with the current state-of-the-art but we will also offer them an insight into
the historical development of these methodologies by using landmark publications as well as
contemporary scientific publications on the field.
The ICT knowledge modeling approach that we will introduce in this course is
generally referred to as Fact-Based Modeling. This approach was pioneered in the early 70’s
and came about by an ever increasing application of information technology in different
domains mainly in the form of database applications. In those days every couple of years a new
database technology emerged (i.e. hierarchical, network, relational), requiring organizations to
remodel their requirements every time into the model of the implementation technology that
had emerged (i.e. hierarchical schema, network schema, relational schema). This development
created the rational for an IT-independent language to express requirements. Using such a
language would relieve the owners of IT applications to remodel their requirements every time
a new implementation technology would emerge. Instead they could focus on the conceptual
model that would reflect the latest state of the knowledge in their domain or would provide the
conceptual model of the domain knowledge base. If needed this knowledge model could be
implemented in IT applications by using a conceptual-to-implementation transformation.
Since the 1990’s Knowledge management has become a field on its own and managing
domain knowledge ‘as-such’ has proved to be beneficial in many domains, regardless of the IT
implementation in terms of storing and processing this knowledge.

4. Description of the course and schedule

Session Date Content

Session 1: Knowledge management 1 4/2 Knowledge Management: Importance

of Modeling
Session 2: Tutorial 7/2 Facts, fact types, Rules and
Communication Patterns, the most
important integrity rules
Session 3: Knowledge management 2 11/2 More Integrity rules
Session 4: Tutorial 14/2 More Integrity rules
Session 5: Knowledge management 3 18/2 Derivation rules and Notational
mapping
Session 6: Tutorial 21/2 Derivation rules
Session 7: Knowledge management 4 25/2
Introduction to Workgroup exercise
Session 8: Mid-term 28/2
Session 9: Knowledge management 5 11/3 Workgroup exercise: feedback 1
Session 10:Tutorial 14/3 Workgroup exercise: feedback 2
Session 11: Knowledge management 6 25/3 Workgroup exercise: feedback 3
Session 12:Tutorial 28/3 Discussion of results Semantic
conceptual modeling of workgroup
exercise

Page 6 of 22
5. Instructional format

In this course we will use a variety of educational formats. We will have a combination of
lectures in which the theory is presented illustrated by exercises and cases and tutorials in which
students are expected to have prepared exercises and small case studies. During the tutorial
sessions, feedback on the exercises and case studies is provided. During the tutorial hands-on
explanations with respect to the case studies will be provided. In the tutorial sessions we will
expect students to have prepared a number of tasks that are listed here. On top of that students
are expected to hand-in their workouts to their individualized bonus exercise. The combined
score on these bonus exercises make up 30 % of the final grade of which 10 % is a bonus !.
The individualized bonus exercises will be handed out during the first three tutorials on
Thursday and need to be handed in on the following Monday at the beginning of the lecture.

5.1 Literature guidance

It is important to be well prepared for the lectures as well as for the tutorial meetings. The
course is designed in such a way that students will get to read the basic background literature
for semantic conceptual modeling as well as have access to modeling-protocols that will enable
them to acquire modeling skills themselves. The latter is achieved by spending part of the
lecture on an introduction to the modeling protocols. The modeling protocol that will help
students acquiring skills in modeling will be posted after the lecture as an instructional
document on the student portal. Applying the protocol in the instruction will help students in
preparing the exercises that will be discussed in the tutorial after the lecture.

5.2 Tutorial preparation

Students should try to make all tasks/exercises that are listed under the tutorial, before they
come to the tutorial. If they do not (completely) succeed, they should bring this up during the
tutorial and address this to the tutor so the tutor can explain it. It is not expected that all exercises
can be tackled a 100 % before the tutorial. This is an essential part of PBL: prepared students
that bring up the issues that are not clear yet.

5.3 The semantic conceptual modeling workgroup exercise

From session 7 and onwards students will work in working groups on a real-life DKE related
assignment. To work on a manageable project (PBL, Project Based Learning) each tutor group
will be divided in Working Groups (WG), each having between 3 and 6 students.The
composition of the WG is either by the students in the first tutorial, or in absence of that result,
by the tutor. A major aspect is the WG work is to specify the fact types, the associated integrity
rules and the associated concept definitions of a DKE domain that will be provided to each
time

Page 7 of 22
6. Assessment and attendance

In order to pass this block the following requirements must have been met:
- Fulfilling presence requirement
- A grade for the (open-book) mid-term test on Knowledge Management in week 4 that
is at least a 5.0
- Sufficient participation in the 5 tutorials of the course
- A grade for the workgroup semantic conceptual modeling exercise that is at least a 5.0.

The final grade for the block is composed as follows:

- Mid-term test in week 4 (50 %)
- Bonus exercises (20 % of regular grade + 10 % bonus)
- Participation in the tutorials (pass)
- Workgroup semantic conceptual modeling exercise (30 %)

The student must participate in at least 70% of the lectures/tutorial of each course in year 1.
This means that in this course every student has to attend at least 8 out of the 12
lectures/tutorials. A student who fails the attendance requirement in year 1 is excluded from the
resit exam. I.e. no assignments have to be given for students who fail attendance, they are not
allowed to do the resit. Students who not have met the attendance requirement can request an
additional assignment to make up for this insufficient attendance. To qualify for an additional
assignment a student may not have missed more than 5 of the 12 lectures/tutorials.
Furthermore, it is expected that every student at all times will come to the tutorial that
he/she has been scheduled in. Not doing so will lead to a fail for the participation and therefore
for a fail for the course.

7. Course coordinator and partners

The course coordinator for this course is:

 Dr. Peter Bollen
Dept. of Organization and Strategy
Maastricht University School of Business and Economics
room A.1.10, tel. 3883715 e-mail: p.bollen@maastrichtuniversity.nl

This course is set-up and organized as a co-creation effort between Maastricht University and
PNA Group in Heerlen.

Page 8 of 22
8. The Lectures and Tutorial Sessions

Session 1 (Lecture 1): Introduction to Knowledge Management: Importance of

Modeling

Preparation before you come to the first lecture.

Read section 3.1 in chapter 3 of Nijssen and Halpin (1989). This is one of the introductory
chapters on the first international text book of fact-based modeling in which semantic
conceptual modeling is posited in the software life cycle: the specification and design of a
conceptual schema.
Subsequently read pages 9-12 (chapter 6 and chapter 7 up till section 7.1) of the
ONTORULE report. Here we witness the development of fact-based modeling as it was posited
in 1989 to an approach for structuring knowledge.
Go back to the Nijssen and Halpin book and read section 3.2, here a pre-view is given of the
‘original’ Conceptual Schema Design Procedure (CSDP) in fact-based modeling.
Then read section 3.3 of Nijssen and Halpin in which the first step of the CSDP is illustrated:
from examples to elementary facts. This section clearly illustrates that the combination of an
example document from the domain and the verbalization of such a document by a domain user
(or expert) by using the telephone heuristic into elementary facts is essential to capture the
domain semantics.

The need for insight in their knowledge capital has become increasingly important for
organizations to become more agile and therefore more competitive. Knowledge management
in the sense of durable specifications for software systems is also of vital importance. For this
reason knowledge management is becoming a hot item for organizations. Several approaches
towards knowledge management exist. In this course we consider the ICT approach which
focuses on explicitating and structuring the knowledge such that it can be maximally structured
and objectively shared.

In the course we demonstrate that a knowledge specification consists of 5 dimensions, namely:

data, semantics, processes, communication patterns and rules, that form an integrated whole.
The integration of these dimensions within the context of Knowledge Management can be
depicted clearly by means of the knowledge triangle (see figure 1.1).

Page 9 of 22
Figure 1.1: Knowledge triangle

During this session, we first focus on the data dimensions by introducing a framework and
protocol for developing these model dimensions. We end the lecture with a perspective on the
integration: how are the 5 dimensions related to each other, and provide some insight on the
dependencies between them.

The steps of the CogNIAM knowledge modelling protocol that we will introduce and explain
during the first lecture are summarized here2:

Step 0: In case there are no examples, the knowledge engineer produces the examples
and submits them to the persons that know the domain.
Step 1: Verbalise from examples of representations of facts
Step 2: Denote variable and constant parts in the fact
Step 3: Qualification of variables in the fact
Step 4: Identification of concepts mentioned in the facts
Step 5: Generalization towards fact type forms (fact communication patterns) and fact
types
Step 6: Adding Uniqueness rules (NIAM/ORM CSDP step 4)
Preparation after the first lecture.

During the lecture an example of applying the CogNIAM modeling protocol up till step 6 is
provided. This coincides with the first 4 steps from the 1989 CSDP. It is a good idea to read
now after the lecture the additional theoretical literature on the steps in the modeling protocol.
In the modeling instruction that is posted on the student portal it is clearly explained how to
derive an initial knowledge structure diagram in which basically rudimentary elementary fact
types that contain references to entity types and naming conventions (name types) are
incorporated. In section 3.5 of Halpin (1995) these basic rudimentary diagrams are illustrated.
Furthermore it is shown how schemas can be trimmed and how basic derivations can be noted
and made explicit.

2
Note that in the ORM mandatory literature different step numbers in the CSDP procedure are used because of
the evolution in conceptual modeling over the last 30 years.

Page 10 of 22
An alternative explanation and a clear illustration up till step 5 of the CogNIAM modeling
protocol is presented in section 7.1 through 7.5 of the ONTORULE report. Note that the
notational convention has evolved by adding explicit fact type forms to the fact types and where
the role names refer to the entity types or name types that play the role. Furthermore we notice
that circles connected to the boxes are replaced by unary fact types that explicitly declare in
what context instances of name types identify entity types. As we will see later leaving out the
(regular and hyphenated) circles will allow us to consider individual fact types as ‘building
stones’ of a semantic conceptual schema rather than a complete schema.

Finally, we will read some background literature on the first group of integrity rules, that are
referred to as uniqueness constraints (uniqueness rules) in chapter 4 of Halpin (1995) and a
check on the elementarity of fact types. It is recommended to read sections 4.1, 4.2, 4.3 and
4.5 of Halpin (1995). It is also recommended to read the primer on naming conventions in
which it is illustraated for an example domain that choosing a naming convention is not a trivial
task for some domains.

Literature:

The ONTORULE: Ontologies meet Business Rules report p. 9-12, p.14-34

Halpin. Conceptual Schema and Relational Database Design. 2nd edition (1995), (p. 69-75, 79-
121)

Halpin. Information Modeling and Relational Datbases (2001), (p. 78-90)

Nijssen and Halpin. Conceptual schema and relational database design: a fact oriented
approach, (p.29-47)

Lecture slides lecture 1 (will be posted on the student portal after the lecture)

Modeling protocol part 1 (will be posted on the student portal after the lecture)

Bollen, P. A primer on naming conventions

Page 11 of 22
Session 2 (Tutorial): Fact types, Uniqueness Rules and Communication patterns

In this session we will expect students to have prepared a number of tasks that are listed under
session 2 (tasks 2.1, 2.2 and 2.3). Students will be asked to have prepared the workouts of these
tasks at the beginning of the tutorial. Furthermore, students will have to hand-in their
individualized bonus exercise at the beginning of the tutorial session. Note that in total 30 %
(=20 % of the regular grade + 10 % bonus) of the course grade will be determined by the quality
of these bonus exercise hand-ins !. We will ask the students to derive level I and the first three
layers of level II of the knowledge triangle by applying the CogNIAM modelling protocol. For
now we will only derive the fact types, fact type forms and uniqueness integrity rules (steps 1
through 6).
At the end of the tutorial the first bonus exercise will be handed out to the students.
Note that these bonus exercises are personalized. This means that the students have to hand in
the bonus exercise hand-out in which they have put the work-out in the assigned box on that
document. The coordinator will have a copy of these documents, so students have to hand in
their personalized exercise. Handing in another exercise will lead to 0 points for that exercise.
The deadline for handing these personalized bonus exercises is the beginning of the
next lecture (So you will be handed out your bonus exercises on Thursday and they should be
handed in on the next Monday’s lecture3).

Task 2.1:
Make exercise 2 on page 43 of Nijssen and Halpin (1989)
Make exercise 2 on page 47 of Nijssen and Halpin (1989)

Task 2.2:
Make exercise 4.2.1 on page 90 of Halpin (1995)
Make exercise 4.3.1 on page 97 of Halpin (1995)
Make exercise 4.3.2 on page 98 of Halpin (1995)

Task 2.3: The Block chain

In the first lecture we have introduced the block chain as an example domain for our knowledge
management course. It was shown how we can apply the fact-based modeling protocol to create
a conceptual model of the block-chain concept.

Figure 2.1: Example of non-genesis block in a block chain

3
The first bonus exercise is handed out on Thursday February 7th, but only needs to be handed in at the beginning
of the 2nd lecture on Monday February 11th.

Page 12 of 22
One of the advantages of the conceptual modeling approach is that we can extend our universe
of discourse with new examples of communication that exist within the domain. In this task we
will zoom in on the content of a given (non-genesis) block in the block chain as given in figure
2.1.

In the following a description of the block-header is provided.. A Block Header comprises

three fields, written when a block is created.

Block number: An integer starting at 0 (the genesis block), and increased by 1 for every
new block appended to the blockchain..
Current Block Hash: The hash of all the transactions contained in the current block.
Previous Block Hash: A copy of the hash from the previous block in the blockchain.

These fields are internally derived by cryptographically hashing the block data. They
ensure that each and every block is inextricably linked to its neighbour, leading to an
immutable ledger.

Question: apply steps 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 of the CogNIAM modeling protocol4

4
Provide a conceptual schema that contains the relevant fact types, fact type forms, identified concepts and
uniqueness rules.

Page 13 of 22
Session 3 (Lecture 2): More integrity rules

Preparation before you come to the second lecture.

As a final quality check on step 4 from the CogNIAM modeling protocol read section 4.6
from Halpin (1995).
Read pages 159-166 of chapter 5 of Halpin and Morgan (2008). Here the mandatory
(integrity) rule is introduced. Deriving instances of this rule type in a domain subject area makes
up step 5 of the CSDP or the mandatory rule or non-empty rule sub-step of step 7 of the
CogNIAM modeling procedure. Subsequently read pages 216-220 of chapter 6 of Halpin
(2001). A more popular introduction to set comparison constraints is given in the ONTORULE
report pages 35-38.
Subsequently read pages 220-226 of Halpin (2001) on value rule (see also section 7.6.3 in
the ONTORULE report), independent object types and objectified associations (or nesting).
In section 7.2 of Halpin and Morgan (2008) occurrence frequency rules are introduced rule
(see also section 7.6.4 in the ONTORULE report). Finally read the white paper on the
relevance of concept definitions (Bollen, 2018a)

One of the important elements of the data dimension of knowledge is the element of the data-
related integrity rules that ensure that the data in the fact base are in accordance with all the
integrity rules. In this session, we discuss and apply additional data-related integrity rules and
introduce the protocol that can be used to identify and determine these rules. A second
dimension of a knowledge model is the semantic dimension. We introduce this dimension, by
specifying what concepts are, how definitions are to be formed, and we introduce a maturity
model to measure the correctness of the definition structure. We will extend the CogNIAM
protocol with the modelling steps 7 and 8:

Step 7: Add other integrity rules:

 Set comparison rules: subset, equality, exclusion (on the population of the
relevant fact types) (NIAM/ORM CSDP step 6)
 Mandatory (non-empty) rule (NIAM/ORM CSDP step 5)
 Value rule (NIAM/ORM CSDP step 7)
 Occurrence frequency rule (NIAM/ORM CSDP step 7)
 Non-overlap rule
 Value comparison rule in fact instance
 General rule

Step 8: Define concepts

Furthermore, we will illustrate in the lecture the concept of nesting.

Page 14 of 22
Preparation after the second lecture.

During the lecture the example of the CogNIAM modeling protocol on the lecture example up
till step 8 is provided. In the modeling instruction part 2 that is posted on the student portal it
is clearly explained how to derive a semantic conceptual schema up to step 8 of the CogNIAM
modeling protocol. At this stage it might be interesting to read some background material on
the modeling procedure that leads to the discovery of mandatory ans set-comparision integrity
rules. The article of Bollen: A derivation procedure for set-comparison constraints in fact-
based modeling (2011a) provides you with a explicit modeling-protocol for discovering set
comparison integrity rules in an application domain. Next to that (and partially overlapping) it
is recommended to read the research memo of Bollen (2011b) in which the relationship
between mandatory rules and set-comparison rules is illustrated

Literature:

Bollen, P.W.L. A derivation procedure for set-comparison constraints in fact-based modeling.

International Workshop on Fact-Oriented Modeling (ORM’11), Hersonissou, Greece, October
19-21, 2011a. Meersman, R., Herrero, P. (Eds.), OTM Workshops, Springer,
 Lecture Notes
in Computer Science 7046, pp.329-338

Bollen, P.W.L., A derivation procedure for mandatory role and set-comparison constraints in
fact-based modeling, in Meteor Research Memorandum RM/11/036. 2011b, Maastricht
University, School of Business and Economics: Maastricht.

Bollen, P.W.L. The relevance of concept definitions in conceptual modeling. (2018a)

Halpin. Conceptual Schema and relational Database Design. 2 nd edition (1995), (p. 117-121)

Halpin. Information Modeling and Relational Databases. (2001), (p. 216-226)

Halpin, T, Morgan, T. Information Modeling and Relational Databases. 2 nd edition (2008), (p.
159-166, 272-277)

Lecture slides lecture 2 (will be posted on the student portal after the lecture)

Modeling protocol part 2 (will be posted on the student portal after the lecture)

Nijssen and Halpin. Conceptual schema and relational database design: a fact oriented
approach, (1989) (p.29-47)

Ontorule Consortium. The ONTORULE: Ontologies meet Business Rules report, 2010 (can be
downloaded from Eleum) p. 14-19, 25-46.

Page 15 of 22
Session 4 (Tutorial): Nesting and More Integrity rules

In this session we will expect students to have prepared a number of tasks that are listed under
session 4 (tasks 4.1, 4.2 and 4.3). Students will be asked to have prepared the workouts of these
tasks at the beginning of the tutorial. Furthermore, students will have to hand-in their 2nd
individualized bonus exercise at the beginning of the tutorial session. Note that in total 20 %
of the course grade will be determined by the quality of the bonus exercise hand-ins !. We will
ask the students to derive level I and the first three layers of level II of the knowledge triangle
by applying the CogNIAM modelling protocol (steps 1 through 8).

Task 4.1:

Make exercise 4.4.2 on page 105 of Halpin (1995)

Make exercise 4.6.1 on page 120-121 of Halpin (1995)
Make exercise 4.3.3 on page 98 of Halpin (1995)

Task 4.2:

Make exercise 6.3.1 on page 226 of Halpin (2001)

Make exercise 6.4.1 on page 241 of Halpin (2001)
Make exercise 7.2.1 on page 275 of Halpin (2008)

Task 4.3: The Ledger, Block chain and World state

The fabcar sample app creates a set of 10 cars each with a unique identity; a different
color, make, model and owner. Here’s what the ledger looks like after the first four cars
have been created.

Figure 4.1: Example of Ledger, Block chain and World state

The ledger, L, comprises a world state, W and a blockchain, B. W contains four states with
keys: CAR1, CAR2, CAR3 and CAR4. B contains two blocks, 0 and 1. Block 1 contains
four transactions: T1, T2, T3, T4.

Page 16 of 22
We can see that the ledger world state contains states that correspond to CAR0, CAR1,
CAR2 and CAR3. CAR0 has a value which indicates that it is a blue Toyota Prius,
currently owned by Tomoko, and we can see similar states and values for the other cars.
Moreover, we can see that all car states are at version number 0, indicating that this is their
starting version number – they have not been updated since they were created.

We can also see that the ledger blockchain contains two blocks. Block 0 is the genesis
block, though it does not contain any transactions that relate to cars. Block 1 however,
contains transactions T1, T2, T3, T4 and these correspond to transactions that created the
initial states for CAR0 to CAR3 in the world state. We can see that block 1 is linked to
block 0.

Question: apply steps 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 of the CogNIAM modeling protocol5 to the content
of the world state

5
Provide a conceptual schema that contains the relevant fact types, fact type forms, identified concepts and
uniqueness rules, other integrity rules and define identified concepts

Page 17 of 22
Session 5 (Lecture 3): Derivation Rules, level III of the knowledge pyramid and
Notational Mapping

Preparation before you come to the third lecture.

Read pages 69-75 of chapter 5 of Halpin (1995). Here the derivation rule is introduced.
Deriving instances of this rule type in a domain subject area makes up step 9 of the CogNIAM
modeling procedure. Subsequently read a primer on derivation rules (Bollen(2018b)). In the
literature some different views exist on incorporating derived fact types in the conceptual
schema. In this course we will assume that derived fact types are incorporated into the
conceptual schema. We can decided to show explicitly that they are derived by adding an asterix
to (the name of) the fact type. We further recommend to read chapter 10 of Nijssen and Halpin
(1989) to get some ideas of schema equivalence that can exist because of different outcomes of
some of the steps in the modeling procedure. Next to that we will provide some transformation
between the ORM and CogNIAM modeling conventions. Finally we will show that the level
III is the highest level in the pyramid because modeling level 3 models will once again lead to
a level III model (read chapter 13 of Halpin and Nijssen (1989) and chapter 8 of the
Ontorule report.

The final aspect of the complete knowledge model is the completion of the rules dimension, in
particular the derivation rules. Derivation rules define the way new facts are determined based
on existing facts. In the 2nd part of the lecture we will discuss the notational conventions for
ORM and CogNIAM and we will show how we can map models from one notational
convention to another. Furthermore we will shine a light on the third level in the knowledge
triangle (the meta level).

We will extend the CogNIAM protocol with the modelling step 9:

Step 9: Define derivation rules

Literature:

Bollen, P.W.L. Enterprise resource Planning; The Need for Semantic verification. F.Piazolo
and M. Felderer (eds.), Innovation and Future of Enterprise Information Systems, Lecture Notes
in Information Systems and Organisation 4, pp. 53-67, Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg,
2013.

Bollen (2018b): A primer on derivation rules

Halpin. Conceptual Schema and relational Database Design. 2 nd edition (1995), (p. 69-75)

Lecture slides lecture 3

Nijssen and Halpin. Conceptual schema and relational database design: a fact oriented
approach, (1989) (p.216-234, p 291-302)

Ontorule Consortium.The ONTORULE: Ontologies meet Business Rules report, 2010 p. 58-
60.

Page 18 of 22
Session 6 (Tutorial): Derivation rules

In this session we will expect students to have prepared a number of tasks that are listed under
session 6 (tasks 6.1, and 6.2). Students will be asked to have prepared the workouts of these
tasks at the beginning of the tutorial.

Task 6.1: Driving test

The following report is an extract from an information system that records the results of a
driving test performed by various employees. A driver may take as many tests as he or she
wishes, but cannot take more than one test on the same day. A minimum score of 80 is required
to pass the test. Sometimes a person takes another test simply to try for a better score. A driver
has at most one driver name, consisting of last name, a comma and then the first name.

test date Driver SSN Driver name score Pass or fail

101 01-01-2017 539-31-1234 Jones, Jim 75 F
102 01-01-2017 438-12-3456 Harris, Selena 85 P
103 01-02-2017 539-31-1234 Jones, Jim 80 P
104 01-03-2017 789-23-5786 Jones, Jim 82 P
105 01-04-2017 678-34-6782 72 F

A test will be identified by a test code. A driver can be identified by a social security number
(SSN). A score is identified by a natural number in the range from 1 through 100. A test result
is identified by a result code that can either be a P or a F. A passing score is a score that is >=
80.

Question: apply steps 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 of the CogNIAM modeling protocol

Task 6.2: Smart Contracts

To support the consistent update of information — and to enable a whole host of ledger
functions (transacting, querying, etc) — a blockchain network uses smart contracts to
provide controlled access to the ledger. Smart contracts are not only a key mechanism for
encapsulating information and keeping it simple across the network, they can also be
written to allow participants to execute certain aspects of transactions (see figure 6.1)
automatically.

A smart contract can, for example, be written to stipulate the cost of shipping an item
where the shipping charge changes depending on how quickly the item arrives. With the
terms agreed to by both parties and written to the ledger, the appropriate funds change
hands automatically when the item is received.

Let’s consider the following smart contract between a supplier organization and a customer
organization within a consortium of organizations within a given industry (figure 6.2).

Page 19 of 22
Transaction: 235467
Supplier ID: 565748 Customer ID: 57567

Product shipment form origin: Maastricht to destination: Sittard

Package size: B
Transportation priority: regular

Net order cost : Euro 234,50

Transportation fee : Euro 15,00
_________

Total shipment value: Euro 249,50

Transaction: 235468
Supplier ID: 565748 Customer ID: 35462

Product shipment form origin: Sittard to destination: Utrecht

Package size: A
Transportation priority: overnight

Net order cost : Euro 404,50

Transportation fee : Euro 80,00
_________

Total shipment value: Euro 484,50

Figure 6.1: Transaction within industry consortium

Every organization in the consortium can be a supplier and customer at any point in time. The
total shipment value of a transaction is the sum of the net order cost and the transportation fee.
In the following smart contract it is stipulated what the transportation fee is gonna be for a given
transaction between a customer and a supplier within the consortium. The transportation fee for
a transaction is determined by the distance factor for the orgin/destination combination, the
package size and the transportation priority.

Page 20 of 22
 Smart contract for calculating shipment value in industry consortium

Destination/origin Origin/destination Distance factor

Sittard Maastricht 1
Utrecht Maastricht 5
Sittard Utrecht 5

Transportation fee based on distance factor, size and transportation priority

Size Transportation priority Transportation fee

A overnight Distance factor* 16
A regular Distance factor* 8
B overnight Distance factor* 30
B regular Distamce factor*15

Figure 6.2: Smart contract within industry consortium

Question:

Apply steps 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 of the CogNIAM modeling protocol6 to the integrated

Universe of discourse that consists of the transactions in figure 6.1 and the smart contract in
figure 6.2.

6
Provide a conceptual schema that contains the relevant fact types, fact type forms, identified concepts and
uniqueness rules, other integrity rules and define identified concepts

Page 21 of 22
Session 7 (Lecture 4): Introduction to the student conceptual modeling team exercise

In this lecture we will finalize the introduction of the knowledge management concepts and
we will introduce the conceptual modelling team exercises.

Session 8 : Mid-term

A 2 hour open book test on the content of sessions 1,2,3,4,5 and 6

Session 9 (Lecture 5): Briefing on the student conceptual modeling team exercise

In this lecture we will address issues regarding the content of the conceptual modelling team
exercises.

Session 10 (Tutorial): Semantic conceptual modeling of team exercise 1

In this tutorial students can ask questions and feedback on the status of their modeling team
exercise

Session 11 (Lecture 6): Semantic conceptual modeling of team exercise 2

In this lecture we will address issues regarding the content of the conceptual modelling team
exercises.

Session 12 (Tutorial): Semantic conceptual modeling team exercise 3

In this tutorial students can will get feedback on the status of their modeling team exercise
.

Page 22 of 22