IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SYSTEMS, MAN, AND CYBERNETICS—PART C: APPLICATIONS AND REVIEWS, VOL. 42, NO.

1, JANUARY 2012 101

Model-Based Systems Engineering: An Emerging

Approach for Modern Systems
Ana Luı́sa Ramos, Member, IEEE, José Vasconcelos Ferreira, and Jaume Barceló

Abstract—To engineer the modern large, complex, interdisci- performance through cooperative, integrative, adaptable, and
plinary systems-of-systems (SoS), the collaborative world teams interoperable environments.
must “speak” the same language and must work on the same The challenge is getting higher as the classical systems are
“matter.” The “matter” is the system model and the communi-
cation mechanisms must be supported by standard, flexible, and evolving to complex systems-of-systems (SoS) [1], [2], includ-
friendly modeling languages. The evolving model-based systems ing both technological and social contexts [3], [4], thereby in-
engineering (MBSE) approach is leading the way and is expected volving a considerable component of customized services with
to become a standard practice in the field of systems engineering complex human-centered aspects [5] and incorporating an ex-
(SE) in the next decade. As an emerging paradigm for the systems tensive set of challenging requirements, like flexibility, sustain-
of the 21st century, it seems useful to overview its current state
of the art concerning the developing standards, the embryonic for- ability, real-time capability, adaptability, expandability, reliabil-
malisms, the available modeling languages, the methodologies, and ity, usability, and delivery of value to society [6].
the major applications.
Index Terms—Model-based systems engineering (MBSE), mod- A. Systems for Systems Engineering
eling, standards.
The SE field can be either classified as an application of the
systems science, and consequently, its perspective is the one of
I. SYSTEMS ENGINEERING AT A GLANCE the systems thinking “One could imagine a science of relation-
HE contemporary world is crowded of large, interdisci- ships underlying SE” [7] and, as a branch of engineering, with
T plinary, complex systems made of personnel, hardware,
software, information, processes, and facilities. An integrated
relatively new tradition and characterized by the professional
creative application of scientific principles to the design and de-
holistic approach is crucial to develop these systems and take velopment of systems. According to Wymore [8], engineering is
proper account of their multifaceted nature and numerous in- “the creative exploitation of energy, materials and information in
terrelationships. As the system’s complexity and extent grow, organized systems of men, machine and environment, systems
the number of parties involved (i.e., stakeholders and sharehold- which are useful in terms of contemporary human values.”
ers) usually also raises, thereby bringing a considerable amount The definitions of SE, which began to be formalized in the
of points of view, skills, responsibilities, and interests to the 1970s with the first U.S. military standard, are numerous and
interaction. diverse; however, they all share the underlying concepts of the
The field of systems engineering (SE) aims to tackle the systems approach, like holism, synthesis, interrelationships, as
complex and interdisciplinary whole of those sociotechnical well as the engineering-project-based ideas of system life cy-
systems, thereby providing the means to enable their successful cle and requirements. The classical definitions, from the 1970s,
realization. Its exploitation in our modern world is assuming are still used, but their focus was mainly on the translation of
an increasing relevance noticeable by emergent standards, sci- requirements to design. The following ones, from the 1990s
entific journals and papers, international conferences, and aca- and 2000s, are more expanded embracing a more holistic per-
demic programmes in the field. This significance is probably due spective, the emergent properties, and the sociotechnical aspect.
to the escalating complex and “hasty” nature of our present-day The definition from the International Council on SE (INCOSE)
systems and the interest in achieving their overall “maximum” can be understood as a consensus of the mentioned different
perspectives: “An interdisciplinary approach and means to en-
able the realization of successful systems. It focuses on defining
Manuscript received June 30, 2010; revised September 13, 2010 and customers needs and required functionality early in the devel-
November 11, 2010; accepted January 8, 2011. Date of publication March 3,
2011; date of current version December 16, 2011. This work was supported in opment cycle, documenting requirements, and then proceeding
part by the Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology under Grant Sis- with design synthesis and system validation while considering
tema de Formação de Recursos Humanos/Bolsas de Doutoramento/43892/2008. the complete problem” [9].
This paper was recommended by Associate Editor S. H. Rubin.
A. L. Ramos and J. V. Ferreira are with the Unidade de Investigação Surprisingly, in a recent and evolving field, there are already
em Governança, Competitividade e Polı́ticas Públicas, Department of Eco- references to “the old SE” (or the traditional, the classical, the
nomics, Management, and Industrial Engineering, University of Aveiro, 3810- ordered) and “the new SE” [6], [7]. This evolution has been
193 Aveiro, Portugal (e-mail: [email protected]; [email protected]).
J. Barceló is with the Department of Statistics and Operations Re- reflecting predominantly the nature of the systems to engineer,
search, Technical University of Catalonia, 08034 Barcelona, Spain (e-mail: which, in turn, reflect the tremendous and continuous advances
[email protected]). in the technological and societal fields.
Color versions of one or more of the figures in this paper are available online
at http://ieeexplore.ieee.org. The classical systems (i.e., the system-as-machine paradigm)
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TSMCC.2011.2106495 were small to large-scale, multidisciplinary, relatively stable
1094-6977/$26.00 © 2011 IEEE

Authorized licensed use limited to: Univ Federal do ABC (UFABC). Downloaded on October 12,2022 at 12:20:26 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
102 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SYSTEMS, MAN, AND CYBERNETICS—PART C: APPLICATIONS AND REVIEWS, VOL. 42, NO. 1, JANUARY 2012

and predictable, without people as a component, and were typ- in 2008), the most-relevant updated international benchmark.
ically from the aerospace and defense industries. The new ones There has been a growing effort to integrate the systems and
(i.e., the system-as-organism paradigm), which must cope with software-engineering processes, along with hardware and hu-
the global challenges of sustainable development, are large man engineering processes due to the increasing criticality of
scale, complex, adaptive, interoperable, scalable, technology- software within systems and to the increasing emphasis on user-
intensive, human integrative, and comprise; for example, the intensive systems and value generation.
so-called “super systems,” like transportation and sustainable Besides the process standards, the fundamental core that pro-
energy [10]. The perspectives of the different shareholders and vides a foundation for a SE approach, there are other standards
stakeholders, which may be conflicting and competing, must be in the field. The AFs is one of those groups, which includes
synthesized and resolved to serve the highest order system of the standard frameworks that have been developed to support
interest needs [6]. systems’ (and software) architecting. According to Cloutier and
This emerging metafield of study, in a synergistically coevo- Verma [16], a framework is a logical structure or an organi-
lution with SE and aiming to add a broader context to the field, zational skeleton used to classify concepts, terminology, data,
is called engineering systems, which is “a field of study taking artifacts, etc. There are several established AF typically oriented
an integrative holistic view of large-scale, complex, technolog- for a given target domain. The enterprise architecting, the sys-
ically enabled systems with significant enterprise-level interac- tems architecting, and the software architecting are the classical
tions and sociotechnical interfaces” [6]. There are some other contexts [17], [18]. In the first group, we found the well-known
references that label this new field as complex SE [7], engi- “Zachman Enterprise Framework,” as well as the The Open
neering of complexity [11], or SoS engineering [1], [2]. The Group Architecture Framework (TOGAF) and the Federal En-
trend is to evolve to a unified SE of the future. According to terprise Architecture Framework (FEAF) [19]. The systems’
Rouse [12], SE should be an integrative discipline, exploring, architecting has been described through the U.S. Department
understanding, and designing how everything fits together. of Defense Architecture Framework (DoDAF) and the MoDAF
frameworks. Finally, the software architecting has been repre-
sented by the 4+1 view model of architecture [20] and by the
B. Systems-Engineering Benchmarks
more recent model-driven architecture (MDA), from the OMG.
A technical standard is an established norm that allows the The methodologies is another group with potential upcoming
unified utilization of criteria, terminology, methods, processes, benchmarks in the field. The harmony SE, the object-oriented
measures, frameworks, tools, etc. The standards are unifying SE method (OOSEM), the rational unified process for SE (RUP
references necessary to institutionalize the practice of a given SE), and the object-process methodology (OPM) are informal
discipline, helping to translate the technical perspective to a methodological principles that will mature and may become
more business one, helping to clarify its relevance to society, and established norms in the next decade.
to meet future challenges [13]. Furthermore, and in emerging The modeling tools will be further described in the next
collaborative world environments, they facilitate the interoper- section.
ability between people and organizations. The standardization The data/model interchange mechanisms support data and
is somehow a measure of the maturity, widely expansion, and model exchange among tools. The unified-modeling-language
growing acceptance of a given field and, in this sense, SE is still (UML) based modeling languages have a common founda-
a new area with a lack of accepted definitions and metrics [14]. tion known as OMG metaobject facility (MOF) (which is also
The core set of SE standards is relatively new, with less than an ISO standard ISO/IEC 19502: 2005), an extensible inte-
a decade, and is currently in intense development by the Stan- gration framework to define, manipulate, and integrate meta-
dards Technical Committee of the INCOSE, the Subcommit- data and data in a platform-independent manner. The XML
tee Seven of the International Organization for Standardization metadata-interchange (XMI) specification, which is also from
(ISO), the International Electromechanical Commission (IEC), OMG (as well as an ISO standard ISO/IEC 19503: 2005), en-
the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), ables the interchange of metadata between UML-based mod-
and the Object Management Group (OMG). The first stan- eling tools, like UML or SysML, and MOF-based meta-
dards in the SE field have risen from the American military data repositories in distributed heterogeneous environments,
and aerospace industries, in the 1970s and 1980s, and were through the XML (eXtensible Markup Language). Probably,
dedicated to the engineering process or, in other words, to the the most-relevant and inclusive standard in this area will be the
“WHAT” activities are to be performed. Since then, there has norm STEP/ISO 10303: AP233 (Industrial automation systems
been an effort to take these standards to be domain indepen- and integration: Product data representation and exchange—
dent in order to be applicable across different sectors and to be Part 233: SE data representation). Still under development,
international. this standard is a modular vendor neutral format for inter-
According to Friedenthal [15] the taxonomy of the SE bench- change of SE data and to support interoperability among
marks includes five major areas: the process, the architecture tools.
frameworks (AFs), the methodologies, the modeling tools, and These (formal/informal) standards constitute the core set of
the data/model interchange mechanisms. norms that have been driven the development of SE. This stan-
The process standards still constitute the predominant core dardization is crucial to advance the field and to establish bench-
of norms, being the ISO/IEC 15288: “Systems and software mark practices across different domains.
engineering—System life-cycle processes,” from 2002 (revised

Authorized licensed use limited to: Univ Federal do ABC (UFABC). Downloaded on October 12,2022 at 12:20:26 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
RAMOS et al.: MODEL-BASED SYSTEMS ENGINEERING: AN EMERGING APPROACH FOR MODERN SYSTEMS 103

II. MODELING FUNDAMENTALS

Modeling is a universal technique to understand and simplify
the reality through abstraction. From brain representations to
computer simulations, the models are pervasive in the mod-
ern world, being the foundation of systems’ development and
systems’ operation.
A model (the term “model” derives from the Latin word
modulus, which means measure, rule, pattern, example to be
followed [21]) is a representation of a selected part of the world,
the domain of interest, that captures the important aspects, from
a certain point of view, simplifying or omitting the irrelevant
features [22]. Ludewig [21] described three criteria that a model Fig. 1. Left side and right side of the brain. L-mode is the verbal, analytical,
must meet in order to be elected as a model: mapping criterion logical, rational, etc., thinking. R-mode is the visual, integrative, holistic, etc.,
(there is an original object or phenomenon that is mapped to thinking.
the model), reduction criterion (not all the properties of the
original are mapped on to the model, and this one must mirror the model purpose. Criteria, such as reliability, completeness,
at least some properties of the original; this is the real strength accuracy, power to convince, ease of use, compatibility, run
of models), and pragmatic criterion (the model is useful, i.e., time, and extendibility are of frequent utilization. According to
can replace the original for some purpose). Karcanias [27], modeling is “the common basis to human activ-
According to Rumbaugh et al. [22], the models are important ities and thus its development is also a measure of our ability to
to do the following: understand nature, society, and related issues.”
1) Capture and state requirements and domain knowledge so
that all stakeholders may understand them.
2) Think about the design of a system. A. Brain Thinking
3) Produce usable work products. It is important to understand how the brain system functions
4) Organize, find, examine, filter, manipulate, and edit infor- and handles information in order to try to improve the learning
mation about large systems. processes and the mechanisms of communication.
5) Explore several solutions operationally, economically, and Our brain is divided in two hemispheres, which are connected
environmentally. with fibbers, which interpret the world differently [28]. The
6) Master complex systems. left-brain thinking or the L-mode is the analytical, quantitative,
Sussman [23] added the importance of using models to gain verbal, rational, linear, step-by-step thinking. The right-brain
insight into complex systems, to do experimentation, to operate thinking or the R-mode is the integrative, qualitative, holistic,
systems in real time, and to negotiate, with conflicting parties, creative, and visual thinking (see Fig. 1). Soliman [29] stated that
how the system will be deployed. Buede [24] reinforced the need the left side is predominantly analytic and sequential, while the
of modeling in order to gain insight into how the world functions. right side seems specialized for holistic mentation being more
According to the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy [25], simultaneous in its mode of operation. The latest neuroanatom-
the models are vehicles to explore, to understand, and to learn ical and neurophysiologic studies show that the right brain is
about the world, where this cognitive function is the basis of in charge of image recognition. The pictures are images of the
the so-called “model-based reasoning.” Learning occurs with real world, and therefore, picture recognition is a task for the
denotation (i.e., defining a representation relation between the R-mode that is capable to deal with complex visual elements
model and the target), demonstration (i.e., investigating the char- [29]. The pictorial representation and the amount of informa-
acteristics of the model in order to demonstrate theoretical con- tion that it can handle, as well as the facility to be stored in our
jectures), and interpretation (i.e., converting the findings into memory, is frequently illustrated by the aphorism “A picture is
claims about the target system) [26]. These activities require a worth a thousand words.”
deep analysis of the system to be modeled enhancing its under- As previously referred, the SE field is concerned with the
standing. whole, the complexity, the multidisciplinarity, the holistic think-
The modeler tends to shape his view of the system accord- ing, the synthesis and, consequently, it seems natural to identify
ing to his favorite(s) modeling approach(es). From qualitative these concerns with the R-mode, which is normally neglected
network models to quantitative kinetics-based approaches, the in engineering curriculum [28]. According to these authors, the
“art” of choosing the best approach, and representing the model architecting of systems can greatly benefit from the use of the
adequately, in order to answer to the target questions, constitute creative holistic thinking provided by the R-mode, and more
the major characteristics of a good modeler. Frequently, those easily reproduced with visual representations. As Senge [30]
decisions are closely related to time and budget constraints and stated, “If we want to see system wide, we need a language of
the availability of data. interrelationships [R-mode].”
The success of the model is measured by their users in differ- The “ideal” performance can be achieved with the interplay
ent ways and according to their perspective/expectations of/on between the left and the right brain, or the whole brain thinking,

Authorized licensed use limited to: Univ Federal do ABC (UFABC). Downloaded on October 12,2022 at 12:20:26 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
104 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SYSTEMS, MAN, AND CYBERNETICS—PART C: APPLICATIONS AND REVIEWS, VOL. 42, NO. 1, JANUARY 2012

which allows mixing science and art, creativity and practice,

words and pictures.

B. Graphical Modeling Languages

The modeling tools, which are previously referred in
Section I-B, can be classified as another group of SE stan-
dards. This group includes the common representations used to
describe a system. The modeling techniques used in the field
of SE, to develop systems (modeling concepts, properties, at-
tributes, structure, behavior, entities, interactions, relations, en-
vironment, etc.), have always been predominantly qualitative
and based on a graphical or pictorial representation. These tech-
niques require a corresponding describing language (i.e., graph-
Fig. 2. Simplified sequence diagram (sd) for the use case “measure the blood
ical modeling language or visual modeling language), used to pressure,” including an weak sequencing of occurrences, two lifelines, activa-
represent reality, that involves semantics (i.e., set of symbols tions, a series of synchronous, asynchronous and reply messages, an alt operand
or signs that form the basis of representations) and syntax (i.e., of a combined fragment for the alternative courses of action derived from the
displayed message at the measurement device, and an interaction use (frame
the proper ways of combining the symbols and signs to form reference) that specifies an interaction described on other sd.
thoughts and concepts).
The functional flow block diagrams (FFBDs), which are de-
veloped in the 1950s, have been, for many years, the classical In order to incorporate these and other features, the OMG and
representation of SE with a wide spread use within the commu- the INCOSE have joined efforts and developed an extension of
nity. This tool illustrates a step-by-step sequence of a system’s UML for SE: the systems modeling language (SysML) [15],
functional flow through a functional-decomposition approach. which was released in 2007. This graphical SysML, which sup-
During the 1970s, the structured analysis and design technique ports the specification, analysis, design, and verification of com-
(SADT) emerged as the graphical language to communicate plex systems, is considered as the next de facto modeling lan-
ideas [31], and to understand and describe systems as a hierar- guage for SE. According to Oliver et al. [33] “SysML continues
chy of functions. In 1993, the National Institute of Standards to lack a few of the needed concepts, but has extended others in
and Technology (NIST) launched the Integration Definition for useful ways beyond historic SE practice.”
Function Modeling (IDEF0), which is a graphical notation be- The SysML-modeling tools usually store the user model as
longing to the IDEF suite of modeling approaches and derived structured data in a model repository, and the model enters and
from the SADT. This notation was developed to represent activ- retrieves that information by using the graphical representation
ities or processes that are carried out in an orderly manner [32], that is, the diagrams. The SysML diagrams, which reflect var-
illustrating the functional perspective of a system, the data flow, ious aspects of a system, are nine and are organized in four
and the system control. major blocks that are known as the four pillars of SysML and
The enhanced FFBD (EFFBD) and the IDEF0 have been represent four key modeling facets: the requirements of the sys-
the main modeling languages used in SE in the last decades. tem, the structure, the behavior, and the parametric relationships
Other tools include, for example, the N 2 charts, state-transition (Fig. 2 depicts an example of an SysML diagram developed in
diagrams, and petri nets. the Artisan Studio tool). These different views match particu-
These traditional functional decomposition procedures/ lar viewpoints (the stakeholders’ perspectives) and enable the
representations are being “replaced” by object-oriented ap- holistic approach required by SE.
proaches. The modern object-oriented practices, with its roots As UML, the modeling language for SE is not attached to
in software engineering, are now pervasive in the systems engi- any methodology. The SysML also supports model and data in-
neering field. Oliver et al. [33] traced the origin of the object- terchange via the XMI and via the evolving neutral ISO AP233
oriented paradigm back to the 1970s, with the development of standard (this application protocol aims to support the exchange
abstract data types and the introduction of classes to program- of data during the whole system development lifecycle and
ming languages, like Simula67, in order to provide procedure, across different domain engineering disciplines allowing the
data, and control abstractions. In the 1990s, these principles have creation of one consistent view of the system). The XMI pro-
been extended to the analysis and design of software, through vides interoperability capabilities such as, to export selected
the Booch method, the object modeling technique (OMT), and parts of an SysML model (in the model repository) to another
then through the de facto UML [34]. The characteristics of the UML tool in order to support software development, and to im-
software systems are different from those of the systems of SE port and export parametric diagrams relating data to engineering
(that may also include software components), and consequently, analysis tools [15].
the UML lacks support from aspects, like the whole/part decom- The unified profile for DoDAF/MoDAF (UPDM) is also
position, or the interconnections provide by physical things (and an extension of UML to describe SoS and enterprise archi-
not by compilers), or the trade studies. tectures compliant with DoDAF and MoDAF requirements.

Authorized licensed use limited to: Univ Federal do ABC (UFABC). Downloaded on October 12,2022 at 12:20:26 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
RAMOS et al.: MODEL-BASED SYSTEMS ENGINEERING: AN EMERGING APPROACH FOR MODERN SYSTEMS 105

III. MODEL-BASED SYSTEMS ENGINEERING

FOR MODERN SYSTEMS

Model-based SE (MBSE) is an emerging approach in the SE

field [6], [38], and can be described as the formalized application
of modeling principles, methods, languages, and tools to the en-
Fig. 3. Example of an (left) OPD and (right) the corresponding OPL.
tire lifecycle of large, complex, interdisciplinary, sociotechnical
systems. A simplified definition of MBSE is provided by Mellor
et al. [39] as “. . .is simply the notion that we can construct a
model of a system that we can transform into the real thing.”
This profile is particularly tailored for military acquisition This model-centric approach, which main artifact is a coher-
programs. ent model of the system being developed, contrasts with the
The OPM, which was founded by Dori in 2002, and the cor- traditional document-based one [15]. The emergence of com-
responding graphical and textual representations, object process puters in the 1950s and 1960s has strongly contributed to this
diagrams (OPDs), and object process language (OPL), enlarge paradigm shift in a considerable range of engineering disci-
the domain of object-oriented-modeling tools for SE. The pro- plines like the mechanical and the electrical ones, but in the SE
vided bimodality (i.e., graphical and textual) facilitates the un- field the transitioning process, while becoming prevalent, is still
derstanding of complexity since it is very similar to the power immature [6], [15], [40].
of both sides of the brain, i.e., the right side that acts like the As pointed out by Bahill and Botta [41], as a fundamental
visual interpreter and the left side that acts like the language in- principle of good system design, the essence of MBSE relies on
terpreter. According to Grobshtein and Dori [36], this intuitive the application of appropriate formal models to a given domain.
dual notation provides a single model that is comprehensible In the next decade, it is expected that MBSE will play an
to the different stakeholders (both technical and nontechnical) increasing role in the practice of SE and that will extend its ap-
involved in the development process. plication modeling domains beyond hardware and software sys-
They are available at the software environment object process tems, including social, economical, environmental, and human-
CASE tool (OPCAT). According to Booch et al. [34], OPM “is performance components [9].
a comprehensive novel approach to SE. Integrating function,
structure, and behavior in a single, unifying model, OPM sig-
nificantly extends the system modeling capabilities of current A. Main Features
object-oriented methods.” Fig. 3 provides an example of an OPD The emergent model-based approach aims to facilitate the
and the corresponding OPL. SE activities through the development of a unified coherent
The OPM is based on three fundamental aspects of a sys- model as the main artifact. The SE process is accomplished
tem: the structure (how it is made), the function (what it does), with increasing detailed models that are all part of the sys-
and the behavior (how it changes over time). The function is tem model. The major potential advantages of this approach
enabled by the architecture of the system that combines the include enhanced communications between the stakeholders
structure and the behavior. The graphics (i.e., OPDs) and the nat- and team members as well as a true shared understanding of
ural language (i.e., OPL) express these characteristics in a uni- the domain, improved knowledge capture, design precision and
fied frame of reference that corresponds to an integrated single integrity without disconnections among the representations of
model. data, better information traceability, enhanced reuse of artifacts,
The SysML and the OPDs/OPL constitute the current state- and reduced development risk. As Friedenthal et al. [15] stated,
of-the-art systems modelling languages. SysML being a more “the emphasis is placed on evolving and refining the model using
“institutionalized/standardized” language with the support of model-based methods and tools”; therefore, the prominence of
the OMG and the INCOSE, and the OPDs/OPL a more intuitive controlling documents is now replaced by controlling the model
simpler language with less training effort, it seems interesting of the system.
to combine the advantages of both languages creating synergies It is expected that this paradigm will become a standard prac-
between them [36]. This integration can strongly contribute to tice in the SE field in the next years. The standards evolution in
a common understanding of the system and to improved com- the field, including the SysML, the ISO 10303: AP233, the XMI,
munications between different stakeholders, as well as to a pro- and the MDA are impelling the proliferation of MBSE. Accord-
ficient SE collaborative development environment. ing to the INCOSE Vision for 2020, the future of SE will be
According to Wilkiens [37] there will be, in the future, a model-based, embracing high-fidelity static and dynamic mod-
great demand to model languages since systems will become els at different levels of abstraction. The MBSE approach will
increasingly complex and there are considerable advantages in expand its boundaries and all the application domains (e.g., de-
modeling and simulating before using them in practice. The fense, industrial, pharmaceutical and healthcare, transportation,
author synthesizes the advantages of the modeling languages telecommunications, energy, etc.) will be potential targets for a
with the following idea: “The modeling language allows me to model-based development.
move on different abstraction levels. The more abstract I get The system model is the main artifact of MBSE and is typically
the simpler the system appears to be. This is the art of being developed in a modeling language, which is available in a mod-
concrete on an abstract level.” eling tool (for example, SysML in Artisan Studio, OPDs/OPL

Authorized licensed use limited to: Univ Federal do ABC (UFABC). Downloaded on October 12,2022 at 12:20:26 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
106 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SYSTEMS, MAN, AND CYBERNETICS—PART C: APPLICATIONS AND REVIEWS, VOL. 42, NO. 1, JANUARY 2012

in OPCAT), depicted on graphical diagrams, and contained in a B. Formalisms, Methodologies, and Applications
model repository. This integrated-model repository so that “ev-
By the present time, the theory and formalisms of MBSE are
eryone draws from the same well” [18] will embrace all the
quite inexistent. The first standards in the field are now emerging
relevant information for the system and will enable marketing
and an established MBSE body of knowledge is expected to be
research, decision analysis, environmental impact analysis, so-
achieved in ten years. Nevertheless, there already exist three
cial and economical modeling, biological modeling, and other
main formalisms that deserve special attention. One of them is
appropriate analyses.
more elementary and is related with the SE field, while the other
The system model is made by interconnected modeling el-
two are mainly devoted to the MBSE discipline.
ements that represent the key aspects of the system, namely,
The first formalism is a semantic glossary and model for SE
its requirements, its structure, its behavior, and its paramet-
concepts proposed by Oliver et al. [33]. They provided a set
rics [15]. This integrated specification is usually in interaction
of definitions and a graphical model for the SE concepts that
with other engineering models (e.g., simulation models, analy-
aims to introduce rigorous and consistent definitions in the field,
sis models, hardware models) that address multiple aspects of
which are critical to support an MBSE approach.
the systems, originating a complete coherent development envi-
The second formalism refers to an information model for
ronment. This environment is, nowadays, a global one without
system design proposed by [44] and helps to understand the
physical barriers and geographical constraints. Consequently,
MBSE approach from the perspective of the kinds of infor-
the collaborative world teams must “speak” the same language
mation to be used and the associated relationships. The model
and must work on the same “matter” that, in an MBSE approach,
suggests four main kinds of information that are interrelated:
corresponds to the system model.
model, requirements, components, and design alternatives. The
The potential advantages of MBSE are critical to cope with the
requirements specify components, the requirements may be de-
complexity of the global development environment of modern
composed into other requirements, components may be decom-
systems. This environment demands for adaptive and accurate
posed into other components, design alternates satisfy require-
communication mechanisms that can support considerable di-
ments, design alternates represent components, models execute
mension and interdisciplinarity, geographically dispersed teams,
design alternates, and models represent components. By the end
people, and technology as inherent parties of the systems, coop-
of the design (i.e., after a concurrent incremental process), there
eration and concurrency of different subsystems, the integration
should be only one design alternate (i.e., the best according to
of legacy and Commercial-Off-The-Shelf (COTS) systems, and
given criteria) and the models must become sufficiently faithful
“personalized” standards and system descriptions. The coex-
for compliance assessment.
istence of these features and their integration along with “the
The third formalism corresponds to a mathematical model
system’s big picture” can be enabled by an MBSE approach.
for SE and MBSE that was introduced in 1993 by Wymore in
Particular care must be taken in order to ensure that complete-
his book Model-Based SE: An Introduction to the Mathematical
ness, integration, and synchronization is aligned with focus and
Theory of Discrete Systems and to the Trycotyledon Theory of
simplicity (“managers prefer simple models that they under-
System Design and is informally known as Wymorian theory.
stand and trust, to more realistic ones” [42]). The transition-
The book provides a rigorous mathematical framework as the
ing to MBSE implies a considerable investment in processes,
basis for the development of models and designs for large-scale,
methods, tools and, obviously, in training [15]. The MBSE ap-
complex systems. Since each person has an internalized notion
proach requires a new way of thinking and a new set of skills.
of system his seminal work was devoted to establish a (universal)
The community working with the modeling tools and languages
mathematical formalization of the concept of “system” based on
must include language/tool experts that will develop the system
set theoretic concepts and based on system models. A system
model and that are able to train other team members.
model is a description that separates the perceived universe into
The MBSE metrics can be used to assess design quality,
two parts: the “inside” of the system, which is described by
development progress, risk, and they provide an indication if
states, and the “outside” of the system from, where the inputs
the process is moving in a successful way in order to achieve a
come and to where the system delivers its outputs [45].
successful outcome. The metrics to evaluate the design quality
These contributions help to establish coherent and unambigu-
embrace, typically, the satisfaction of requirements, the critical
ous foundations for the MBSE paradigm. They should evolve
performance properties to be monitored such as reliability, and
in the next years and provide the desired body of knowledge
the partitioning of the design.
required to elevate the MBSE approach to a truly scientific
The development progress can be assessed, for example, by
discipline.
the number of use case scenarios completed, the number of re-
The methodologies for MBSE are implementations of specific
quirements satisfied, the percentage of logical components that
processes. According to Friedenthal et al. [15], a methodology
have been allocated to physical components, the completeness of
is “a set of related activities, techniques, and conventions that
the specification of interfaces and properties, the number of test
implement one or more processes and is generally supported by
cases, and verification procedures that have been accomplished.
a set of tools.” According to Estefan [46], an MBSE method-
The development effort and risk can be managed through the
ology is a set of related processes, methods, and tools used to
COSYSMO model that aims to accurately estimate the time and
support the discipline of SE in a model-based context. The pro-
effort associated with the SE activities [43].
cess is the set of interacting activities that transform the inputs

Authorized licensed use limited to: Univ Federal do ABC (UFABC). Downloaded on October 12,2022 at 12:20:26 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
RAMOS et al.: MODEL-BASED SYSTEMS ENGINEERING: AN EMERGING APPROACH FOR MODERN SYSTEMS 107

into outputs or, in other words, the WHAT activities are to be 1) Object-oriented/process-oriented approach and reflective
performed. The method specifies the techniques to perform the methodology.
tasks of the process, i.e., the HOW to execute. The tools are 2) Requirement specifying, analysis and designing, imple-
the resources applied to the method in order to improve the effi- menting, using, and maintaining.
ciency of the tasks, thus enhancing the WHAT and the HOW. An 3) OPDs/OPL.
MBSE methodology gathers all these pieces, thus implementing 4) OPCAT.
a given process, which is supported by a given method, which The MBSE methodologies are not, by this time, covered by
is enhanced by a set of tools. The capabilities and limitations formal standards but it is expected that will occurs as soon as
of the surrounding environment, including the technologies and they prove their value in real-world contexts.
the people, enable or disable the methodology and the result- The applications of the MBSE paradigm to real-world sce-
ing success or failure of the system’s development. One of the narios are beginning to be published to the community. The
primary artifacts of an MBSE methodology is the system model. scientific journals and the new dedicated conferences in the
Analyzing the main methodologies presented in [46] and [47], field confirm it.
one can see that they are particularly focused on the implemen- Probably, the first MBSE applications have arisen from the
tation of the concept and development phases of the SE process. Defense and aerospace industries that are typically character-
In fact, it is in these stages that SE (and MBSE) can provide ized by SoS. The dimension and complexity of these systems,
considerable value-added. A synthesis of the main characteris- with a strong technological facet, had impel the evolution of en-
tics of these methodologies is presented in the next paragraphs gineering solutions to deal with cost overruns, schedule delays,
and is organized according to the following structure: [name of technology constraints, and interoperability issues. Bell Labs in
the methodology and origin: 1) main development approach, the 1940s, the U.S. Department of Defense in the 1950s, and
2) main task flow, 3) predominant modeling language, and NASA in the 1960s were possibly the first ones to recognize the
4) software-tool support]. importance of the SE interdisciplinarity to manage and integrate
Harmony SE from IBM Telelogic: large complex engineering projects.
1) Consistent with the Vee model (i.e., classical top-down The increasing complexity of these systems, with people,
approach) and service-request-driven approach. technologies, hardware, software, processes, and enterprises
2) Requirements analysis, system functional analysis, and acting as interacting agents, demand the utilization of “intel-
design synthesis. ligent and intuitive model-based SE techniques” [48].
3) SysML. The “MBSE challenge” team (i.e., collaboration between the
4) Rhapsody TAU. INCOSE and the European Southern Observatory) is one of the
OOSEM from INCOSE: most active initiatives in the application of MBSE principles
1) Consistent with the Vee model (i.e., classical top-down to contemporary complex systems. The “telescope-modeling”
approach) incorporating object-oriented concepts and project and the “space systems” project, in current development,
Scenario-driven approach. are examples that belong to this initiative. The major goals are
2) Analyze stakeholders needs, define systems requirements, to apply the SysML to solve the modeling problems, to demon-
define logical architecture, synthesize allocated architec- strate its adequacy to support MBSE, and to create modeling
tures, optimize and evaluate alternatives, validate, and ver- guidelines for future MBSE projects. The “telescope-modeling”
ify system. project involves the development of a next-generation optical
3) SysML. telescope that must provide a continuous mirror surface. The
4) OMG SysML tools (integrated with other engineering “space systems” project is working on the FireSat system whose
tools). mission is to detect, identify, and monitor forest fires from orbit.
RUP SE from IBM Rational: The project “excavator model,” which will evaluate inter-
1) Consistent with the spiral model (i.e., iterative and incre- operability issues between modeling and simulation, is being
mental development) and object-oriented concepts. developed by the Georgia Institute of Technology. The project
2) Inception, elaboration, construction, transition, and use involves the integration of SysML models leveraged with con-
case flow down activities. ventional modeling and simulation tools like mechanical CAD,
3) UML/SysML. factory CAD, spreadsheets, math solvers, finite element analysis
4) Rational method composer with RUP SE plug-in. (FEA), discrete event solvers, and optimization tools [49].
Vitech MBSE methodology from Vitech Corporation: The Global Earth Observation System of Systems (GEOSS),
1) Concurrent design, incremental approach (i.e., “onion to monitor and collect information related to Earth’s resources is
model”). another application example of MBSE. Rao et al. [50] demon-
2) Requirements analysis, behavior analysis, architecture/ strated the use of SysML to define the GEOSS architecture and
synthesis, and design V&V. the combined utilization of colored petri nets to develop the
3) System definition language (SDL) (which is based on the executable simulation model. Butterfield et al. [51] proposed an
ERA model), EFFBDs. MBSE process to develop the architecture model and system
4) CORE. specifications, thereby emphasizing the SoS perspective.
OPM from Prof. Dori: Mandutianu et al. [52] described an example of a pilot appli-
cation of the OOSEM methodology to design a space mission.

Authorized licensed use limited to: Univ Federal do ABC (UFABC). Downloaded on October 12,2022 at 12:20:26 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
108 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SYSTEMS, MAN, AND CYBERNETICS—PART C: APPLICATIONS AND REVIEWS, VOL. 42, NO. 1, JANUARY 2012

The study reveals some encouraging potential benefits of us-

ing an MBSE approach, such as the improved communications
among model designers and stakeholders, the consistent and
complete representation of system models across different mis-
sions and phases, the reduction of errors and ambiguity, the
reduction of design and maintenance costs, and the saved time
and resources.
Simpkins et al. [53] presented a practical application of
MBSE, using the Vitech methodology, thereby leading to an Fig. 4. Integrated MBSE environment.
integrated and convergent solution for an automated parking
system. The major benefits pointed out involve a better insight
of the problem, a faster response to stakeholders’ inquiries, a adequate and customized training in languages, methods, and
more rigorous traceability, and automated consistency checking tools is vital as well as continuous mentorship; pilot projects are
and documentation. required to test and validate the model-based approach; well-
Soyler and Diakanda [54] proposed the adoption of the defined modeling purposes, objectives, and scope are essential
MBSE holistic approach to capture the structure and behavior of to properly manage the stakeholders’ expectations, which are
disaster-management systems and to deal with their complexity. “the most-noticeable measure of the MBSE project success.”
The SysML is used to realize the model-based paradigm.
The utilization of MBSE principles in the manufacturing do-
main is discussed in [55]. There are several case studies ana- IV. VISION FOR THE FUTURE
lyzed that aim to discover if the workers want to move from a The different MBSE aspects that have been discussed through
document-based approach to model-based working. The results the previous sections (i.e., standards, formalisms, methods,
disclose the need to implement different modeling levels and modeling tools, applications, etc.) can be considered as inter-
strategies to engage domain workers in modeling activities. acting dimensions that must work together to achieve the main
Andersson et al. [56] described the lessons learned when result, which is an MBSE environment able to lead to a success-
introducing an MBSE approach, using UML/SysML, at Saab ful system. This success is measured by the fulfillment of the
Aerosystems. The approach is considered to have high potential stakeholders’ expectations. This integrated vision is illustrated
to improve engineering productivity and quality. However, there in Fig. 4.
is a clear need to instigate effective modeling training programs, The future of MBSE will be facilitated by the continuously
with particular emphasis on model-based methods and tools. evolving information technologies (computing power, storage
Haan [57] described an application of MBSE to the health- and analysis capacities, distributed capabilities, virtual network-
management field. An SysML model is used to demonstrate the ing, etc.) as well as by the fine-tuned profile of modern systems
potential competitive advantage of prognostics and health man- engineers (the proliferation of SE courses at the various gradua-
agement. As the author stated “. . .MBSE methods are clearly tion levels and the adaptive profile innate to the new generations
applicable and should be highly sought by enterprises wishing will contribute to the systems engineer of the future).
to finesse a competitive advantage from PHM technologies.” The emergence of the MBSE discipline is now well visible in
The INCOSE MBSE initiative is also working on the ur- the new dedicated conferences that are flourishing such as the
ban transportation field, along with the Florida Department of International Conference on SE and Modeling sponsored by the
Transportation, using the cases of an urban traffic signal and a IEEE, the Technion, and the INCOSE (with a second edition
highway-maintenance system. These projects are quite imma- that took place in 2009 under the designation MBSE 2009), and
ture and require further advances. the Association for Computing Machinery (ACM)/IEEE Inter-
The importance of these diverse real-world applications and national Conference on Model-Driven Engineering Languages
the true essence of MBSE is quite highlighted in the following and Systems (MODELS) that is, in 2010, in its 13th edition, but
statement “. . .the specific tool, or language, or approach, is not has been, until 2007, under the designation of the International
the important thing; rather, systems engineers should model to Conference on the UML.
understand the problem, and to communicate with others about The potential of MBSE can only be realized if the required
the problem. If your modeling approach helps you accomplish cultural and technical challenges will be overcome. The mar-
that, it is a good thing” [58]. The idea is corroborated by Ras- ket forces and the field visionaries must “push the envelope
mussen as “the benefit of formal modeling is that we can finally to demonstrate value, exploiting opportunities, and setting an
stop being ambiguous and say exactly what we mean” [59]. example for others to follow” [9].
A balance provided in [60], which is a resultant from experi- Some concrete recommendations for advancing MBSE, from
ences of pioneer applications of the MBSE approach, points out several specialists in the field, include the development of met-
the following major guidelines for the successful implemen- rics and a value model for MBSE, the promotion of the use of
tation of an MBSE environment: The MBSE cultural change modeling tools and interoperability support/standards, the de-
must be supported by an organizational change and continuous velopment of a “human centric” MBSE establishing the bridge
improvements principles; a well-defined MBSE methodology between cognitive and systems engineers, the identification
is decisive to support the development of the system model; of MBSE best practices, the advancement of standards such

Authorized licensed use limited to: Univ Federal do ABC (UFABC). Downloaded on October 12,2022 at 12:20:26 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
RAMOS et al.: MODEL-BASED SYSTEMS ENGINEERING: AN EMERGING APPROACH FOR MODERN SYSTEMS 109

as OMG SysML and AP233, the integration between SysML process entailing a classification of stakeholders and models
and simulation standards, the sharing of knowledge across the that will help the system’s developer(s) to choose the appropri-
SE/MBSE community, and the development of an MBSE certi- ate model(s) to use in a given phase with a particular group of
fication in education. stakeholders (e.g., to state the problem and to incite a discus-
According to our vision, the fundamental research lines in sion with local governors and academic researchers the system’s
the field will be related with 1) the development of simple and engineer will look at the “S” matrix, for the right entry (gov-
agile MBSE methodologies and 2) the effective utilization of ernors × researchers) and will pick the indicate model(s) like
graphical modeling languages able to support collaborative de- an OPD system diagram to define the boundaries of the system
velopment environments and successful stakeholders’ commu- and the main constituents and an SysML requirement diagram
nication/interactions thus successful systems. to describe system’s requirements and their relationships).
In the first case, the development of an integrated methodol- We believe that the major developments (which will con-
ogy with simple, lean, and customizable processes and methods tribute to the establishment of a reliable MBSE unifying ref-
is of paramount importance to enable the widen utilization of erence, made of formal standards, organizational culture, and
MBSE practices. The SE process (i.e., WHAT) must be intu- high-quality education/training) will be accomplished through
itive, logical, universal, and easy to use and tailor. According accredited SE/MBSE-centric programs and noteworthy empiri-
to our opinion, the ISO/IEC 15288 processes standard requires cal research.
some integration that can be provided by the SIMILAR process The centric programs, at the basic, master, and doctoral lev-
model. The SIMILAR acronym stands for state the problem, els, will be fundamental to provide systems engineers with the
investigate alternatives, model the system, integrate, launch the technical, communicational, modeling, and leading skills and
system, assess performance, and reevaluate. In 1998, in this competences that are critical to connect people and informa-
same journal, Bahill and Gissing [61] had suggested this gen- tion, to cope with holism, flexibility, multidisciplinarity, human
eral process as a universal way of planning and problem solving behavior, scalability, and risk, and to solve problems creatively
closely related to human thinking. After a decade, the process delivering value to society. This holistic education should be
stills extensive and straightforward, but must be contextualized complemented by domain-specific disciplines, such as energy
in the framework of the international SE processes standard that and environment or healthcare. The empirical research will be
has emerged since then. Some seminal work in this subject is essential to drive the evolution of MBSE knowledge and to help
provided in [62]. The MBSE method specifies the HOW to ex- to establish a coherent unifying reference. The experimental ob-
ecute the process and relies on the development of a coherent servations are fundamental to understand the real modern com-
model of the system. This area has significant research oppor- plex systems, and they can be used to test MBSE hypotheses, to
tunities since the existing methods (e.g., OOSEM, RUP SE, develop MBSE standards, and to create MBSE theories. It is our
and OPM) are still immature and require a proof of value in opinion that this empirical work will have as target domain the
real-world contexts. The methods based on more agile iterative complex super systems that aim to deliver world sustainability.
and incremental development approaches and supported by the The traffic and environment, the energy, and the healthcare are
state-of-the-art modeling languages will probably be the ones examples of these large, complex, and heterogeneous systems.
that can lead the way to formal standards. We are convinced that MBSE will be, in the next decade,
In the second case, the challenge will be to integrate the exist- a fundamental paradigm for the development of modern 21st
ing benchmark graphical modeling languages, such as SysML century complex systems and will be crucial to support effective
and OPDs/OPL, to create an effective collaborative development collaborative development environments. The main challenge
environment. These two languages are considerably different in will be to ensure that the system model reflects the stakeholders’
terms of size and complexity. SysML is fairly large, rich, and ideas and positions acting as a shared working platform, and the
comprehensive, appropriate to provide a detailed description of resulting system satisfies their expectations.
the system, and uses a standard notation supported by several
commercial tools but is cumbersome and requires significant
REFERENCES
learning efforts (usually, the nontechnical stakeholders are not
able to work with this language). The OPDs/OPL is a language [1] M. Jamshidi, “System of systems engineering–new challenges for the 21st
century,” IEEE Aerosp. Electron. Syst. Mag., vol. 23, no. 5, pp. 4–19, May
more compact, simple, and easy to learn and use and is more 2008.
adequate to model the high-level concepts. [2] J. Lane and B. Boehm, “System of systems lead system integrators; where
The synergies between these two languages can strongly con- do they spend their time and what makes them more or less efficient?”
Sys. Eng., vol. 11, pp. 81–91, Spring 2008.
tribute to a common understanding of the system and to im- [3] C. Haskins, “Using patterns to transition systems engineering from a
proved communications between different stakeholders. As we technological to social context,” Syst. Eng., vol. 11, pp. 147–155, Summer
know, the communication is as more difficult as we bring to the 2008.
[4] H. de Bruijn and P. Herder, “System and actor perspectives on sociotech-
dialog people with different skills, points of view, responsibili- nical systems,” IEEE Trans. Syst., Man, Cybern. A, Syst, Humans, vol. 39,
ties, and interests. Some automation mechanisms to convert one no. 5, pp. 981–992, Sep. 2009.
language into another are already being worked by Grobshtein [5] J. Tien, “On integration and adaptation in complex service systems,” J.
Syst. Sci. Syst. Eng., vol. 17, pp. 385–415, Dec. 2008.
and Dori [36]. We think that the creation of agile tools, like [6] D. Rhodes, “Addressing systems engineering challenges through collabo-
matrices, to assist the system’s modeling process will be impor- rative research,” in SEARI—Systems Engineering Advancement Research
tant. For example, we can develop matrices for the SIMILAR Initiative. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2008.

Authorized licensed use limited to: Univ Federal do ABC (UFABC). Downloaded on October 12,2022 at 12:20:26 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
110 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SYSTEMS, MAN, AND CYBERNETICS—PART C: APPLICATIONS AND REVIEWS, VOL. 42, NO. 1, JANUARY 2012

[7] S. Sheard and A. Mostashari, “Principles of complex systems for systems [36] Y. Grobshtein and D. Dori, “Creating SysML views from an OPM model,”
engineering,” Syst. Eng., vol. 12, pp. 295–311, Winter 2009. in Proc. 2nd Int. Conf. Model Based Syst. Eng., Herzelya and Haifa, Israel,
[8] A. Wymore, Model-Based Systems Engineering. Boca Raton, FL: CRC, Mar. 2009, pp. 36–45.
1993. [37] T. Wilkiens, Systems Engineering with SysML/UML—Modeling, Analysis,
[9] INCOSE, in Systems Engineering Handbook—A Guide for System Life Design. Burlington, MA: Morgan Kaufmann/OMG, 2007.
Cycle Processes and Activities, C. Haskins, K. Forsberg, and M. Krueger, [38] J. Grady, “Universal Architecture Description Framework,” Syst. Eng.,
Eds. San Diego, CA: Int. Council Syst. Eng., 2007. vol. 12, pp. 91–116, Summer 2009.
[10] D. Hybertson and S. Sheard, “Integrating and unifying old and new sys- [39] S. Mellor, A. Clark, and T. Futagami, “Model driven development,” IEEE
tems engineering elements,” INSIGHT-INCOSE J., vol. 11, pp. 13–16, Softw., vol. 20, no. 5, pp. 14–18, Sep./Oct. 2003.
Feb. 2008. [40] J. Andary and D. Oliver, “Models in systems engineering and software
[11] E. Honour, “Systems engineering and complexity,” INSIGHT-INCOSE engineering,” INSIGHT-INCOSE J., vol. 10, pp. 26–27, Oct. 2007.
J., vol. 11, pp. 20–21, Feb. 2008. [41] A. Bahill and R. Botta, “Fundamental principles of good system design,”
[12] W. Rouse, “Engineering complex systems: Implications for research in Eng. Manag. J., vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 9–17, 2008.
systems engineering,” IEEE Trans. Syst., Man, Cybern. C, Appl. Rev., [42] J. Little, “Models and managers: The concept of a decision calculus,”
vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 154–156, May 2003. Manag. Sci., vol. 16, no. 8, pp. B466–B485, 1970.
[13] S. Arnold, “Where is standardization guiding us?” INSIGHT-INCOSE J., [43] R. Valerdi, The Constructive Systems Engineering Cost Model
vol. 10, pp. 41–43, Apr. 2007. (COSYSMO): Quantifying the Costs of Systems Engineering Effort in
[14] R. Valerdi and H. Davidz, “Empirical research in systems engineering: Complex Systems. Saarbrücken, Germany: VDM Verlag, 2008.
Challenges and opportunities of a new frontier,” Syst. Eng., vol. 12, [44] L. Baker, P. Clemente, B. Cohen, L. Permenter, B. Purves, and P. Salmon,
pp. 169–181, Summer 2009. “Foundational concepts for model driven syst. design,” INCOSE Model
[15] S. Friedenthal, A. Moore, and R. Steiner, A Practical Guide to SysML, The Driven Syst. Design Interest Group, Int. Council Syst. Eng., San Diego,
Systems Modeling Language. Burlington: Morgan Kaufmann/OMG, CA, White Paper.
Elsevier, 2008. [45] A. Wymore, “Systems movement: Autobiographical retrospectives, con-
[16] R. Cloutier and D. Verma, “Applying the concept of patterns to systems tributions to the mathematical foundations of systems science and sys-
architecture,” Syst. Eng., vol. 10, pp. 138–154, Summer 2007. tems engineering,” Int. J. General Syst., vol. 33, no. 6, pp. 593–610,
[17] A. Tang, J. Han, and P. Chen, “A comparative analysis of architecture 2004.
frameworks,” Centre Component Software Enterprise Syst., School Inf. [46] J. Estefan, “MBSE methodology survey,” INSIGHT-INCOSE J., vol. 12,
Technol. Swinburne Univ. Technol., Melbourne, Vic., Australia, Technical pp. 16–18, Apr. 2009.
Rep. SUTIT TR2004.01, 2004. [47] INCOSE, “Survey of model based systems engineering (MBSE) method-
[18] T. Browning, “The many views of a process: Toward a process architec- ologies,” Model-Based Systems Engineering Initiative of the International
ture framework for product development processes,” Syst. Eng., vol. 12, Council on Systems Engineering [published online INCOSE TD 2007 003
pp. 69–90, Spring 2009. 01], 2008.
[19] M. Richards, N. Shah, D. Hastings, and D. Rhodes, “Managing complexity [48] J. Garcia, Jr., “Executable and integrative whole-system modeling via the
with the department of defense architecture framework: Development of a application of OpEMCSS and Holons for model-based systems engineer-
dynamic system architecture model,” Eng. Syst. Div., Mass. Inst. Technol., ing,” INSIGHT-INCOSE J., vol. 12, pp. 21–23, Dec. 2009.
Cambridge, MA, Working Paper ESD-WP-2007-09, 2007. [49] R. Peak, C. Paredis, L. McGinnis, S. Friedenthal, and R. Burkhart, “Mod-
[20] P. Kruchten, “The 4+1 view model of architecture,” IEEE Softw., vol. 12, elling & simulation interoperability team status update,” presented at IN-
no. 6, pp. 42–50, Nov. 1995. COSE Int. Workshop, Phoenix, AZ, 2010.
[21] J. Ludewig, “Models in software engineering—An introduction,” Softw. [50] M. Rao, S. Ramakrishnan, and C. Dagli, “Modeling and simulation of net
Syst. Modelling, vol. 1, pp. 5–14, Mar. 2003. centric system of systems using systems modeling language and colored
[22] J. Rumbaugh, I. Jacobson, and G. Booch, The Unified Modeling Language petri-nets: A demonstration using the global earth observation system of
Reference Manual. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Longman, 1999. systems,” Syst. Eng., vol. 11, pp. 203–220, Autumn 2008.
[23] J. Sussman, Introduction to Transportation Systems. Dedham, MA: [51] M. Butterfield, J. Pearlman, and S. Vickroy, “A system-of-systems engi-
Artech House, 2000. neering GEOSS: Architectural approach,” IEEE Syst. J., vol. 2, no. 3,
[24] D. Buede, The Engineering Design of Systems—Models and Methods, pp. 321–332, Sep. 2008.
2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 2009. [52] S. Mandutianu, M. Moshir, and K. Donahue, K., “Conceptual model
[25] Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Models in Science. [Online]. (2006). for space mission systems design,” presented at 19th Ann. Int. Symp.
Available: http:/plato.stanford.edu/entries/models science INCOSE, Singapore, 2009.
[26] R. Hughes, “Models and representations,” Philos. Sci., vol. 64, pp. 325– [53] P. Simpkins, A. Kleinholz, and J. Maley, “A practical application of
336, 1997. MBSE—The automated parking system,” presented at 3rd Asia-Pacific
[27] N. Karcanias. (2004). Modelling and simulation in technological and Conf. Syst. Eng., Singapore, 2009.
emerging fields: Emerging challenges. Workshop: SIM SERV Mod- [54] A. Soyler and S. Diakanda, “A model-based systems engineering approach
elling and Simulation Challenges, Working Group Roadmap for Con- to capturing disaster management systems,” in Proc. 4th Ann. IEEE Syst.
tinuous and Hybrid Simulation, White Paper, Greece [Online] Available: Conf., San Diego, CA, Apr. 2010, pp. 283–287.
http:/www.sim-serv.com/wg_doc/WG7_General_roadmap.pdf [55] H. Tellioglu, “Practicing modelling in manufacturing,” in Proc. 2nd Int.
[28] T. Di Carlo, B. Khoshnevis, and F. Udwadia, “Whole brain thinking Conf. Model Based Syst. Eng., Herzelya and Haifa, Israel, Mar. 2009,
in systems architecting,” Syst. Eng., vol. 12, pp. 265–273, Autumn pp. 75–82.
2009. [56] H. Andersson, E. Herzog, G. Johansson, and O. Johansson. (2009). Expe-
[29] S. Soliman (2005). Systems and creative thinking. Center for Advance- rience from introducing unified modeling language/systems modeling lan-
ment of Postgraduate Studies and Research in Engineering Sciences, Fac- guage at Saab aerosystems, Syst. Eng. [Online]: DOI 10.1002/sys.20156,
ulty of Engineering, Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt [Online]. Available: 2009.
http:/www.pathways.cu.edu.eg/subpages/Creativity-Engine.htm [57] B. Haan, “A model of the competitive advantage of prognostics and
[30] P. Senge, The Fifth Discipline—The Art & Practice of the Learning Orga- health management,” in Proc. Ann. Rel. Maintainability Symp., Jan. 2009,
nization. New York: Doubleday, 1990. pp. 442–447.
[31] D. Ross, “Structured analysis (SA): A language for communicating ideas,” [58] R. Cloutier, “Introduction to this special edition on model-based sys-
IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng., vol. SE-3, no. 1, pp. 16–34, Jan. 1977. tems engineering,” INSIGHT-INCOSE J., vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 7–8, Dec.
[32] C.-H. Kim, R. Weston, A. Hodgson, and K.-H. Lee, “The complementary 2009.
use of IDEF and UML modelling approaches,” Comput. Ind., vol. 50, [59] C. Delp, L. Cooney, C. Dutenhoffer, R. Gostelow, M. Jackson, M. Wilk-
pp. 35–56, 2003. erson, T. Kahn, and S. Piggott, “The challenge of model-based systems
[33] D. Oliver, J. Andary, and H. Frisch, “Model based systems engineering,” engineering for space systems, year 2,” INSIGHT-INCOSE J., vol. 12,
in Handbook of Systems Engineering and Management, 2nd ed., A. Sage pp. 36–39, Dec. 2009.
and W. Rouse, Eds. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley, 2009, pp. 1361–1399. [60] S. Friedenthal, “SysML: Lessons from early applications and future di-
[34] G. Booch, J. Rumbaugh, and I. Jacobson, The Unified Modeling Language rections,” INSIGHT-INCOSE J., vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 10–12, Dec. 2009.
User Guide. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Longman, 1999. [61] A. Bahill and B. Gissing, “Re-evaluating systems engineering concepts
[35] D. Dori, Object-Process Methodology: A Holistic Systems Paradigm. using systems thinking,” IEEE Trans. Syst., Man Cybern. C, Appl. Rev.,
New York: Springer, 2002. vol. 28, no. 4, pp. 516–527, Nov. 1998.

Authorized licensed use limited to: Univ Federal do ABC (UFABC). Downloaded on October 12,2022 at 12:20:26 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
RAMOS et al.: MODEL-BASED SYSTEMS ENGINEERING: AN EMERGING APPROACH FOR MODERN SYSTEMS 111

[62] A. Ramos, J. Ferreira, and J. Barceló, “Revisiting the SIMILAR process Jaume Barceló was born in Spain in 1944. He re-
to engineer the contemporary systems,” J. Syst. Sci. Syst. Eng., vol. 19, ceived the Degree in physics from the University of
no. 3, pp. 321–350, Sep. 2010. Valencia, Valencia, Spain, in 1967 and the Ph.D. de-
gree in physical sciences from the Autonomous Uni-
versity of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain, in 1974.
Since 1986, he has been a Full Professor of op-
erations research with the Technical University of
Catalonia (UPC), Barcelona, where, since 2007, he
Ana Luı́sa Ramos (M’10) was born in Portugal in has been a Scientific Director of the Area of Informa-
1974. She received the M.Sc. degree in computer en- tion and Communication Technologies and Mobility.
gineering from the University of Coimbra, Coimbra, In 1985, he set up the research group that developed
Portugal, in 2002. She is currently working toward the microscopic traffic simulator Aimsun, and he was a cofounder and a Sci-
the Ph.D. degree in industrial management with the entific Director of the Transport Simulation Systems (TSS), which is a spin-off
University of Aveiro, Aveiro, Portugal. company of UPC. He has been a Coordinator of several projects of the R&D
She is also an Assistant Lecturer of management programs of the European Union on Intelligent Transportation Systems. He is
and industrial engineering (MIE) with the Univer- an author or a coauthor of more than 100 papers published in technical journals,
sity of Aveiro, where she was the Vice-Director of conference proceedings, and chapters in transportation technical books. He is
the MIE undergraduate program from 2003 to 2006 currently an Associate Editor of Transportation Science and of Transportation
and the Coordinator of the Socrates/Erasmus Pro- Research Part C—Emerging Technologies. His current research interests include
gram from 2003 to 2006. She is a coauthor of the articles “Combining heuristic optimization and simulation techniques for transportation problems.
procedures and simulation models for balancing a PC camera assembly line,” Prof. Barceló was the Director at Large of the Institute for Operations Re-
which was published in Computers and Industrial Engineering, and “Revisiting search and the Management Sciences (INFORMS). In 1997, he received the
the SIMILAR Process to Engineer the Contemporary Systems,” which was pub- Narcı́s Monturiol Medal of the Catalan Government to Technological Innova-
lished in the Journal of Systems Science and Systems Engineering. Her current tion, and in 2001, he received the Honorific Mention Prize Ciudad de Barcelona
research interests include modeling and simulation and model-based systems to Technological Innovation.
engineering, mainly in the industrial and transportation sectors.
Dr. Ramos is a member of the International Council on Systems Engineer-
ing (INCOSE) and received the INCOSE Foundation/Stevens Institute Doctoral
Award for promising research in Systems Engineering and Integration in 2009.
She is also a member of the Portuguese Society for Operational Research.

José Vasconcelos Ferreira was born in Portugal in

1960. He received the M.Sc. degree in operational
research and systems engineering from the Technical
University of Lisboa, Lisboa, Portugal, in 1989 and
the Ph.D. degree in engineering sciences from the
University of Porto, Porto, Portugal, in 2005.
Since 2005, he has been an Assistant Professor
of management and industrial engineering with the
University of Aveiro, Aveiro, Portugal, where he is
a member with the Department of Economics, Man-
agement, and Industrial Engineering Council and a
member of the Industrial Engineering Doctoral Program Council. He was an
Assistant Lecturer with the University of Porto. He is a coauthor of the arti-
cles “A Travelling Salesman Model for the Sequencing of Duties in Bus Crew
Routes,” which was published in the Journal of the Operational Research So-
ciety, and “Revisiting the SIMILAR Process to Engineer the Contemporary
Systems,” which was published in the Journal of Systems Science and Systems
Engineering. He has more than 20 years of experience collaborating with the
main urban mass-transit companies in Portugal. He works in partnership with
a spin-off company dedicated to transportation planning and optimization. His
current research interests include systems engineering, logistics, multivariate
data analysis, and operational planning at mass-transit companies.

Authorized licensed use limited to: Univ Federal do ABC (UFABC). Downloaded on October 12,2022 at 12:20:26 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.