Conjoining Wymore’s Systems Theoretic Framework and the DEVS Modeling Formalism: Toward Scientific Foundations for MBSE

Abstract

The objective of this research article is to re-introduce some of the concepts provided by A. Wayne Wymore in his mathematical theory of Model-Based Systems Engineering, discuss why his framework might have not been adopted, and define a potential path to modernize the framework for practical application in the digital age. The dense mathematical theory has never been converted to a practical form. We propose a path to modernization by creating a metamodel of Wymore’s mathematical theory of MBSE. This enables explaining the concepts in simple to understand terms and shows the internal consistency provided by the theory. Furthermore, the metamodel allows for conversion of the theory into software application, for which we show some initial results that open the research to the art of the possible. In recognition of limitation of the theory, we make the case for a merger of the theoretical framework with the enhanced formalism of Discrete Event System Specification (DEVS). This will establish a path toward the scientific foundations for MBSE to enable future implementations of the complementary pairing and their empirical results.

Cross-Industry Principles for Digital Representations of Complex Technical Systems in the Context of the MBSE Approach: A Review

“…This can be achieved through the use of a single modeling language or common standards for all components, as well as through a meta-model, which, in this case, is a "model of a model" that maps heterogeneous lower-level models through a single higher-level model. In reference [103], the construction of a metamodel and its subsets of relationships are explained. This is then linked to the DEVS (Discrete Event System Specification), thereby facilitating convergence between the two.…”

DEVS-Based Building Blocks and Architectural Patterns for Intelligent Hybrid Cyberphysical System Design

“…Homomorphisms [29] are useful in proving that implementation are correct realizations and establishing minimal realizations. The general concepts of homomorphism and isomorphism relate system models at the same level of specification.…”

Initial Systems Theoretic Metamodel of Verification Artifacts

“…Particularly, a set of system requirements describe a problem space (boundary) that yields a solution space that contains all systems (and/or designs) that satisfy the set of system requirements [30,31]. For example, in T3SD, the input/output requirement defines a space from which functional system designs can be separated into those that are acceptable from those that are unacceptable [27,28]. This has been extended to suggest that system requirements define a problem space of functions through characterizing desired items to be inputs/outputs (of a system design) that are transferred through desired interfaces [30][31][32][33], which further enables distinguishing the boundary between acceptable and unacceptable system designs.…”

“…Furthermore, T3SD provides a framework for verification built on the basis of homomorphic relationships [16]. Given that homomorphic mapping is established between the functional and buildable system designs, the combined system design is said to be implementable and progresses to testing (e.g., verification) [28]. While we share the assumption that morphisms can be used to characterize an artifact, such as a verification model, T3SD limits verification models to complete system designs.…”

“…The use of homomorphism is, in fact, integral to the Tricotyledon Theory of System Design (T3SD) [27,28], one of the first frameworks for MBSE (e.g., [29]). In T3SD, homomorphism is used to map the preservation of internal structure (e.g., behavior) between the functional system design and its buildable system design, which incorporates the physical elements that execute functionality.…”