Re: The anatomy of plagiarism that was made by authors of "Anchor Modeling"

In their main paper: "Anchor Modeling - An Agile Modeling Technique using the Sixth Normal Form for Structurally and Temporally Evolving Data", this authors put in the title the following text: "using the Sixth Normal Form". In this post I will prove that they don't and can not use Sixth Normal Form. To prove this, I will use my example from 2005. See my paper "Some ideas about a new Data Model", Example 2.5 at http://www.dbdesign10.com
Note that this my paper was "severely" discussed on this user group, for several years. Anyone can see this discussion.

Example:
The table Savings has only two attributes: Amount and AmountKey. The second attribute is the primary key. The table is simplified for the purpose paying attention to creating knowledge. Usually we create a table like this:

(i)

AmountKey Amount

116                    $2000.00

However if we want to implement knowledge on the level of a value of the attribute Amount, then we can, for example add six new columns in this table: Date1, Date2, Operater1, Date3, Date4, Operater2. Table Saving now can look like:

AmountKey Amount Date1 Date2 Operator1 Date3 Date4 Operator2

116    $2000.00  5/Oct/04    1      John Mayell     6/Oct/04    1       Paul Jones
117    $2000.00  5/Oct/04 28/Oct/04  Mick Smith    6/Oct/04  29/Oct/04  Lee Evans
118    $2500.00 28/Oct/04    1       Mick Smith    29/Oct/)4    1       Lee Evans

End of the example

1.
My main structures from the above example have the following forms (surrogate-key, one-attribute, meta-data), exactly the same data structure uses "Anchor Modeling" - they use (surrogate key, one-attribute and meta data). Note that this my example was presented in my paper in 2005. The first paper from "Anchor Modeling" is from 2009 year. The "Anchor Modeling" some things have changed and I have shown that all these changes have faults.

2.
Note also that above example has the following data structure:  (AmountKey, Amount, Date1, Date2, Operator1, Date3, Date4, Operator2) . This structure is not in 6NF. We can note that the following data structure (surrogatekey,  attribute, meta-data) is not in 6NF. So it is not possible that "Anchor modeling" can use 6NF, as is asserted in the title of this paper.

3.
Note that relations that represent relationships with metadata are not in 6NF. Moreover, relations that represent only relationships (without meta data), are not in 6NF.
Again, it is not possible that "Anchor modeling" can use 6NF, as is asserted in the title of the mantioned paper.

4.
The authors of "Anchor Modeling" are defined all important data structures, without the use of metadata. Thus, for example, their main structure Historized Attributes, Hatt (C, D, T) does not have metadata at all. On the other hand, metadata are very important for "Anchor Modeling" and "History". In the above mentioned paper, these authors have written the following justification why they left out the metadata: "Although important, the metadata is not discussed further since its use does not differ from that of other modeling techniques." It is important to understand that nobody can use 6NF as it is stated in the title of "Anchor Modeling". 6NF is just a name, 6NF does not have any procedure which can put some relation in 6NF.

5.
Now, how to explain the anatomy of this kind of "science":

(i) How they did that so simple this decomposition of entities and relationships into
following atomic structures, "Historized Attributes" and "Historized Ties". How to prove this "decomposition" and "recomposition", because nobody can do it.

(ii)

If someone do not believe, then look at title of paper "Anchor modeling - an agile modeling using the sixth normal form for STRUCTURALLY and temporally evolving data" . But 6NF does not work with metadata?

(iii)

The authors of "Anchor Modeling" work simultaneously in two data models, ERM and RM. In my Thread, "The original version", I wrote that the mapping between two data models is done only in my data model. After that, the authors of "Anchor Modeling" have plagiarized my work and took the most important part of my work - the theory of the states.

I mention all of this again, because it is now in a broader context. In this thread I write about other serious theoretical errors of the authors of "Anchor Modeling", that is, I am writing about their professional competence.

Vladimir Odrljin Received on Thu Mar 26 2015 - 22:29:47 CET