Archive‎ > ‎

2011

EMMSAD 2011 was organized in London, United Kingdom, in June, 2010, in conjunction with CAiSE'11.

The field of information systems analysis and design includes numerous information modeling methods and notations (e.g., ER, ORM, UML, DFDs, BPMN) that are typically evolving. Even with some attempts toward standardization (e.g., UML for object-oriented design), new modeling methods are constantly being introduced, many of which differ only marginally from existing approaches. These ongoing changes significantly impact the way information systems are analyzed and designed in practice. This workshop focuses on exploring, evaluating, and enhancing current information modeling methods and methodologies. Though the need for such studies is well recognized, there is a paucity of such research in the literature.

The objective of EMMSAD 2011 was to provide a forum for researchers and practitioners interested in modeling methods in systems analysis and design to meet and exchange research ideas and results. It also gave the participants an opportunity to present their research papers and experience reports, and to take part in open discussions.

EMMSAD 2011 was the 16th in a very successful series of EMMSAD events, previously held in Heraklion, Barcelona, Pisa, Heidelberg, Stockholm, Interlaken, Toronto, Velden, Riga, Porto, Luxembourg, Trondheim, Montpellier, Amsterdam and Hammamet. This year we had 31 submissions by authors from 16 different countries (Australia, Austria, Belgium, Brazil, France, Germany, Israel, Italy, Luxembourg, Malaysia, The Netherlands, Norway, Spain, Sweden, the UK, and the USA). The management of paper submission and reviews was facilitated by use of the EasyChair conference system. After an extensive review process by a distinguished international Program Committee, with each paper receiving at least three reviews, we accepted the 16 papers that appear in these proceedings.

Apart from the contribution by paper authors, the quality of this conference depended in no small way on the generous contribution of time and effort by the Program Committee and the additional reviewers. Their work is greatly appreciated. Continuing with our very successful collaboration with IFIP WG 8.1 that started in 1997, this year’s conference was again a joint activity of CAiSE and WG 8.1. We are also grateful for the sponsorship of the European INTEROP Network of Excellence, AIS-SIGSAND, the Enterprise Engineering Network, and the ORM Foundation.

Acknowledgements

Apart from the contribution by the paper authors, the quality of this workshop depends on no small way on the generous contribution of time and effort by the program committee. Their work is greatly appreciated. We also express our sincere thanks to the CAiSE organizing committee, especially the CAiSE Workshop organizers.

Workshop Co-Chairs

  1. Terry Halpin, Northface University, USA
  2. John Krogstie, SINTEF and Norwegian Institute of Science and Technology, Norway
  3. Erik Proper, Public Research Centre Henri Tudor, Luxembourg and Radboud University Nijmegen, The Netherlands

Workshop Steering Committee

  1. Keng Siau, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, USA
  2. Terry Halpin, Northface University, USA
  3. John Krogstie, SINTEF and Norwegian Institute of Science and Technology, Norway

Accepted papers

  1. Sundar Gopalakrishnan, John Krogstie, and Guttorm Sindre. Adapted UML Activity Diagrams for Mobile Work Processes: Experimental Comparison of Colour and Pattern Fills. In I. Bider, T. Halpin, J. Krogstie, S. Nurcan, E. Proper, R. Schmidt, and R. Ukor, editors, Proceedings of the 11th International Workshop, BPMDS 2010, and 15th International Conference, EMMSAD 2010, held at CAiSE 2010, Hammamet, Tunisia, number 81 in Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, pages 314-331. Springer, Berlin, Germany, June 2011. ISBN-13: 9783642130502 doi:10.1007/978-3-642-21759-3_23
    For multi-channel information systems it is often relevant to model where something is supposed to take place, but business process modelling notations seldom capture geographical location. In previous papers, we suggested and compared alternatives for small modifications to UML Activity Diagrams to address this, and a controlled experiment indicated that an alternative using colour performed better than one using annotations. However, colour also has some challenges, especially concerning users with colour vision problems. Hence, this paper reports on a new experiment comparing colour with black/white pattern fills. The experiment investigated both the participants’ opinions about the notations and their performance on some tasks. While opinion was significantly in favour of the colour notation, task performance was only slightly in favour of this notation, and not significantly so.
    [Paper]

  2. Markus Döhring and Birgit Zimmermann. vBPMN: Event-Aware Workflow Variants by Weaving BPMN2 and Business Rules. In I. Bider, T. Halpin, J. Krogstie, S. Nurcan, E. Proper, R. Schmidt, and R. Ukor, editors, Proceedings of the 11th International Workshop, BPMDS 2010, and 15th International Conference, EMMSAD 2010, held at CAiSE 2010, Hammamet, Tunisia, number 81 in Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, pages 332-341. Springer, Berlin, Germany, June 2011. ISBN-13: 9783642130502 doi:10.1007/978-3-642-21759-3_24
    When workflows are modeled for practical use, workflow variants often have to be considered to fit dynamically changing context factors. If there is a rich workflow context with a large value space, contemporary BPM solutions lack the support for on-the-fly generated variants, requiring explicit one-by-one modeling instead. Researchers have recognized the value of business rules for variant and adaptation support. However, there is still a need for dedicated standards-based constructs for context-dependent event- and exception-handling. Motivated by a realistic example, we therefore foster a framework for the combined use of business rules with a BPMN adaptation pattern catalogue. As the core contribution of this work, we substantiate our framework with a metamodel called vBPMN, which is weaved from BPMN2 and the R2ML rule language and allows for the convenient definition of variant models.
    [Paper]

  3. Iyad Zikra, Janis Stirna, and Jelena Zdravkovic. Analyzing the Integration between Requirements and Models in Model Driven Development. In I. Bider, T. Halpin, J. Krogstie, S. Nurcan, E. Proper, R. Schmidt, and R. Ukor, editors, Proceedings of the 11th International Workshop, BPMDS 2010, and 15th International Conference, EMMSAD 2010, held at CAiSE 2010, Hammamet, Tunisia, number 81 in Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, pages 342-356. Springer, Berlin, Germany, June 2011. ISBN-13: 9783642130502 doi:10.1007/978-3-642-21759-3_25
    In Model Driven Development (MDD), models replace software code as the development artifact. At the same time, requirements represent the information that is elaborated in models. However, despite the tight relationship between models and requirements, only a few MDD approaches provide the necessary methodological guidelines and tool support to explicitly facilitate this relationship. We analyze approaches for integrating requirements with models within MDD and highlight the common characteristics, benefits, and problems. Based on the analysis, we elicit a set of general properties that need to be fulfilled when considering the integration of requirements and models, and we assess the contribution of the considered approaches accordingly.
    [Paper]

  4. José M. González Vázquez, Peter Fettke, Hans-Jürgen Appelrath, and Peter Loos. A Case Study on a GQM-Based Quality Model for a Domain-Specific Reference Model Catalogue to Support Requirements Analysis within Information Systems Development in the German Energy Market. In I. Bider, T. Halpin, J. Krogstie, S. Nurcan, E. Proper, R. Schmidt, and R. Ukor, editors, Proceedings of the 11th International Workshop, BPMDS 2010, and 15th International Conference, EMMSAD 2010, held at CAiSE 2010, Hammamet, Tunisia, number 81 in Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, pages 357-371. Springer, Berlin, Germany, June 2011. ISBN-13: 9783642130502 doi:10.1007/978-3-642-21759-3_26
    Within this contribution, an approach on a goal-question-metric (GQM) based quality model for a domain-specific reference model catalogue is introduced. First of all, we motivate and present an ontology-based reference model catalogue to support requirements analysis within information systems development in the German energy market. For this purpose, we describe requirements for creating such a catalogue. Based on these requirements, quality metrics, to continuously measure the quality of the catalogue during its development and extension, are presented. In addition, the application of these metrics is shown.
    [Paper]

  5. Raian Ali, Fabiano Dalpiaz, Paolo Giorgini, and V\'\itor Estêvão Silva Souza. Requirements Evolution: From Assumptions to Reality. In I. Bider, T. Halpin, J. Krogstie, S. Nurcan, E. Proper, R. Schmidt, and R. Ukor, editors, Proceedings of the 11th International Workshop, BPMDS 2010, and 15th International Conference, EMMSAD 2010, held at CAiSE 2010, Hammamet, Tunisia, number 81 in Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, pages 372-382. Springer, Berlin, Germany, June 2011. ISBN-13: 9783642130502 doi:10.1007/978-3-642-21759-3_27
    Requirements evolution is a main driver for systems evolution. Traditionally, requirements evolution is associated to changes in the users’ needs and environments. In this paper, we explore another cause for requirements evolution: assumptions. Requirements engineers often make assumptions stating, for example, that satisfying certain sub-requirements and/or correctly executing certain system functionalities would lead to reach a certain requirement. However, assumptions might be, or eventually become, invalid. We outline an approach to monitor, at runtime, the assumptions in a requirements model and to evolve the model to reflect the validity level of such assumptions. We introduce two types of requirements evolution: autonomic (which evolves the priorities of system alternatives based on their success/failure in meeting requirements) and designer-supported (which detects loci in the requirements model containing invalid assumptions and recommends designers to take evolutionary actions).
    [Paper]

  6. Mohammed A. Aboulsamh and Jim Davies. A Formal Modeling Approach to Information Systems Evolution and Data Migration. In I. Bider, T. Halpin, J. Krogstie, S. Nurcan, E. Proper, R. Schmidt, and R. Ukor, editors, Proceedings of the 11th International Workshop, BPMDS 2010, and 15th International Conference, EMMSAD 2010, held at CAiSE 2010, Hammamet, Tunisia, number 81 in Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, pages 383-397. Springer, Berlin, Germany, June 2011. ISBN-13: 9783642130502 doi:10.1007/978-3-642-21759-3_28
    In the model-driven approach to software development, system implementations are generated automatically from abstract models of structure and behaviour. This could greatly facilitate systems evolution: a new version of a system may be produced simply by updating the system model and repeating the generation process. However, an information system may hold data of considerable value and complexity, and this must be safely migrated at each evolutionary step. This paper shows how this problem can be solved through a formal, model-driven approach: platform-specific data migration functions are generated automatically from a formal model of system changes, and the applicability of these functions is calculated in advance, ensuring that they may be safely applied to existing data.
    [Paper]

  7. Remigijus Gustas. Overlaying Conceptualizations for Managing Complexity of Scenario Specifications. In I. Bider, T. Halpin, J. Krogstie, S. Nurcan, E. Proper, R. Schmidt, and R. Ukor, editors, Proceedings of the 11th International Workshop, BPMDS 2010, and 15th International Conference, EMMSAD 2010, held at CAiSE 2010, Hammamet, Tunisia, number 81 in Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, pages 398-412. Springer, Berlin, Germany, June 2011. ISBN-13: 9783642130502 doi:10.1007/978-3-642-21759-3_29
    Most conventional conceptual modeling approaches are not putting into a foreground interaction dependencies between actors. This is one of the main reasons why it is difficult to apply them for managing complexity of conceptual representations. The goal of this paper is to present conceptual modeling method, which allows constructing graphical representations of scenarios with a more comprehensible structure. Using simple interaction loops between organizational and technical components help designers to separate crosscutting concerns in system engineering without the requirement to specify a complete solution. The examples of sequential, iterative, parallel and alternative behavior are analyzed to demonstrate conceptual descriptions of use-case scenarios. The overlaying and underlying interaction loops among actors are easier to understand, extend and maintain.
    [Paper]

  8. Elena Kornyshova, Rébecca Deneckère, and Colette Rolland. Method Families Concept: Application to Decision-Making Methods. In I. Bider, T. Halpin, J. Krogstie, S. Nurcan, E. Proper, R. Schmidt, and R. Ukor, editors, Proceedings of the 11th International Workshop, BPMDS 2010, and 15th International Conference, EMMSAD 2010, held at CAiSE 2010, Hammamet, Tunisia, number 81 in Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, pages 413-427. Springer, Berlin, Germany, June 2011. ISBN-13: 9783642130502 doi:10.1007/978-3-642-21759-3_30
    The role of variability in Software engineering grows increasingly as it allows developing solutions that can be easily adapted to a specific context and reusing existing knowledge. In order to deal with variability in the method engineering (ME) domain, we suggest applying the notion of method families. Method components are organized as a method family, which is configured in the given situation into a method line. In this paper, we motivate the concept of method families by comparing the existing approaches of ME. We detail then the concept of method families and illustrate it with a family of decision-making (DM) methods that we call MADISE.
    [Paper]

  9. Terry A. Halpin. Structural Aspects of Data Modeling Languages. In I. Bider, T. Halpin, J. Krogstie, S. Nurcan, E. Proper, R. Schmidt, and R. Ukor, editors, Proceedings of the 11th International Workshop, BPMDS 2010, and 15th International Conference, EMMSAD 2010, held at CAiSE 2010, Hammamet, Tunisia, number 81 in Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, pages 428-442. Springer, Berlin, Germany, June 2011. ISBN-13: 9783642130502 doi:10.1007/978-3-642-21759-3_31
    A conceptual data model for an information system specifies the fact structures of interest as well as the constraints and derivation rules that apply to the business domain being modeled. The languages for specifying these models may be graphical or textual, and may be based upon approaches such as Entity Relationship modeling, class diagramming in the Unified Modeling Language, fact orientation (e.g. Object-Role Modeling), Semantic Web modeling (e.g. the Web Ontology Language), or deductive databases (e.g. datalog). Although sharing many aspects in common, these languages also differ in fundamental ways which impact not only how, but which, aspects of a business domain may be specified. This paper provides a logical analysis and critical comparison of how such modeling languages deal with three main structural aspects: the entity/value distinction; existential facts; and entity reference schemes. The analysis has practical implications for modeling within a specific language and for transforming between languages.
    [Paper]

  10. Andrew Carver and Tony Morgan. Characterizing Business Rules for Practical Information Systems. In I. Bider, T. Halpin, J. Krogstie, S. Nurcan, E. Proper, R. Schmidt, and R. Ukor, editors, Proceedings of the 11th International Workshop, BPMDS 2010, and 15th International Conference, EMMSAD 2010, held at CAiSE 2010, Hammamet, Tunisia, number 81 in Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, pages 443-452. Springer, Berlin, Germany, June 2011. ISBN-13: 9783642130502 doi:10.1007/978-3-642-21759-3_32
    The recognition of business rules as an important element of modern information systems has led to various proposals for business rule categorization schemes. In particular, a recent business rule standards proposal, the OMG standard for the Semantics of Business Vocabularies and Business Rules (SBVR) distinguishes between major categories of rule using a scheme derived from modal logic, based on alethic and deontic modalities. This paper examines some of the claims made for this categorization scheme in terms of the relationship with generally accepted logical systems, and identifies a number of problem areas. It further assesses the value of this modal logic classification scheme in the development and maintenance of information systems. Planned future work will look at an alternative scheme for practical categorization of business rules.
    [Paper]

  11. Lamia Abo Zaid and Olga De Troyer. Towards Modeling Data Variability in Software Product Lines. In I. Bider, T. Halpin, J. Krogstie, S. Nurcan, E. Proper, R. Schmidt, and R. Ukor, editors, Proceedings of the 11th International Workshop, BPMDS 2010, and 15th International Conference, EMMSAD 2010, held at CAiSE 2010, Hammamet, Tunisia, number 81 in Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, pages 453-467. Springer, Berlin, Germany, June 2011. ISBN-13: 9783642130502 doi:10.1007/978-3-642-21759-3_33
    In this paper, we provide an approach for modeling data variability as part of the overall software product line modeling approach. Modeling data variability in software product lines allows tailoring the data to the variability of a product. For this purpose, we have extended our Feature Assembly Modeling technique with the concept of persistency feature. We explain how these persistency features can be used to express the data variability, how they can be created and how they relate to the other features of the software product line. We also show how to derive a so-called variable data model from these persistency features and how an actual data model for a product of the product line can be derived. Additionally, annotations provide traceability between the variability of the features and the variability in the data model.
    [Paper]

  12. Iris Reinhartz-Berger and Arava Tsoury. Experimenting with the Comprehension of Feature-Oriented and UML-Based Core Assets. In I. Bider, T. Halpin, J. Krogstie, S. Nurcan, E. Proper, R. Schmidt, and R. Ukor, editors, Proceedings of the 11th International Workshop, BPMDS 2010, and 15th International Conference, EMMSAD 2010, held at CAiSE 2010, Hammamet, Tunisia, number 81 in Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, pages 468-482. Springer, Berlin, Germany, June 2011. ISBN-13: 9783642130502 doi:10.1007/978-3-642-21759-3_34
    Software product line engineering mainly deals with specifying and developing core assets that can be utilized and adapted into specific product artifacts. Feature-oriented and UML-based modeling methods have been proposed for managing and supporting core assets specification. While these methods get a lot of attention in software product line engineering literature, their comparison in terms of comprehension is somewhat neglected. Being suitable for early stages of core assets development, this work aims at performing comparative analysis and discussing their advantages and limitations in view of two main stakeholders: developers and product customers. To this end, we conducted two experiments for examining the comprehension of core assets specification in feature-oriented CBFM and UML-based ADOM. The results showed that the only significant difference in terms of comprehension between these methods is in variability specification; developers may better understand the locations at which variability occurs and the ways to realize variability in ADOM.
    [Paper]

  13. Manpreet K. Dhillon and Subhasish Dasgupta. Individual Differences and Conceptual Modeling Task Performance: Examining the Effects of Cognitive Style, Self-efficacy, and Application Domain Knowledge. In I. Bider, T. Halpin, J. Krogstie, S. Nurcan, E. Proper, R. Schmidt, and R. Ukor, editors, Proceedings of the 11th International Workshop, BPMDS 2010, and 15th International Conference, EMMSAD 2010, held at CAiSE 2010, Hammamet, Tunisia, number 81 in Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, pages 483-496. Springer, Berlin, Germany, June 2011. ISBN-13: 9783642130502 doi:10.1007/978-3-642-21759-3_35
    In information systems development, conceptual modeling, which includes both data modeling and process modeling, is the most effective technique for depicting and sharing an understanding of the functional capabilities and limitations of the product/ system/ service design. The quality of conceptual models depends on a number of factors. This research focused on attributes of the modeler and specifically examined how an individual’s cognitive style, task self-efficacy, and knowledge of application domain impact the quality of two types of conceptual models: data models and process models. Results of the research revealed that an individual’s cognitive style may relate to conceptual model quality. In addition, the research showed that self-efficacy may be a determinant of model quality. Application domain knowledge did not appear to play a role in quality of models produced by the participants in this study.
    [Paper]

  14. Ajantha Dahanayake and Bernhard Thalheim. Enriching Conceptual Modelling Practices through Design Science. In I. Bider, T. Halpin, J. Krogstie, S. Nurcan, E. Proper, R. Schmidt, and R. Ukor, editors, Proceedings of the 11th International Workshop, BPMDS 2010, and 15th International Conference, EMMSAD 2010, held at CAiSE 2010, Hammamet, Tunisia, number 81 in Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, pages 497-510. Springer, Berlin, Germany, June 2011. ISBN-13: 9783642130502 doi:10.1007/978-3-642-21759-3_36
    Models, modelling languages, modelling frameworks and their background have dominated conceptual modelling research and information systems engineering for last four decades. Conceptual models are mediators between the application world and the implementation or system world. Design science distinguishes the relevance cycle as the iterative process that re-inspects the application and the model, the design cycle as the iterative model development process, and the rigor cycle that aims in grounding and adding concepts developed to the knowledge base. This separation of concern into requirements engineering, model development and conceptualisation is the starting point for this paper. Research in design science and on conceptual modelling resulted in a large body of knowledge, practices, and techniques. The two research approaches have developed their approaches and solutions. This paper shows how the two approaches can be integrated without making a sacrifice for integration. Modelling is based on modelling activities. Integration therefore starts with an integrated view on modelling. As an example of this integration we shall use reasoning support for modelling. Each modelling step considers specific work products, orients towards specific aspects of the system or application, involves different partners, and uses a variety of resources.
    [Paper]

  15. Sabine Buckl, Markus Buschle, Pontus Johnson, Florian Matthes, and Christian M. Schweda. A Meta-language for Enterprise Architecture Analysis. In I. Bider, T. Halpin, J. Krogstie, S. Nurcan, E. Proper, R. Schmidt, and R. Ukor, editors, Proceedings of the 11th International Workshop, BPMDS 2010, and 15th International Conference, EMMSAD 2010, held at CAiSE 2010, Hammamet, Tunisia, number 81 in Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, pages 511-525. Springer, Berlin, Germany, June 2011. ISBN-13: 9783642130502 doi:10.1007/978-3-642-21759-3_37
    Enterprise Architecture (EA) management is a commonly accepted instrument to support strategic decision making. The objective of EA management is to improve business IT alignment by making the impact of planned changes explicit. The increasing interconnectivity of applications with other applications and with business processes however makes it difficult to get a complete view on change impacts and dependency structures. This information is nevertheless required to support decision makers. Current meta-languages proposed for the context of EA management provide only limited support for modelling qualitative and quantitative dependencies. In this paper we propose a meta-language, which builds on the Meta Object Facility (MOF). This meta-language specifically accounts for the requirements of EA analysis. We discuss existing meta-languages from the field of EA management and related areas against these requirements. Building on the standard of the OMG, we present an extension of MOF designed to support EA analysis. The theoretic exposition of the extension is complemented by an example illustrating the applicability of the presented meta-language.
    [Paper]

  16. D.J.T. Van der Linden, S.J.B.A. Hoppenbrouwers, A. Lartseva, and H.A. Proper. Towards an Investigation of the Conceptual Landscape of Enterprise Architecture. In I. Bider, T. Halpin, J. Krogstie, S. Nurcan, E. Proper, R. Schmidt, and R. Ukor, editors, Proceedings of the 11th International Workshop, BPMDS 2010, and 15th International Conference, EMMSAD 2010, held at CAiSE 2010, Hammamet, Tunisia, number 81 in Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, pages 526-535. Springer, Berlin, Germany, June 2011. ISBN-13: 9783642130502

    In this paper we discuss our preliminary work on clarifying the conceptual landscape of Enterprise Architecture. We do so to aid in the integration of conceptual models originating from different communities (of language users, concerns, viewpoints etc.). We propose that discovering the basic ontological structure used by these communities is necessary for the effective integration of models, and that different communities have a distinguishable different central understanding of some categories in their ontology. Our initial results include the description and categorization analysis of several languages and methods used in EA (as used by their creators), which suggest a prototype structure reflecting a community’s focus.
    [Paper]

Program Committee

  1. Stephan Aier, University of St. Gallen, Switzerland
  2. Antonia Albani, University of St. Gallen, Switzerland
  3. Herman Balsters, University of Groningen, The Netherlands
  4. Giuseppe Berio, University of Turin, Italy
  5. Linda Bird, National E-Health Transition Authority, Australia
  6. Peter Bollen, Maastricht University, The Netherlands
  7. Nacer Boudjlida, UHP Nancy 1/Loria, France
  8. Sjaak Brinkkemper, Utrecht University, The Netherlands
  9. Andy Carver, Carver Consulting, United States of America
  10. Olga De Troyer, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Belgium
  11. David Embley, Brigham Young University, USA
  12. Mathias Ekstedt KTH - Royal Institute of Technology, Sweden
  13. John Erickson, University of Nebraska-Omaha, United States of America
  14. Gordon Everest University of Minnesota, United States of America
  15. Peter Fettke, Institute for Information Systems, DFKI, Germany
  16. Ulrich Frank, University of Duisberg-Essen, Germany
  17. Andrew Gemino, Simon Fraser University, Canada
  18. Remigijus Gustas, Karlstad University, Sweden
  19. Wolfgang Hesse, University of Marburg, Germany
  20. Stijn Hoppenbrouwers, Radboud University Nijmegen, The Netherlands
  21. Mike Jackson, Birmingham City University, United Kingdom
  22. Paul Johanneson, Stockholm University, Sweden
  23. Pontus Johnson, KTH - Royal Institute of Technology, Sweden
  24. Pericles Loucopoulos, Loughborough University, United Kingdom
  25. Kalle Lyytinen, Case Western Reserve University, United States of America
  26. Florian Matthes Technical University of Munich, Germany
  27. Raimundas Matuleviˇcius University of Tartu, Estonia
  28. Graham McLeod, Promis Solutions, Switzerland
  29. Jan Mendling, Humboldt-University Berlin, Germany
  30. Wolfgang Molnar, Public Research Centre Henri Tudor, Luxembourg
  31. Tony Morgan, Neumont University, United States of America
  32. Andreas L. Opdahl, University of Bergen, Norway
  33. Hervé Panetto, France, University Henri Poincaré Nancy I, France
  34. Barbara Pernici, Politecnico di Milano, Italy
  35. Anne Persson, University of Sko ̈vde, Sweden
  36. Michaël Petit, University of Namur, Belgium
  37. Jolita Ralyté, University of Geneva, Switzerland
  38. Sudha Ram, University of Arizona, United States of America
  39. Colette Rolland, University of Paris 1, France
  40. Kurt Sandkuhl Jönköping University, Sweden
  41. Peretz Shoval, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Israel
  42. Guttorm Sindre, University of Trondheim, Norway
  43. Il-Yeol Song, Drexel University, United States of America
  44. Carson Woo, University of British Columbia, Canada 
  45. Martin Zelm, CIMOSA, Germany

Additional reviewers for EMMSAD 2011

  1. Alexis Aubry
  2. Thomas Buechner
  3. Mikael Berndtsson
  4. Khaled Gaaloul
  5. David Gouyon
  6. David Heise
  7. Hannes Holm
  8. Constantin Houy
  9. Heiko Kattenstroth
  10. Ritu Khare
  11. Per Närman
  12. Pia Närman
  13. Waldo Rocha Flores
  14. Sascha Roth
  15. Xuning Tang
  16. Ornsiri Thongoom
  17. Armella-Lucia Vella
  18. Jürgen Walter
  19. Ilona Wilmont