The meaning of multiplicity of n-ary associations in UML

Génova, Gonzalo; Lloréns, Juan; Martı́nez, Paloma

doi:10.1007/s10270-002-0009-3

Cited by 23 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It is handled by means of an additional element, i.e. a class performing a linking function [19]. As aforementioned in the section describing binary relationships, the OM ODMG 3.0 Standard does not support n-ary relationships [5,10,11].…”

Section: The Object-oriented Database Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Association-Oriented Database Model — n-ary Associations

Krótkiewicz

2017

Int. J. Soft. Eng. Knowl. Eng.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper provides a comparison between methods used to represent unary, binary and n-ary relations in the relational database (RDB) and object-oriented database (OODB) models and the association-oriented database (AODB) model proposed in terms of their unambiguity. We have elaborated upon the RDB, OODB and AODB models perceived from the perspective of the categories applied to de¯ne them. What has been discussed is a number of solutions assuming the form of schemes for the AODB model. We substantiate that those solutions have unequivocally met the conditions of relations of any chosen arity and multiplicity, at the same time keeping the notation concise, unambiguous and considerably expressive.

show abstract

Section: The Object-oriented Database Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Association-Oriented Database Model — n-ary Associations

Krótkiewicz

2017

Int. J. Soft. Eng. Knowl. Eng.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Let's give examples of such relations from the real subject domains [8], [9]. There are two classes: the DISEASE and GENOTYPIC_TRAIT.…”

Section: Using Of Additional Classesmentioning

confidence: 99%

N-ary Relations of Association in Class Diagrams: Design Patterns

Sergievskiy¹

2016

ijacsa

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract-Most of the technology of object-oriented development relies on the use of UML diagrams, in particular, class diagrams. CASE tools, used for automation of objectoriented development, often do not support n-ary associations in the class diagrams, and their implementation in the form of program code in contrast to binary rather time-consuming. The article will show how in some cases it is possible to move from the n-ary association between classes to binary and how can reduce the number of objects. The rules to transform models, that contain n-ary association, will be presented in the form of design patterns. Proposed three new design patterns can be used in the process of developing software systems. These patterns describe transformations of n-ary (often ternary) associations occur between classes in binary and the introduction of additional classes and binary association with the aim of optimizing the model.

show abstract

“…For both approaches, two different interpretations can be made in calculating cardinality constraints depending on whether entity instances (i.e., potential instances or incomplete instances) or relationship instances (i.e., real instances) are taken into account [29].…”

Section: Review Of the Syntax And Semantics Of Cardinality Constraintsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To give one example, while the cardinality constraint in a ternary relationship has the same notation for the Entity-Category-Relationship (ECR) model [24] and UML class diagrams, it also has different semantics. These semantics define the constraints in two different ways, using the Merise method [50] in the case of the former and Chen's approach [29] in the case of the latter. Semantic ambiguity seriously affects designers, both in the design process (e.g., the mapping between a conceptual to relational schema) and when the schema integration comes from several conceptual models.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Guidelines for representing complex cardinality constraints in binary and ternary relationships

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ternary relationships represent the association among three entities whose constraints database designers do not always know how to manage. In other words, it is very difficult for the designer to detect, represent and add constraints in a ternary relationship according to the domain requirements. To remedy the shortcomings in capturing the semantics required for the representation of this kind of relationship, the present paper discusses a practical method to motivate the designer's use of ternary relationships in a methodological framework. The method shows how to calculate cardinality constraints in binary and ternary relationships and to preserve the associated semantics until the implementation phase of the database development method.

show abstract

The meaning of multiplicity of n-ary associations in UML

Cited by 23 publications

References 15 publications

Association-Oriented Database Model — n-ary Associations

Association-Oriented Database Model — n-ary Associations

N-ary Relations of Association in Class Diagrams: Design Patterns

Guidelines for representing complex cardinality constraints in binary and ternary relationships

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About