**3.1 Why framework-based approach?**

In general, a framework may be defined as a real or conceptual foundation, with a specified level of complexity that serves as a support or a guide for the building of a particular artifact or performing a particular activity by expanding and specializing the generic structure that specifies the family of interrelated products and/or procedures. Framework favors reusability by managing the overall control flow and orchestration of dynamically configured components in an inversion of control way. There are two major categories of contemporary framework: non-software empowered (usually represented as a set of structured and/or semi-structured

*The Foundation for Open Component Analysis: A System of Systems Hyper Framework Model DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.103830*

documents) and software empowered (software supported collaborative/cooperative environments supporting the digital transformation of problem domain). The development of software empowered interoperability frameworks have usually been preceded by the intensive and time-consuming: specification; modeling; and metamodeling activities performed and managed within the scope of related projects and/ or portfolios.

### **3.2 Why interoperability-based approach?**

In the context of this chapter, cooperation and collaboration of independently developed or specified systems may be generally achieved through total homogenization; harmonization; adaptation; and orchestration interoperability principles. The total homogenization principle states that all of the related systems have to be designed or redesigned to achieve absolute compliance with the globally accepted and standardized template. Homogenization is the most radical, heavy-weight, approach. A harmonization principle is a lightweight approach that assumes the definition and standardization of interfaces that hide the internal characteristic of participating systems and enable their cooperation/collaboration over the unique communication protocol and through the standardized interfaces only. The participating systems need to be functionally complete while retaining the structural diversity. The adaptation interoperability principle assumes cooperation/collaboration of functionally and structurally incomplete systems where participating systems are homogenized up to the functional and structural completeness, in a virtual or real way (where homogenization payoff may substantially differ from system to system) and harmonized afterward. Adaptation interoperability may be seen as a middle-weight approach. It is more complex than the harmonization but, compared to the total homogenization, significantly more acceptable and achievable faster. The orchestration interoperability is the ability of the heterogeneous systems, with arbitrary functionality and topology, to interact toward the mutually beneficial dynamically configured mission, build through the functional and/or structural orchestration of participating systems features and/or resources. Each system retains and shares everything it can perform and/ or deliver and delegates and/or acquires everything that is beyond its scope, but available as a mutual benefit of a current configuration. The orchestration interoperability is an example of broker-based service-oriented dynamic architecture that may be formally described by the swarm intelligence concepts.

### **3.3 Why the interoperability framework approach?**

If carefully combined the best characteristics of two, previously discussed promising concepts, may result in an empowered solution capable of handling the growing complexity of SoS dynamic configurations associated with the multidimensional and multilevel LDOs. The development of interoperability framework generally requires a multi-stakeholder process and the long-term vision of a highly reusable generic solution that, in the context of SoS-HFM, may impact the overall ontology, configurable topology, state-driven behavior, and time and context-dependent LDOs: creation, processing, storing, retrieval and visualizing.

The starting point of SoS and POS paradigms integration is the formulation of a hybrid system meta-model that combines multidimensionality and context-based multilevel features. The meta-concept (MetaConcept) of SoS-HFM is modeled as a typed composite MetaElement presented in **Figure 3**.
