Database Reference
In-Depth Information
Figure 4: Concept map
Note that each representation is similar to, while at the same time, slightly different
from, the others. This is due to the fact that each GCM representation mechanism focuses
on different aspects of the information acquired. The concept map highlights, primarily, the
associations between the different elements, whereas the identifi cative dictionary emphasizes
the meaning of each element. Finally, the narrative text locates elements and associations
at the same level, easing communication with the less technically competent participants
in the analysis.
Because of its intrinsic ambiguousness, the GCM, and the concept map in particular,
can record the problem domain information without any sort of conceptual or computational
constraint such as those imposed by the traditional conceptual models (Dieste, Genero,
Juristo, Maté & Moreno, 2003), thus enabling the set P of problems to be mapped to the
set PM of problem models. As mentioned, all conceptual models categorize the domain of
discourse using constructors with a well-defi ned, that is, non-ambiguous, meaning. Therefore,
the problem domain is fi ltered from the very start of analysis according to the viewpoint
permitted by the conceptual model.
Accordingly, for example, the information recorded in the concept map shown in
Figure 3 can be paraphrased as, “Patient is assigned to Room. Room belongs to Ward.” If
this same information were recorded in a class diagram or a data fl ow diagram, the result
would be as shown in Figure 5(a) and (b), respectively: only the domain aspects that each
conceptual model is capable of recording are considered during analysis. Specifi cally, in
Figure 5(a), information related to the manual or automatic process of assigning a patient
