A process for conducting architecture model-based interoperability assessment may reduce interoperability issues in a design. For instance, a computer-implemented method may include organizing, by a computing system, candidate conditions into a hierarchy of logical expressions, and determining, by the computing system, whether each child condition is necessary or unnecessary to its parent condition.
Please help me write a proper abstract based on the patent claims. CLAIM: 1. A computer-implemented method, comprising: organizing, by a computing system, candidate conditions into a hierarchy of logical expressions; and determining, by the computing system, whether each child condition is necessary or unnecessary to a condition of a parent. 2. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, further comprising: receiving, by the computing system, an identified use case in an architecture model for interoperability assessment. 3. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, further comprising: identifying, by the computing system, a data model subset, wherein the data model subset comprises at least one class and a set of relationships between elements in a class. 4. The computer-implemented method of claim 3, further comprising: constraining, by the computing system, the data model subset to assess design characteristics, to expose instances exhibiting a poor general design practice, or both. 5. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, further comprising: formalizing, by the computing system, axioms to formulate assertions against necessary conditions for interoperability of a design. 6. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, further comprising: identifying, by the computing system, necessary conditions. 7. The computer-implemented method of claim 6, wherein the identifying of the necessary conditions comprises: determining, by the computing system, new constraints necessary for interoperability of the design; and documenting, by the computing system, the new constraints necessary for interoperability of the design. 8. A computer-implemented method, comprising: receiving, by a computing system, an identified use case in an architecture model for interoperability assessment organizing, by the computing system, candidate conditions into a hierarchy of logical expressions; and determining, by the computing system, whether each child condition is necessary or unnecessary to a condition of a parent. 9. The computer-implemented method of claim 8, further comprising: identifying, by the computing system, a data model subset, and the data model subset comprises at least one class and a set of relationships between elements in a class. 10. The computer-implemented method of claim 9, further comprising: constraining, by the computing system, instantiations of the data model subset to exclude instances exhibiting a poor general design practice, prevent interoperability for a use case, or both. 11. The computer-implemented method of claim 8, further comprising: formalizing, by the computing system, axioms to formulate assertions against conditions for interoperability of a design. 12. The computer-implemented method of claim 8, further comprising: identifying, by the computing system, the conditions for interoperability of the design. 13. The computer-implemented method of claim 12, wherein the identifying of the necessary conditions comprises: determining, by the computing system, which new constraints are necessary for interoperability of the design. 14. The computer-implemented method of claim 13, wherein the identifying of the necessary conditions further comprises: documenting, by the computer system, the new constraints necessary for interoperability of the design. 15. A computer-implemented method, comprising: receiving, by a computing system, a first performer and a second performer to determine interoperability between the first performer and the second performer in a design; assessing, by the computing system, interoperability between the first performer and the second performer in the design; and transmitting, from the computing system, results of the assessment for the interoperability. 16. The computer-implemented method of claim 15, wherein the assessing of the interoperability comprises determining, by the computing system, whether there are known aspects that may create issues for interoperability of the design. 17. The computer-implemented method of claim 15, wherein the assessing of the interoperability of the design comprises identifying, by the computing system, classes in an architecture model and relationships between the classes. 18. The computer-implemented method of claim 16, wherein the assessing of the interoperability comprises adding, by the computing system, constraints to the classes and the relationships between the classes to expose instances exhibiting a poor general design practice, to assess design characteristics, or both. 19. The computer-implemented method of claim 18, wherein the assessing of the interoperability comprises formalizing, by the computing system, axioms to formulate assertions against conditions that will be tested for necessity for the interoperability of the design. 20. The computer-implemented method of claim 19, wherein the assessing of the interoperability comprises determining, by the computing system, new constrains necessary for interoperability of the design.