This paper conducts an empirical study that explores the differences between adopting a traditional conceptual modeling (TCM) technique and an ontology-driven conceptual modeling (ODCM) technique with the objective to understand and identify in which modeling situations an ODCM technique can prove beneficial compared to a TCM technique. More specifically, we asked ourselves if there exist any meaningful differences in the resulting conceptual model and the effort spent to create such model between novice modelers trained in an ontologydriven conceptual modeling technique and novice modelers trained in a traditional conceptual modeling technique. To answer this question, we discuss previous empirical research efforts and distill these efforts into two hypotheses. Next, these hypotheses are tested in a rigorously developed experiment, where a total of 100 students from two different Universities participated. The findings of our empirical study confirm that there do exist meaningful differences between adopting the two techniques. We observed that novice modelers applying the ODCM technique arrived at higher quality models compared to novice modelers applying the TCM technique. More specifically, the results of the empirical study demonstrated that it is advantageous to apply an ODCM technique over an TCM when having to model the more challenging and advanced facets of a certain domain or scenario. Moreover, we also did not find any significant difference in effort between applying these two techniques. Finally, we specified our results in three findings that aim to clarify the obtained results.

Abstract. Modeling loosely framed and knowledge-intensive business processes with the currently available process modeling languages is very challenging. Some lack the flexibility to model this type of processes, while others are missing one or more perspectives needed to add the necessary level of detail to the models. In this paper we have composed a list of requirements that a modeling language should fulfil in order to adequately support the modeling of this type of processes. Based on these requirements, a metamodel for a new modeling language was developed that satisfies them all. The new language, called DeciClare, incorporates parts of several existing modeling languages, integrating them with new solutions to requirements thathad not yet been met. Deciclare is a declarative modeling language at its core, and therefore, can inherently deal with the flexibility required to model loosely framed processes. The complementary resource and data perspectives add the capability to reason about, respectively, resources and data values. The latter makes it possible to encapsulate the knowledge that governs the process flow by offering support for decision modeling. The abstract syntax of DeciClare has been implemented in the form of an Ecore model. Based on this implementation, the language-domain appropriateness of the language was validated by domain experts using the arm fracture case as application scenario.

No abstract

After observing various inexperienced modelers constructing a business process model based on the same textual case description, it was noted that great differences existed in the quality of the produced models. The impression arose that certain quality issues originated from cognitive failures during the modeling process. Therefore, we developed an explanatory theory that describes the cognitive mechanisms that affect effectiveness and efficiency of process model construction: the Structured Process Modeling Theory (SPMT). This theory states that modeling accuracy and speed are higher when the modeler adopts an (i) individually fitting (ii) structured (iii) serialized process modeling approach. The SPMT is evaluated against six theory quality criteria.

The Resources-Events-Agents (REA) model is a semantic data model for the development of enterprise information systems. Although this model has been proposed as a benchmark for enterprise information modelling, only few studies have attempted to empirically validate the claimed benefits of REA modelling. Moreover, these studies focused on the evaluation of REA-based system implementations rather than directly assessing the REA-modelled conceptual schemas that these systems are based on. This paper presents a laboratory experiment that measured the user understanding of diagrammatic conceptual schemas developed using the REA model. The theoretical foundation for the hypotheses are cognitive theories that explain pattern recognition phenomena and the resulting reduction in cognitive effort for understanding conceptual schemas. The results of the experiment indicate a more accurate understanding of the business processes and policies modelled when users recognize the REA model's core pattern of enterprise information in the diagram. The implication for modelling practice is that the use of the REA model improves the requirements engineering process by facilitating the user validation of conceptual schemas produced by analysts, and thus helps ensuring the quality of the enterprise information system that is developed or implemented

Recent Resource, Event, Agent (REA) research has focused on defining and theoretically justifying the ontology's contents. Here, we elaborate on more practical issues related to REA. First, we classify REA and its applications using ontology classification schemes and application frameworks. This analysis clarifies REA's application potential but also reveals weaknesses that may impede its operationalization. Next, we propose a new REA ontology specification that uses a Unified Modeling Language (UML) profile for graphically representing ontologies. This new specification is more complete and precise than previously available specifications, without compromising understandability. It can easily be transformed into a machine-readable representation for automatic processing, which is a prerequisite for the successful application of REA in business modeling, software engineering, knowledge representation, and interoperability creation. The paper ends with a proof of concept application in which a formal Ontology Web Language (OWL) specification of REA is fed into the Proté gé knowledge representation tool and subsequently used for the development of an enterprise schema.

No abstract

Abstract. Modeling dynamic, human-centric, non-standardized and knowledgeintensive business processes with imperative process modeling approaches is very challenging. Declarative process modeling approaches are more appropriate for these processes, as they offer the run-time flexibility typically required in these cases. However, by means of a realistic healthcare process that falls in the aforementioned category, we demonstrate in this paper that current declarative approaches do not incorporate all the details needed. More specifically, they lack a way to model decision logic, which is important when attempting to fully capture these processes. We propose a new declarative language, Declare-R-DMN, which combines the declarative process modeling language Declare-R with the newly adopted OMG standard Decision Model and Notation. Aside from supporting the functionality of both languages, Declare-R-DMN also creates bridges between them. We will show that using this language results in process models that encapsulate much more knowledge, while still offering the same flexibility.