Comparison of models of a complex system

• US 20100036874A1
• Filed: 07/10/2009
• Published: 02/11/2010
• Est. Priority Date: 03/19/2003
• Status: Active Grant

• Current Assignee: Ipr Value Ug
• Original Assignee: Roland Pulfer
• Inventors: Pulfer, Roland
• Granted Patent: US 8,195,709 B2
• Time in Patent Office: Days
• US Class Current: N/A
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 10/06 Resources, workflows, human or project management; Enterprise or organisation planning; Enterprise or organisation modelling
• CPC Class Codes: Y10S 707/99945 Object-oriented database structure processing

Abstract

The invention relates to a method for comparing computer-based and data-processing models of a complex system, with a first model and a second model of the system, whereby the models reflect a model of a system behavior by means of predefined objects which represent activities and units within the system. The inventive method comprises the steps of comparing the models and destination of corresponding respective predefined objects of the first and second model, detecting differences in attributes of corresponding predefined objects and outputting the differences to a user. The use of predefined objects—that is, of objects that pertain to a known set of types—enables a more-efficient comparison of models than in unstructured models.

Claims

1-21. -21. (canceled)

22. A method for modeling a change in a complex system using comparison of at least two computer-based, data-processing models of the complex system, and the method comprising the following steps:

by a computer, comparing a first and a second model and determining predefined objects of the first and the second model,

wherein the predefined objects are associated with one another in the first and the second model,

wherein the first model and the second model of the complex system are present and in each case model a system behavior by way of predefined objects that represent activities and units within the complex system,

wherein the first model is a separate and distinct representation of the complex system in a first condition, and

wherein the second model is a separate and distinct representation of the complex system in a second condition;

by a computer, determining the associations and differences in attributes of the predefined objects associated with one another in the first and second model; and

by a computer, using a comparison algorithm to automatically determine action steps required for conveying the complex system from the first condition as represented by the first model into the second condition as represented by the second model.

23. The method of claim 22, wherein:

the modeling of the change in the complex system, in the first model and the second model, on a lowermost description level applies a limited set of basic types representing the units within the complex system and describing the units within the complex system interaction;

each basic type processes data, said data representing values of characteristics of the units mentioned; and

the set of basic types comprises;

a basic type “

transfer”

, which represents a transfer of units, leads through data for characterizing these units, and comprises one input as well as one output,

a basic type “

merge”

, which represents a combining of units, links data for characterizing these units to one another, and comprises two inputs as well as one output, and

a basic type “

split”

, which represents a division of units, determines data for characterizing units, which come from a dividing-up from data of a unit to be divided up, and comprises one input as well as two outputs,

wherein in each type of the basic types, inputs serve for receiving data into respective basic types and outputs serve for transferring data out of respective basic types, and

wherein computer-based, data-processing models of the complex system are formed by way of forming a quantity of basic types and by way of linking inputs and outputs of these basic types;

thereby modeling the complex system in the first condition and in the second condition to facilitate a computer analysis of the change in the complex system.

24. The method according to claim 23, wherein on comparison of the first and second model, the predefined objects of the models are associated with one another on agreement of at least one of

an absolute identifier of the objects,

a qualified name in each case indicating and defining the objects under the designation of higher-order objects, and

a type description of the predefined objects.

25. The method according to claim 24, wherein an agreement of an identifier has priority over an agreement of names.

26. The method according to claim 24, wherein a manual association has priority over the agreement of identifiers or the agreement of names.

27. The method according to claim 23, wherein the first modeling level and the second model in each case comprise:

at least one first modeling level and second modeling level on which the complex system in each case with different degrees of abstraction is represented by definition of objects and of links between the objects; and

associations between objects of the first modeling level and of the second modeling level.

28. The method according to claim 27, wherein the links represent an exchange or a transfer of working means, and

wherein a working means represents a physical unit or an information unit.

29. The method according to claim 27, wherein the associations between the objects of the first modeling level and second modeling level represent a partial support of the objects of the first modeling level by the objects of the second modeling level.

30. The method according to claim 27, wherein at least some objects on the first modeling level represent processes;

wherein a process is an entirety of tasks and sequences of an organization or production unit; and

wherein at least some objects on the second modeling level represent elements,

wherein an element is a real physical or logical unit, and

wherein the support of a process by an element expresses the fact that the process requires the element in order to be able to function.

31. The method according to claim 27, wherein at least some objects on the first modeling level represent elements;

wherein an element represents a real physical or logical unit; and

wherein at least some objects on the second modeling level represent information and function units,

wherein the information and function units are data, programs, or rules, and

wherein the support of an element by an information and function unit expresses the fact that the element requires the information and function unit in order to be able to function.

32. The method according to claim 22, wherein the first model represents the complex system at a first point in time or an actual condition, and

wherein the second model represents the complex system at a second point in time or a nominal condition.

33. The method according to claim 22, further comprising the step of using the action steps for planning and control of changes of the complex system,

wherein the complex system is a technical installation or a production process.

34. The method according to claim 22, further comprising the step of using the action steps for planning or control of changes of the complex system,

wherein the complex system is a technical installation or a production process.

35. The method according to claim 22, further comprising the step of using the action steps to automatically reconfigure the complex system into the second condition represented by the second model,

wherein the complex system is a technical installation or a production process.