SysMLv2: IN THE METAMODEL the type of the redefinition of Usage::/definition is not always directly the corresponding definition; sometimes it is the KerML metaclass that is subclassified by the corresponding definition.

The following from SysML2.0 are referring to rules for the final model:

In the underlying metamodel, the type of Usage:/definition is actually Classifier, where Definition subclassifies Classifier.

Note also that many of the SysMLv2 metamodel «metadata def» elements that subclassify Usage (directly or indirectly) have a redefinition (direct or indirect) of Usage::/definition hat is typed by a KerML «metclass», typically (but not always) the KerML «metaclass» subclassified by the corresponding definition element. Consider for example:

OccurrenceUsage::/occurrenceDefinition : Class [0..*] {redefines definition, ordered}

Where OccurrenceDefinition specializes Class.

This "shared KerML metaclass" pattern is so mostly exhibited "higher up" in the hierarchy where SysMLv2 connects to KerML, but is not just restricted to Usage itself.

For a nice illustration of this visit:

There are also some trickier special cases:

• The type of StateUsage::/stateDefinition is Behavior, but StateDefinition subclassifies first ActionDefinition, which then subclassifies Behavior.