Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Data-flow diagram

A data flow diagram (DFD) is a graphical representation of the flow of data through an information system, illustrating how data is input, processed, stored, output, and transformed within processes.^[1] DFDs model the system from a functional perspective, focusing on the movement of data rather than control flow or timing, making them essential tools in systems analysis and software engineering.^[2] Originating in the late 1970s as part of structured systems analysis, DFDs were first introduced by software engineers Ed Yourdon and Larry Constantine in their 1979 book Structured Design: Fundamentals of a Discipline of Computer Program and Systems Design.^[1] Around the same time, computer scientists Chris Gane and Trish Sarson independently developed a similar technique, contributing standardized notations that emphasized practical diagramming for business systems.^[3] Tom DeMarco further popularized the methodology through his work on structured analysis, integrating DFDs into broader requirements gathering practices.^[4] At their core, DFDs employ four primary components: external entities (sources or destinations of data outside the system, depicted as squares or rectangles), processes (transformations of data, shown as circles in Yourdon notation or rounded rectangles in Gane-Sarson notation), data stores (repositories for persistent data, represented as open-ended rectangles or parallel lines), and data flows (arrows indicating the direction and type of data movement between components).^[1] These elements adhere to two main symbol sets—Yourdon-Coad (using circles for processes to emphasize modularity) and Gane-Sarson (using rectangles for clarity in complex diagrams)—allowing analysts to choose based on project needs.^[2] DFDs are constructed hierarchically to manage complexity: the context diagram (Level 0) provides a high-level view of the entire system as a single process interacting with external entities; subsequent levels (1, 2, etc.) decompose processes into subprocesses, revealing finer details while maintaining data balance across levels to ensure consistency.^[3] This decomposition supports iterative refinement, helping stakeholders visualize system boundaries, detect redundancies or bottlenecks, and align on requirements during design phases.^[1] Widely used in fields like business process modeling, database design, and software development, DFDs facilitate communication among technical and non-technical teams, though they have limitations such as not capturing temporal aspects or user interactions, often complementing tools like entity-relationship diagrams or UML activity diagrams in modern methodologies.^[2] Despite evolving technologies, DFDs remain a foundational technique for understanding data-centric systems, with ongoing adaptations in agile and DevOps environments.^[3]

Overview

Definition and Purpose

A data-flow diagram (DFD) is a graphical modeling tool that depicts a system as a network of functional processes interconnected by data flows and data stores, illustrating the movement of data from inputs through transformations to outputs. Unlike flowcharts, it emphasizes data transformations and storage without detailing control mechanisms, timing, or sequential execution.^[5] The primary purpose of a DFD is to provide a visual framework for analyzing and designing systems, enabling the identification of data requirements, processes, and interactions during requirements elicitation and modeling phases. It simplifies complex systems by focusing on "what" data is processed rather than "how" it is implemented, facilitating communication among stakeholders such as analysts, developers, and users.^[6]^[5] DFDs offer key benefits including enhanced understanding of system dynamics through intuitive, hierarchical diagrams that fit on a single page for clarity; support for structured analysis that verifies functionality independently of physical implementation; and early detection of inefficiencies like bottlenecks or redundancies. These advantages make DFDs especially valuable for operational and information systems where data handling is paramount.^[6]^[5] A brief example is an order processing system, where customer input data flows to a central "validate and process order" function, which interacts with an inventory data store to check availability and produces outputs like order confirmations and updated stock records.^[1]

Historical Development

Data-flow diagrams (DFDs) emerged in the early to mid-1970s as part of the structured analysis movement in software engineering, aimed at overcoming the limitations of traditional flowcharts, which were often overly sequential and difficult to manage for complex systems. The foundational concepts were introduced in the 1974 paper "Structured Design" by W. P. Stevens, G. J. Myers, and L. L. Constantine, published in the IBM Systems Journal, where they proposed data flow graphs as a method to model data movement and module interactions in program design. This work built on earlier efforts in structured programming and provided a graphical alternative focused on data rather than control flow, enabling better decomposition of systems into manageable components. Larry Constantine, a key pioneer in structured design, is credited with formalizing the data-flow diagram as a distinct technique in the mid-1970s, co-authoring influential texts that popularized its use. In 1979, Ed Yourdon and Larry Constantine further advanced DFDs in their book Structured Design: Fundamentals of a Discipline of Computer Program and Systems Design, emphasizing their role in high-level system modeling and coupling-cohesion analysis. Concurrently, Tom DeMarco's 1978 book Structured Analysis and System Specification integrated DFDs into structured analysis methodologies, using a notation that highlighted processes, data stores, and external entities. The Gane-Sarson notation, which employs rectangles for processes and open-ended rectangles for data stores, was formalized in Chris Gane and Trish Sarson's 1979 book Structured Systems Analysis: Tools and Techniques, providing a standardized visual syntax that became widely adopted.^[7]^[8] By the late 1970s, DFDs saw their first widespread application in business process modeling around 1975, following the 1974 paper's dissemination, and were integrated into methodologies such as Yourdon-DeMarco structured analysis. In the 1980s, adoption expanded significantly in information systems development, particularly through the UK's Structured Systems Analysis and Design Method (SSADM), developed from 1980 onward by the Central Computer and Telecommunications Agency, which mandated DFDs for logical data modeling in government projects.^[9] The 1990s brought minor refinements via Computer-Aided Software Engineering (CASE) tools, such as those from Rational and Visible Systems, which automated DFD creation, validation, and integration with other diagrams, though the core technique remained largely unchanged. Since then, DFDs have maintained stability, influencing later standards for system modeling, including aspects of ISO/IEC 42010:2007 on systems and software engineering—architecture description, which incorporates data flow concepts in architectural viewpoints.^[10]

Core Elements

Symbols and Notation

Data-flow diagrams (DFDs) employ a set of standardized graphical symbols to represent key elements of data movement and transformation within a system. These symbols include rectangles or squares for external entities, which depict sources or sinks of data outside the system's boundaries; circles or rounded rectangles for processes, which illustrate actions that transform input data into output; open-ended rectangles or parallel lines for data stores, representing repositories where data is held for later use; and arrows for data flows, indicating the directional movement of data packets between elements.^[1]^[4]^[11] Two primary notation styles dominate DFD representations: the Yourdon-DeMarco notation and the Gane-Sarson notation. In Yourdon-DeMarco, processes are depicted as circles, data stores as two parallel horizontal lines, external entities as squares, and data flows as arrows with optional arrowheads to show direction.^[11]^[4] The Gane-Sarson style uses rectangles with rounded corners for processes, open-ended rectangles for data stores, rectangles for external entities, and straight arrows for data flows.^[1]^[12] The choice between these notations often depends on factors such as readability preferences and compatibility with diagramming tools, with Gane-Sarson favored for its more structured appearance in formal documentation.^[13]^[4] Labeling conventions in DFDs ensure clarity and consistency. Processes are typically labeled with concise verb phrases that describe the transformation, such as "Validate Order" or "Generate Report," to highlight the action performed.^[1] Data flows are named using noun phrases that specify the data type or content, for example, "Order Details" or "Customer Information," without implying sequence or control logic.^[1] Notably, DFDs include no dedicated symbols for control elements like decisions or branches, as they focus solely on data movement rather than procedural logic.^[14] Additional diagram conventions enhance readability and precision. Processes are assigned unique numerical identifiers, such as "1.0" for top-level processes or "2.3" for sub-processes, to facilitate hierarchical referencing. Lines representing data flows should avoid crossing to prevent confusion, with rerouting or duplication of symbols used as needed to maintain clarity.^[13] Color coding may be applied optionally in complex diagrams to distinguish elements like data flows or processes, though it is not part of the core notation standards.^[15]

Element	Yourdon-DeMarco Notation	Gane-Sarson Notation
External Entity	Square	Rectangle
Process	Circle	Rounded Rectangle
Data Store	Two Parallel Lines	Open-Ended Rectangle
Data Flow	Arrow	Arrow

This table summarizes the visual differences between the two notations, based on established structured analysis practices.^[4]^[12]

Components of DFDs

Data flow diagrams (DFDs) consist of four primary components that collectively model the movement and transformation of data within a system: processes, data stores, external entities, and data flows.^[16] These elements emphasize the functional aspects of data handling without detailing control flows or implementation specifics.^[17] Processes represent the active functional units in a DFD that receive input data, transform it through computation or manipulation, and produce output data. They depict operations such as calculations, decisions, or data validations performed by the system, often labeled with a descriptive name and number for identification. Each process is atomic at its level of detail, meaning it performs a single, well-defined function, though it can be further decomposed into subprocesses in lower-level diagrams. For example, a process might aggregate customer orders into a summary report by processing raw transaction data.^[16]^[18] Data stores symbolize repositories where data is persistently stored for later retrieval, such as databases, files, or memory buffers, independent of the order in which data is generated or accessed. Labeled sequentially (e.g., D1 for the first store, D2 for the second), they hold data that processes can read from or write to, enabling reuse across multiple system functions. Unlike processes, data stores are passive and do not transform data themselves; they simply retain it within the system boundary. An example is a customer database (D1) that stores profile information accessed by various processes for updates or queries. Data enters and exits data stores only through processes, preventing direct external access.^[16]^[18] External entities denote sources or destinations of data outside the system's boundary, including users, other systems, or organizations that interact with the system by providing inputs or receiving outputs. They do not perform internal processing and are placed at the diagram's periphery to highlight the system's interfaces. For instance, a "Customer" external entity might supply order details as input or receive shipment notifications as output, clarifying the system's environmental context without including entity-internal details. External entities ensure the DFD focuses on data exchanges at the system level.^[16]^[18] Data flows illustrate the directed movement of specific data items or packets between processes, data stores, and external entities, represented as labeled arrows indicating the nature and direction of the transfer. Each flow must describe meaningful, discrete data elements—such as "order details" or "customer ID"—rather than vague aggregates, ensuring clarity in how information propagates. Data flows cannot connect external entities directly to one another or data stores without an intervening process, maintaining logical data paths. This component underscores the dynamic aspect of the system, showing composition, duplication, or decomposition of data as it moves.^[16]^[17] The interactions among these components enforce data conservation, where inputs to a process or level must balance with outputs, preserving the integrity of data representation across the diagram. All data flows must originate from or terminate at valid components—typically external entities to processes, processes to data stores, or between processes—preventing isolated or invalid connections that could misrepresent system behavior.^[16]^[18]

Modeling Guidelines

Rules for Creating DFDs

Creating effective data-flow diagrams (DFDs) requires adherence to established principles that ensure clarity, consistency, and logical representation of data movement within a system. These rules, originating from structured analysis methodologies developed by pioneers like Edward Yourdon and Tom DeMarco, guide analysts in modeling systems without introducing ambiguities or invalid constructs. By following these guidelines, DFDs accurately depict how data flows through processes, stores, and external interactions, facilitating better system design and communication among stakeholders. One fundamental rule is the balance principle, which mandates that inputs and outputs must match between a parent diagram and its child diagrams at lower levels of decomposition. This ensures no new data flows are introduced at subordinate levels that do not exist in the parent, preserving the overall integrity of the model and preventing discrepancies in data conservation across hierarchies. For instance, if a parent process receives specific inputs from external entities, the corresponding child processes must collectively account for those same inputs without adding extraneous flows. Similarly, outputs from the parent must be reflected in the aggregated outputs of the children, maintaining traceability and logical equivalence. Another key constraint prohibits direct connections between external entities and data stores. External entities, representing sources or destinations outside the system boundary, can only interact with processes through data flows; any data destined for or retrieved from a data store must pass through an intervening process to reflect real-world system mediation. This rule avoids implying unauthorized or unprocessed access to internal storage, ensuring that all data transformations are explicitly modeled via processes. For example, a customer (external entity) cannot directly write to a database (data store); instead, the data must flow to a "Process Order" process, which then updates the store. Processes in a DFD must embody specificity, with each process performing exactly one well-defined function to promote modularity and readability. Overly complex processes that encompass multiple unrelated tasks should be decomposed, while trivial ones that merely pass data unchanged should be eliminated or consolidated. Processes are typically labeled with a verb-noun phrase, such as "Validate Customer," to clearly indicate their transformative role on incoming data. This granularity aids in identifying system functionalities without overwhelming the diagram with excessive detail. Data flows themselves must exhibit clarity by representing only atomic data items—discrete packets of information like "customer ID" or "order details"—without incorporating control elements such as decisions, sequences, or conditional logic. DFDs are purely data-oriented and exclude control flows, which are better suited to other modeling techniques like flowcharts. Labels on data flows should be descriptive and consistent, avoiding vague terms to ensure precise communication of what data is being transferred. Defining clear system boundaries is essential, with external entities positioned outside the diagram's perimeter to delineate what lies beyond the scope, while internal components like processes and data stores remain within. This separation highlights the system's interfaces, focusing analysis on internal data dynamics without blurring the distinction between in-scope and out-of-scope elements. External entities are often placed along the diagram's edges for visual emphasis on entry and exit points. DFDs do not model control structures like iterations or decision loops, focusing on data movement. Avoid unresolved cycles or infinite sinks (e.g., processes with inputs but no outputs). Data flows should represent steady-state interactions, allowing feedback cycles where appropriate but ensuring logical resolution through processes or stores. This rule underscores the diagram's role in modeling steady-state data handling rather than dynamic control behaviors.

Ensuring Consistency and Balance

Ensuring consistency in data flow diagrams (DFDs) involves verifying that data flows are named uniformly throughout the model and that processes execute their specified functions without internal contradictions or discrepancies in data handling. This check prevents ambiguities that could mislead system analysts or developers during interpretation. For instance, if a data flow labeled "customer order" in one process must maintain the same name and implied attributes (e.g., order ID, quantity) in all connected processes and lower-level decompositions.^[19] Balancing techniques focus on maintaining alignment between hierarchical levels of DFDs, particularly through parent-child balance, where the inputs and outputs crossing the boundary of a parent process must exactly match the collective inputs and outputs of its child processes. This conservation principle ensures no data is lost or invented during decomposition; for example, all external entity interactions shown on a level-0 diagram must appear identically on the corresponding level-1 subprocesses. Leveling tables, which tabulate data flows by level and track their origins and destinations, aid in visualizing and enforcing this balance across the entire model.^[20]^[21] Validation methods for DFDs include cross-referencing elements against a centralized data dictionary to confirm that flow names, process descriptions, and data store definitions are synchronized and adhere to predefined standards. Stakeholder walkthroughs, where analysts review diagrams in sessions to simulate data movement and identify functional gaps, provide qualitative assurance of logical accuracy. Automated tools, such as those implementing formalized syntax rules, perform programmatic checks for balance violations and naming inconsistencies, often generating reports on discrepancies for iterative correction.^[22]^[23] Common errors in DFDs that undermine consistency and balance encompass unbalanced levels, where aggregated child flows do not replicate parent boundary flows; orphan processes lacking any inputs or outputs, indicating isolated or incomplete functions; and dangling flows that originate from a source but terminate without a valid sink, suggesting incomplete modeling. Resolution involves systematically refining process boundaries by re-examining external interactions, consolidating or eliminating redundant flows, and iteratively re-balancing using leveling tables until alignment is achieved.^[21]^[24] Quality metrics for evaluating DFD integrity emphasize completeness, ensuring all required data paths from external entities to stores and processes are represented without omissions; minimality, which avoids superfluous elements like duplicate flows or unnecessary subprocesses to streamline the model; and readability, achieved through standardized, descriptive labeling that facilitates quick comprehension by non-experts. These metrics guide ongoing refinement to produce models that are both precise and maintainable.^[19]^[22]

Hierarchical Structure

Decomposition Process

The decomposition process for data flow diagrams (DFDs) employs a top-down approach to progressively refine the system's representation, starting from a high-level overview and breaking it down into finer details. This method begins with the creation of a context diagram (Level 0), which models the entire system as a single process interacting with external entities via data flows, thereby establishing the system's boundaries and primary inputs and outputs. From this foundation, analysts identify the major functional areas or primary processes that transform these inputs into outputs. The next step involves constructing the Level 1 DFD, which decomposes the single process from the context diagram into a manageable set of 3 to 7 subprocesses, each representing a key functional component of the system. These subprocesses are connected by data flows to external entities, data stores, and one another, ensuring the diagram captures the essential transformations without overwhelming detail. Subsequent decomposition targets individual high-level processes, replacing each with a more detailed sub-DFD that elaborates on its internal logic, typically limiting subprocesses to 3 to 7 per diagram for clarity and comprehension. This iterative refinement continues across multiple levels until the model achieves sufficient granularity.^[25] Decomposition halts at the primitive or elementary level, where processes perform a single, indivisible action—such as a basic calculation or decision—without further internal data flows that warrant breakdown; overall, the hierarchy typically encompasses 1 to 50 elements to avoid excessive fragmentation. A key criterion for stopping is that leaf-level processes can be fully specified using procedural descriptions like pseudocode or decision tables, rather than additional diagrams. Throughout, balance must be preserved, meaning the inputs, outputs, and data stores in each child diagram match those of its parent process to maintain consistency across levels. Supporting tools, particularly the data dictionary, play a crucial role by providing precise definitions for all DFD elements—including processes, data flows, entities, and stores—ensuring unambiguous interpretation during decomposition. This enables iterative refinement, where feedback from stakeholders or analysts prompts adjustments to refine data transformations or resolve ambiguities. The process's benefits lie in its ability to manage complexity through hierarchical layering, allowing analysts to focus on high-level architecture initially before uncovering nuanced details, such as specific data manipulations or control flows within processes.^[25]

Levels of Abstraction

Data flow diagrams employ a hierarchical structure of abstraction levels to progressively reveal system details, beginning with a broad system boundary and refining into specific operations. The highest level of abstraction is the context diagram (Level 0). This diagram portrays the entire system as a single process, typically represented by a circle enclosing the system name, surrounded by external entities such as users or other systems. It exclusively depicts data flows between these external entities and the central process, omitting any internal components to emphasize the system's scope and boundaries without delving into subprocesses. This approach, introduced in structured analysis methodologies, facilitates initial stakeholder alignment on system inputs and outputs.^[26] The next tier, the Level 1 diagram, decomposes the single process from the context diagram into 3 to 7 major subprocesses, introducing data stores and the flows among these processes, external entities, and stores. Processes at this level are numbered sequentially, such as 1, 2, and 3, to identify high-level functions like data entry or report generation. Data stores, denoted by open-ended rectangles, appear here for the first time to show persistent data repositories shared across major processes. This level provides a foundational breakdown suitable for overviewing key system functions while preserving the overall input-output balance from the context diagram. According to DeMarco's structured analysis framework, this decomposition ensures the diagram remains manageable, avoiding overload with excessive detail.^[27]^[28] Subsequent levels, starting with Level 2, involve successive refinements where each major process from the prior level is exploded into finer subprocesses, typically again limited to 3 to 7 per diagram for clarity. For instance, process 1 from Level 1 might decompose into subprocesses labeled 1.1, 1.2, and 1.3 on the corresponding Level 2 diagram, detailing more granular data transformations. This progression continues through Level 3 and beyond until reaching the primitive level, where processes describe atomic data manipulations—such as validations or calculations—without further decomposition, often specified via pseudocode or narrative descriptions. Numbering maintains hierarchy, with decimal extensions like 2.1.1 for deeper sublevels. While the depth varies by system complexity, practicality limits most models to 3 or 4 levels, ensuring each adds targeted detail while upholding consistency in data flows and stores across the hierarchy.^[29]^[30]^[28]

Applications and Extensions

Use in System Analysis and Design

Data flow diagrams (DFDs) play a central role in requirements analysis by providing a visual means to elicit and document data needs from stakeholders, capturing how information enters, transforms, and exits the system without specifying implementation details.^[31] This graphical approach facilitates identification of user requirements through iterative modeling sessions, where analysts decompose high-level processes to reveal data dependencies and potential gaps in functionality.^[32] For instance, in structured analysis, DFDs serve as blueprints analogous to construction plans, enabling teams to validate requirements against business objectives early in the project lifecycle.^[32] In system design, DFDs bridge the gap between analysis and implementation by outlining data movements that inform key decisions, such as database schema development and user interface specifications.^[33] They help designers map logical data flows to physical components, ensuring that storage mechanisms and process interactions align with system architecture.^[15] This transition supports the creation of efficient interfaces by highlighting input-output patterns, reducing errors in translating requirements into executable designs.^[1] In modern contexts, DFDs have adapted to agile methodologies, where they support iterative modeling by allowing teams to refine data flows in sprints, promoting collaboration and rapid feedback without rigid upfront planning.^[30] In data engineering, DFDs visualize extract, transform, load (ETL) processes, illustrating how raw data from sources moves through cleaning and aggregation stages to target repositories, aiding in pipeline optimization.^[34] As of 2025, DFDs continue to find applications in fintech for regulatory data reporting, such as consumer credit flows, and in cybersecurity for mapping data risks in systems.^[35]^[36] Post-2010s adaptations include integration with DevOps practices for microservices, where DFDs map inter-service data exchanges to ensure seamless deployment and monitoring in distributed environments.^[37] Practical case studies demonstrate DFDs' effectiveness in e-commerce systems, such as modeling order fulfillment flows from customer input to inventory updates and payment processing, which streamlines transaction handling and error detection.^[38] In healthcare, DFDs have been applied to patient data processing in electronic medical record (EMR) systems, depicting flows from admission details through diagnosis updates to secure storage, enhancing compliance with privacy standards.^[39] However, DFDs exhibit limitations in real-time systems, as they do not model timing constraints or event-driven dynamics, making them unsuitable for applications requiring precise sequencing or latency management.^[40] Tools for creating DFDs include commercial software like Lucidchart, which offers drag-and-drop interfaces and collaboration features for complex diagrams, and Microsoft Visio, integrated with Office suites for enterprise-level modeling.^[4] Open-source alternatives such as Draw.io provide flexible, browser-based creation with export options to various formats.^[41] Some advanced tools, like Visual Paradigm, support integration with integrated development environments (IDEs) for exporting DFDs to generate skeletal code structures in languages like Java or SQL.^[15]

Comparisons with Other Diagramming Techniques

Data flow diagrams (DFDs) differ from flowcharts primarily in their focus: DFDs emphasize the movement and transformation of data between processes, external entities, and data stores, without specifying the sequence or control logic, whereas flowcharts depict the sequential steps, decision points, and control flow of algorithms or procedures.^[42] This makes DFDs particularly suitable for modeling parallel or concurrent data processes in complex systems, where timing is irrelevant, while flowcharts excel in representing linear, algorithmic workflows but struggle with non-sequential data interactions.^[43] For instance, a DFD might illustrate how customer data flows through order processing and inventory updates simultaneously, avoiding the rigid branching of flowcharts that could complicate such views.^[42] In comparison to UML activity diagrams, DFDs provide a simpler, data-centric representation of system behavior, often serving as a precursor in the transition from structured analysis to object-oriented design, where activity diagrams extend this by incorporating object interactions, states, timing constraints, and swimlanes for responsibilities.^[44] UML activity diagrams subsume elements of DFDs and flowcharts, offering a more comprehensive behavioral model that includes control flows alongside data, but at the cost of added complexity for purely data-focused analyses.^[45] DFDs are thus preferred in early requirements gathering for their ease in highlighting data dependencies, while UML diagrams are better for detailed implementation in object-oriented contexts.^[46] DFDs contrast with Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN) by prioritizing data flows over process orchestration, events, and gateways; BPMN diagrams excel in capturing business-level workflows with temporal elements, roles, and exception handling, but lack the explicit data store and transformation details central to DFDs.^[47] This positions DFDs as complementary in information technology domains for modeling data-centric operations, whereas BPMN is more versatile for enterprise-wide business process management, often integrating with DFDs in hybrid architectures to bridge data and process views.^[48] Relative to entity-relationship diagrams (ERDs), DFDs capture the dynamic aspects of data movement and processing within a system, while ERDs focus on static data structures, entities, attributes, and relationships for database design.^[49] The two are inherently complementary: ERDs define "what" data exists and how it relates, serving as a foundation for data stores in DFDs, which then illustrate "how" that data flows and transforms across processes.^[50] Together, they enable complete system modeling, with DFDs addressing behavioral dynamics and ERDs ensuring structural integrity.^[43] DFDs can integrate with IDEF0 for enhanced functional modeling, where IDEF0 extends DFDs by incorporating control and mechanism flows alongside inputs and outputs, providing a more holistic view of activities without solely emphasizing data.^[51] Such hybrids are useful in enterprise engineering for combining data perspectives with operational controls.^[52] However, standalone DFD use has declined since the 2000s with the rise of object-oriented and agile methodologies, which favor UML and BPMN for their support of modern paradigms like modularity and event-driven processes, though DFDs remain valuable for legacy system analysis and data-intensive domains.^[53]

References

[1]
What Is a Data Flow Diagram (DFD)? - IBM
In the 1970s, software engineers Larry Constantine and Ed Yourdon introduced data flow diagrams in their book, "Structured Design. ... Symbols used in the Yourdon ...Missing: originators | Show results with:originators
[2]
What is a Data Flow Diagram (DFD)? | Definition from TechTarget
Aug 2, 2024 · A data flow diagram (DFD) is a graphical or visual representation that uses a standardized set of symbols and notations to describe a business's operations ...How Long Have Data Flow... · What Symbols And Notations... · What Tools Can Be Used To...
[3]
What Is a DFD? Data Flow Diagrams Explained - Atlassian
A data flow diagram (DFD) is a blueprint for any system or process, providing a clear visual representation of how data moves.Key Components Of A Data... · Types Of Data Flow Diagrams · Tips And Best Practices For...
[4]
What is a Data Flow Diagram - Lucidchart
A data flow diagram (DFD) maps out the flow of information for any process or system. It uses defined symbols like rectangles, circles and arrows, plus short ...How to Make a Data Flow... · Data Flow Diagram Symbols
[5]
[PDF] Chapter 9: Dataflow Diagrams - Squarespace
In this chapter, we will explore one of the three major graphical modeling tools of structured analysis: the dataflow diagram. The dataflow diagram is a ...
[6]
[PDF] Data Flow Diagrams
A structured analysis technique that employs a set of visual representations of the data that moves through the organization, the paths through which the data ...
[7]
[PDF] Structured Design ISBN 0-917072-11 - vtda.org
In 1964, I first attempted to integrate into an article the principles we had evolved (~Towards a Theory of Program Design," Data. Processing, December 1965).
[8]
Structured Systems Analysis: Tools and Techniques - Internet Archive
Nov 6, 2019 · Structured Systems Analysis: Tools and Techniques. by: Chris Gane and Trish Sarson. Publication date: 1979. Topics: ndex, ssing.
[9]
A History Of Structured Systems Analysis & Design Methodologies
Sometimes referred to as SSADM is “a set of standards developed in the early 1980s for systems analysis and application design. “ SSADM uses a combination of ...
[10]
[PDF] CASE Tool Integration and Standardization
Specific representation or interpretation of data by a CASE tool (e.g., design diagram, document, code segment). Waterfall Life-Cycle Model. Model of software ...
[11]
DFD Tutorial: Yourdon Notation - Visual Paradigm Online
The most commonly used two different types of notations are by Yourdon & Coad or Gane & Sarson. DFD uses 4 basic symbols to represent the flow of the diagram.Missing: originators | Show results with:originators
[12]
Gane-Sarson Data Flow Diagram Tutorial - Visual Paradigm Online
Gane-Sarson, like Yourdon notation, uses leveled diagrams, that is, a roll-up and drill-down approach where increasing levels of detail are shown on successive ...Missing: originators | Show results with:originators
[13]
How To Draw a Data Flow Diagram in 5 Simple Steps - Figma
These data flow diagram symbols vary by notation style. The four notation styles include Yourdon/DeMarco, SSADM, Unified, and Gane-Sarson. Understanding ...
[14]
Difference Between Flowcharts and Data Flow Diagrams - Yonyx
Mar 28, 2018 · They signify decisions – yes or no – that ... On the other hand, data flow diagrams do not include any control elements or branch elements.
[15]
What is Data Flow Diagram? - Visual Paradigm
Data flow diagrams (DFD) graphically represent the flow of data in a business system, describing processes that transfer data from input to storage and reports.Draw Dfd With The Best Dfd... · Dfd Symbols · Logical Vs Physical Data...<|control11|><|separator|>
[16]
[PDF] Data Flow Diagrams
Data Flow def'n: connects the output of an object or process to the input of another object or process. ▫ shows interim data flow in computation.
[17]
SYSTEMS ANALYSIS & Data Flow Diagrams
Data Flow Diagrams are made of only four basic elements: data flows, represented by named vectors. processes, represented by circles or "bubbles"
[18]
None
### Summary of Primary Components in Data Flow Diagrams (DFDs)
[19]
[PDF] FORMALIZATION OF THE DATA FLOW DIAGRAM RULES ... - arXiv
The formalized rules for consistency check between the diagrams are used in developing the tool. This is to ensure the syntax for drawing the diagrams is ...
[20]
Comparison of Diagramming Tools - UMSL
Balancing is the conservation of inputs and outputs to a data flow diagram process when that process is decomposed into a lower level. Figure 2: The example of ...
[21]
Mastering Data Flow Diagram Balancing: A Comprehensive Guide
Oct 11, 2023 · Balancing ensures that DFDs remain consistent, accurate, and easily comprehensible at every level of abstraction. In this comprehensive guide, ...Introduction · Balancing Data Flow...
[22]
Formalization of the Data Flow Diagram Rules for Consistency Check
The formalized rules for consistency check between the diagrams are used indeveloping the tool. This is to ensure the syntax for drawing the diagrams is correct ...
[23]
Data flow diagram balancing - Sybase
The goal of the balancing feature is to check your system internal consistency, which is particularly useful as different levels of expertise are generally ...
[24]
Data Flow Diagram - Balancing - Tutorials Point
Balancing is an essential concept in DFDs, ensuring that data at different levels of the diagram maintains consistency and clarity.
[25]
Structured Analysis and System Specification - Semantic Scholar
Structured Analysis and System Specification. @inproceedings{DeMarco1978StructuredAA, title={Structured Analysis and System Specification}, author={Tom DeMarco ...
[26]
https://online.visual-paradigm.com/knowledge/software-design/dfd-tutorial-yourdon-notation/
[27]
Tools of the System Analyst - pdfcoffee.com
The highest level in a data flow diagram and contains one process ... 3 to 9 processes and showing data stores and new lower level data flows Each ...
[28]
Structured Analysis and System Specification: | Guide books
Structured Analysis and System SpecificationNovember 1979. Author: Author Picture Tom DeMarco ... Automatic transformation from data flow diagram to structure ...
[29]
Levels in Data Flow Diagrams (DFD) - GeeksforGeeks
May 19, 2025 · Each sub-process is depicted as a separate process on the level 1 Data Flow Diagram (DFD). The data flows and data stores associated with each ...Levels In Data Flow Diagram... · 0-Level Data Flow Diagram... · 1-Level Data Flow Diagram...
[30]
Data Flow Diagram (DFD)s: An Agile Introduction
Squares representing external entities, which are sources or destinations of data. Rounded rectangles representing processes, which take data as input, do ...
[31]
Data Flow Diagram (DFD) | Business Analysis - Notre Dame Sites
These symbols follow the conventions of Gane & Sarson or Yourdon & DeMarco notation, which are the two most commonly used notations for DFDs. 3. Example. The ...Missing: originators | Show results with:originators
[32]
[PDF] Lecture 3 Structured Analysis & Data Flow Diagrams
Data flow diagrams provide graphical documentation for systems analysis. They are analogous to blue prints in a construction project. They are leveled set of ...Missing: definition | Show results with:definition
[33]
What is DFD(Data Flow Diagram)? - GeeksforGeeks
May 19, 2025 · A Data Flow Diagram (DFD) is a visual, graphical representation of data flow within a system, showing incoming, outgoing, and stored data.
[34]
Data Flow: Boost Your System Architecture Efficiency | Databricks
Creating data flow diagrams One of the ways organizations illustrate the flow of data throughout the system is by creating a data flow diagram (DFD).
[35]
Advancing DevOps with Diagrams
Mar 17, 2017 · Data Flow Diagram. With Data Flow Diagrams (DFD) the diagrams start to map out the system and procedures that happen and the flow of data. DFDs, ...
[36]
[PDF] DFD – iii – Case Studies
Case Studies. 2. Page 3. DFD – part iii – Case Studies. 1. Inventory Control System. 2. Business Process Reengineering (BPR). 3. Electronic Commerce Application.
[37]
[PDF] Data Flow Diagrams of an Electronic Medical Record System in ...
This paper develops an Electronic Medical Record System in the Neurosurgical Unit of Mansoura General Hospital using. Data Flow Diagrams.
[38]
DFD Guide: Step by Step Approach For Business Analysts
Jul 18, 2023 · Another rule to keep in mind is that data stores should not directly connect with each other. Instead, they should be connected through ...
[39]
draw.io
Example diagram. Powerful features. Collaborate with shared cursors in real-time. draw.io has everything you expect from a professional diagramming tool.Example draw.io diagrams · About draw.io · Blog · DocumentationMissing: Lucidchart | Show results with:Lucidchart
[40]
Difference between Flowchart and Data Flow Diagram (DFD)
Jul 15, 2025 · FlowChart and Data Flow Diagrams both are ways of representing data or information. FlowChart is a visual representation and DFD is a graphical representation.
[41]
Comparison of Diagramming Methods - UMSL
The formal, structured analysis approach employs the data-flow diagram (DFD) to assist in the functional decomposition process. I learned structured analysis ...
[42]
Transformation from Data Flow Diagram to UML2.0 activity diagram
This paper proposes a model transformation from Data Flow Diagrams (DFD) which have been used widely in structure requirement analysis phase to UML Activity ...
[43]
[PDF] Shawn Bohner - Rose-Hulman
UML Activity Diagrams. ❖ Essentially Modern. Version of Flowcharts and/or Data Flow. Diagrams. # Easy to understand. ❖ Used to model: # Business processes.
[44]
UML 2 Tutorial - Activity Diagram - Sparx Systems
In UML, an activity diagram is used to display the sequence of activities. Activity diagrams show the workflow from a start point to the finish point detailing ...
[45]
Data Flow Diagram | Enterprise Architect User Guide - Sparx Systems
While the BPMN Business Process diagram is not centered on data the Data Flow diagram is data-centric and shows which Processes consume, produce and store data.
[46]
10.35 Process Modelling | IIBA®
Data Flow diagrams and Unified Modelling Language™ (UML®) diagrams: used in the information technology domain. Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN): used ...
[47]
Difference between DFD and ERD - GeeksforGeeks
Jul 15, 2025 · Data Flow Diagram (DFD) and Entity Relationship Diagram (ERD) are used for data flow representation. In this article, we will look into DFD and ERD.
[48]
[PPT] Data Flow Diagrams
An ERD shows only the data that the system manipulates. DFDs and ERDs (cont.) Entities on an ERD often (but not always) correspond to data stores on a DFD ...<|separator|>
[49]
[PDF] A STRUCTURED METHODOLOGY FOR ENTERPRISE MODELING
Whereas the DFD (Data. Flow Diagram) shows only the data flow, the IDEF0 allow the modeling of the flows of activities, inputs, outputs, control and mechanisms.
[50]
[PDF] EVALUATION OF PROCESS MODELLING APPROACHES TO ...
structured systems analysis and design method and the Integrated Definition IDEF0 method. Data Flow Diagram (DFD). First introduced in 1970s, DFD is one of ...
[51]
[PDF] UML Summary - Object Management Group
A frequently asked question has been: Why doesn't UML support data-flow diagrams? Simply put, data-flow and other diagram types that were not included in the ...Missing: decline modern<|control11|><|separator|>