Modeling of User Adaptive Enterprise Applications
Inese Šūpulniece and Jānis Grabis
Institute of Information Technology, Riga Technical University, Kalku 1, LV-1658, Riga, Latvia
Keywords: Adaptation, User Adaptive Systems, Enterprise Application, Meta-model.
Abstract: Adjustments of standard system’s modelling techniques are needed for modelling specific aspects of
adaptive systems. In this paper, we present a meta-model for modeling specific aspects of user adaptive
enterprise applications (UAEA). For designing a system, traditional modeling languages or techniques can
be applied to model basic functionalities. Proposed meta-model should be applied additionally to traditional
models as complementary modeling dimensions. Proposed meta-model is based on identified key concepts
of adaptive systems – stakeholder and end-user, goals and expectations, changing object, adapted object and
adaptation algorithm. The described meta-model is applied to model main components of UAEA.
1 INTRODUCTION
There exists a wide spectrum of adaptive systems in
the scientific literature. Regardless of the type
adaptive applications have a number of common
features distinguishing them from non-adaptive
systems. Modeling of adaptive systems is researched
in several domains, from various perspectives and
for different purposes, e.g. Barth and Gomi (2005),
Bielikova and Moravcik (2008), Juan and Sterling
(2003).
This paper focuses on User Adaptive Enterprise
Applications (UAEA), because adaptivity can be one
of the solutions to addressing usability problems of
large packaged applications. The main distinctive
feature of adaptation of enterprise applications is a
focus on improving business process execution
efficiency according to business goals and needs of
users. However, majority of investigations
developing adaptivity methods or algorithms focus
on representation of these particular methods rather
than on capturing common features of user adaptive
systems. Therefore, it is proposed to develop a
general meta-model for modeling UAEA, which
provides a common general representation of these
applications, and specific adaptive method can be
detailed on top of this model. The common high
level representation is useful because adaptive
mechanisms can change quickly.
The objective of this paper is to develop a meta-
model for modeling UAEA at design time and to
apply this meta-model for creating a model of
UAEA.
The rest of paper is structured as follows. Section
2 introduces the meta-model for modeling the user
oriented adaptive system. The UAEA model is
developed in Section 3. The paper concludes with
Section 4, where research results and further
research are discussed.
2 A META-MODEL
In order to construct the UAEA meta-model, key
concepts relevant to user oriented adaptation are
identified in Supulniece (2012) - stakeholder and
end-user, goals and expectations, changing object,
adapted object and adaptation algorithm.
A model of adaptive system consists of a number
of sub-models corresponding to the main concepts
identified:
• (SEM) Stakeholder and End-user Model presents
structure of actors (human roles), which are related
to adaptive system.
• (GEM) Goals and Expectations Model illustrates
structure of goals towards the adaptation and
individual user’s expectations behind them.
• (COM) Model of Changing Object is structure of
system’s or environment’s part, which is changing
(triggers the adaptation).
• (AOM) Model of Adapted Object is structure of
system’s adaptive part (which reacts to changes).
108
Š¯upulniece I. and Grabis J..
Modeling of User Adaptive Enterprise Applications.
DOI: 10.5220/0003976801080111
In Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems (ICEIS-2012), pages 108-111
ISBN: 978-989-8565-12-9
Copyright
c
2012 SCITEPRESS (Science and Technology Publications, Lda.)
• (AAM) Adaptation Algorithm Model describes
rules and behavior of particular adaptation
algorithms.
• (SM) System’s Model presents structure of
information system (e.g., architecture).
SEM, GEM, COM, AOM and SM are structural
diagrams, which present main elements of adaptive
system and relationships between them. AAM is a
behavioral diagram.
In Figure 1 is given a general overview of the
relations between sub-models in the meta-model,
where package symbols are used to denote the sub-
models.
Figure 1: Model of user adaptive enterprise application –
high level abstraction.
2.1 Stakeholder and End-user Model
Stakeholder and End-user model describes main
counterparties in adaptive system and relations
between them. Stakeholder is an actor, which
benefits from adaptive system. We can assume that
the stakeholder always formulates the goal set
towards the adapted object.
Another important actor in the adaptive system is
End-User, who has expectations in his/her mind,
what should be a state of the system after adaptation
process.
Relations between Stakeholder, End-user and
other concepts are presented in Figure 2.
2.2 Goals and Expectations Model
Goals and Expectations model represents a set of
goals and calculated/predicted expectations towards
adaptive system. Expectations differ per each
individual end-user, because they are based on
mental model of each individual end-user. These
expectations also are different in separate time
moments (e.g. depend on user’s mood or particular
situations) even if end-user is the same. As it is not
realistic to capture fully these individual
expectations in any software system, system is
predicting or calculating some of them, e.g. user
preferences, which are listed on software system –
further named as Expectations/User Expectations.
Figure 2: The meta-model for modeling UAEA.
Additionally, software system can capture Goals
- the system under consideration should achieve.
There are available various modelling languages
and techniques for goals modelling, e.g. i*
modelling language (Grau, et al., 2006), goals model
from EKD method (Bubenko, et al., 1998), goals
diagram from KAOS methodology (Respect IT,
2007). Principles used in these methods can be
applied also for user expectations.
To model the goals towards user oriented
adaptive system, we use three levels of goals (see
Figure 2): business goals, operational goals and
technical/functional goals. Business goals and
operational goals are inspired by Charles Perrow
(1961). Technical goals might be evaluated using
technical measurement. All types of goals from
Goals model might have hierarchy and relationships
presented in the model. For modeling adaptive
system only technical goals are explored further, but
linkage to business and operational goals is
advantage as it clearly shows business benefits of
adaptive system.
2.3 System’s Model and Model of
Adapted Object
System’s model describes system, where adaptation
is performed, e.g. system architecture or conceptual
model of system with colored changing and adapted
part. Model of Adapted Object is part of system’s
ModelingofUserAdaptiveEnterpriseApplications
109
model, which specify adaptive components and
explore in details adaptive part of system.
Adapted components are related to technical
goals to illustrate the benefits, thus allowing
selecting the best sub-set of adaptive components.
Adaptive components are also related to
expectations to illustrate concepts, which are used in
adaptive components to achieve better adaptation
result. Adaptation algorithm is linked to adapted
component as it explores adaptation logics for
adapted component. Relation between adapted
component and changing object presents triggers for
starting the processes in adapted component.
2.4 Model of Changing Object
Model of Changing Object defines the structure and
interaction of those concepts, which cause the
change or triggers the adaptation process. Change
can happen within software system or outside of it.
Thus Model of Changing Object might be part of
System’s model, which specify changing
components and explore in details changing part of
system. Or Changing Object might have just
input/output link to System’s model.
2.5 Adaptation Algorithm
Model of Adaptation Algorithm describes behaviour
of each adaptive component. User expectations
impacts the result of adaptation algorithm and
changing object triggers execution of the adaptation
algorithm or particular activities within this
algorithm.
3 MODEL OF USER ADAPTIVE
ENTERPRISE APPLICATION
Enterprise applications are used to execute business
processes. Users of enterprise applications either use
predefined workflows (Curran and Ladd, 2000) or
use other functions provided by enterprise
applications subject to their access rights to execute
their business processes. That means that users have
possibilities to introduce their own variations in
process execution and might come up with more
efficient ways of executing business processes (Topi
et al., 2005). If an enterprise application supports
users in identification of more efficient variations of
business process execution and enables for
continuous execution refinement it is referred as to
User Adaptive Enterprise Application (UAEA).
UAEA is the set of adaptive components to be
added to standard enterprise application: Adaptive
process execution overview; Adaptive GUI
(navigation); Adaptive information support;
Adaptive decision support; Adaptive problem
preventing; Adaptive error and exception handling.
Idea of UAEA lies in following observation
(Supulniece and Grabis, 2010): users use enterprise
application to accomplish their tasks usually
consisting of multiple steps; each user or user group
has a preferred sequence of the steps (task execution
patterns). UAEA attempts to exploit such usage
patterns. Given that ERP systems are mainly used
for repetitive tasks (Klaus, et al., 2000), the user
oriented process adaptation uses previously observed
users’ behavior to optimize performance of business
activities.
The main stakeholder of UAEA is an abstract
object named as Management of organization (see
figure 3), however management is not an end-user of
adaptive system if we assume that management
representatives are not real users of this system. But
new employee is stakeholder (because he benefits
from the adaptive system) and also end-user,
because we assume that new employee uses user-
adaptive enterprise application to execute a business
process.
Technical
goal
Calculated
Expectation
Prevent mistakes
Decrease learning time
for new processes
Optimise routine
activities
Decrease learning time
for new employees
Raise performance
efficiency
Improve system’s
usability
Prevent mistakes
Optimise routine
activities
Support non-routine
activities
Management of
organization
Employee
New employee
User of
system
New user
of system
Process Models
Navigation Patterns
Document-Activity mapping
Decision patterns
Exception patterns
Problem-activity mapping
Stakeholder
End-user
Business
goal
Figure 3: Relations between Stakeholder/End-User and
Goals/Expectations in user adaptive enterprise application.
Relations between stakeholders – goals and end-
users – expectations in UAEA are presented in
Figure 3. In our model we include only those
business and operational goals, which can be related
to technical goals. Technical goals are set only
towards the adaptive system, thus they can be
evaluated purely in adaptive system, where all
ICEIS2012-14thInternationalConferenceonEnterpriseInformationSystems
110
measurements are available. Figure 3 hides technical
measurements and hierarchy of Goals, Expectations,
Stakeholders and End-users to keep the view of the
model readable. But it is possible to see these
relations if different view perspective is selected.
Adaptive process
execution overview
Adaptive GUI
(navigation)
Adaptive
information support
Adaptive decision
support
Adaptive problem
preventing
Adaptive error and
exception handling
Prevent
mistakes
Optimise
routine
activities
Support non-
routine
activities
Process Models
Navigation
Patterns
Document-
Activity mapping
Decision
patterns
Exception
patterns
Problem-activity
mapping
Technical goal Calculated Expectation
<<Adapted component>>
Figure 4: Relations between technical goals, expectations
and adaptive components in user adaptive enterprise
application.
Adapted components are linked to technical
goals (see Fig. 4) to illustrate the benefits, thus
allowing to select the best sub-set of adaptive
components for particular user, user group, process
or application module. Implementation of all
adaptive components at the same time would
confuse the user and decrease system’s performance
as result of overloaded calculation memory.
4 CONCLUSIONS
Adaptive systems are perceived differently than non-
adaptive systems, thus modeling adaptive systems
should highlight and emphasize adaptivity
perspectives or modeling dimensions
The meta-model for modeling adaptive
dimensions of user adaptive enterprise application is
presented in this paper. Proposed meta-model should
be applied additionally to traditional models as
complementary modeling dimensions. These
complementary dimensions are aimed to explore and
extend adaptive characteristics of the system – to
understand the goal and interested parties, system
architecture and components, interaction between
these concepts, and main mechanisms behind the
adaptation.
Sometimes adaptive part of the system have been
created integrated with other system elements
(e.g.user modeling components as cited in Barth and
Gomi (2005)) without a specific component
responsible for it. Proposed meta-model can be
applied to describe detached adaptive component
and also to identify adaptive characteristics for
bounded adaptive functionalities.
The meta-model is applied to model main
components of UAEA. Developed models will be
used to build a prototype of the system. This
application is in design phase currently, thus our
future research is related to prototyping and testing
of it.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This research has been supported by the European
Social Fund within the National Program "Support
for carrying out doctoral study programs”.
REFERENCES
Barth, F. J., E. S. Gomi, 2005, A Meta-Level Architecture
for Adaptive Applications. Proc. of the International
Conference on Adaptive and Natural Computing
Algorithms. Springer-Verlag, pp.329-332.
Bieliková, M., & Moravčík, M., 2008, Modeling the
reusable content of adaptive web-based applications
using an ontology, Advances in Semantic Media
Adaptation and Personalization, pp.307-327.
Bubenko, J. A., Brash, D., and Stirna, J., 1998, EKD User
Guide. Kista, Dept. of Computer and Systems Science,
Royal Institute of Technology (KTH) and Stockholm
University, Stockholm, Sweden. Retrieved from
ftp://ftp.dsv.su.se/users/js/ekd_user_guide.pdf
Curran, T. A., Ladd A., 2000, SAP R/3 Business
Blueprint: Understanding Enterprise Supply Chain,
Prentice Hall PTR, Upper Saddle River.
Grau G., Horkoff J., Yu E., 2006, IStarQuickGuide.
Retrieved from http://istar.rwth-aachen.de/tiki-
index.php?page=iStarQuickGuide
Juan, T., Sterling, L., 2003, A Meta-model for Intelligent
Adaptive Multi-Agent Systems in Open
Environments, in Proc. AAMAS 03; Melbourne, July
14-18, pp.1024-1025.
Klaus, H., Rosemann, M., Gable, G.G., 2000, What is
ERP? Information Systems Frontiers 2:2, pp. 141-162.
Perrow, C., 1961, Organizational Prestige, Some
Functions and Dysfunctions, American Journal of
Sociology, 66 (January, 1961), pp.854-857.
Respect IT, 2007, A KAOS Tutorial, Objectiver.
Supulniece, I., 2012, Conceptual Aspects of User-Oriented
Adaptive Systems, in Proc. IS 2012, pp.116-124.
Supulniece, I., Grabis, J., 2010, Discovery of Personalized
information systems usage patterns, in Proc. ICIST
2010, pp.25-32.
Topi H., Lucas W., Babaian T. 2005, Identifying usability
issues with an ERP implementation, in Proc. ICEIS
2005, pp. 128-133.
ModelingofUserAdaptiveEnterpriseApplications
111
