Managing and Simplifying Cognitive Business Operations Using Process Architecture Models

  • Zia BabarEmail author
  • Eric Yu
  • Sebastian Carbajales
  • Allen Chan
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11483)


Enterprises increasingly rely on cognitive capabilities to enhance their core business processes by adopting systems that utilize machine learning and deep learning approaches to support cognitive decisions to aid humans responsible for business process execution. Unlike conventional information systems, for which the design and implementation is a much-studied area, the design of cognitive systems and their integration into existing enterprise business processes is less well understood. This results in long drawn-out implementation and adoption cycles, and requires individuals with highly specialized skills. As cognitively-assisted business processes involve human and machine collaboration, non-functional requirements, such as reusability and configurability that are prominent for software system design, must also be addressed at the enterprise level. Supporting processes may emerge and evolve over time to monitor, evaluate, adjust, or modify these cognitively-enhanced business processes. In this paper, we utilize a goal-oriented approach to analyze the requirements for designing cognitive systems for simplified adoption in enterprises, which are then used to guide and inform the design of a process architecture for cognitive business operations.


Business process management Goal modeling Cognitive computing Cognitive business operations Requirements engineering 



This work was partially funded by IBM Canada Ltd. through the Centre for Advanced Studies (CAS) Canada (Project #1030).


  1. 1.
    Ogiela, L., Ogiela, M.R.: Advances in Cognitive Information Systems, vol. 17. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Vernon, D.: Artificial Cognitive Systems: A Primer. MIT Press, Cambridge (2014)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Lapouchnian, A., Babar, Z., Yu, E., Chan, A., Carbajales, S.: Designing process architectures for user engagement with enterprise cognitive systems. In: Poels, G., Gailly, F., Serral Asensio, E., Snoeck, M. (eds.) PoEM 2017. LNBIP, vol. 305, pp. 141–155. Springer, Cham (2017). Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chung, L., Nixon, B.A., Yu, E., Mylopoulos, J.: Non-functional Requirements in Software Engineering, vol. 5. Springer, New York (2012). Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lapouchnian, A., Yu, E., Sturm, A.: Re-designing process architectures towards a framework of design dimensions. In: International Conference on RCIS, pp. 205–210. IEEE (2015)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lapouchnian, A., Yu, E., Sturm, A.: Design dimensions for business process architecture. In: Johannesson, P., Lee, M.L., Liddle, Stephen W., Opdahl, Andreas L., López, Ó.P. (eds.) ER 2015. LNCS, vol. 9381, pp. 276–284. Springer, Cham (2015). Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lapouchnian, A., Yu, E.: Exploiting emergent technologies to create systems that meet shifting expectations. In Proceedings of 24th Annual International Conference on Computer Science and Software Engineering, pp. 371–374. IBM Corporation (2014)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Babar, Z., Lapouchnian, A., Yu, E.: Modeling DevOps deployment choices using process architecture design dimensions. In: Ralyté, J., España, S., Pastor, Ó. (eds.) PoEM 2015. LNBIP, vol. 235, pp. 322–337. Springer, Cham (2015). Scholar
  9. 9.
    Van Lamsweerde, A.: Goal-oriented requirements engineering: a guided tour. In: Proceedings of Fifth IEEE International Symposium on Requirements Engineering, pp. 249–262. IEEE (2001)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Horkoff, J., Yu, E.: Comparison and evaluation of goal-oriented satisfaction analysis techniques. Requirements Eng. 18(3), 199–222 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ricci, F., Rokach, L., Shapira, B.: Introduction to recommender systems handbook. In: Ricci, F., Rokach, L., Shapira, B., Kantor, P. (eds.) Recommender Systems Handbook, pp. 1–35. Springer, Boston (2011). Scholar
  12. 12.
    Dumas, M., La Rosa, M., Mendling, J., Reijers, H.: Fundamentals of Business Process Management (Chap. 2). Springer, Heidelberg (2013). Scholar
  13. 13.
    Eid-Sabbagh, R.-H., Dijkman, R., Weske, M.: Business process architecture: use and correctness. In: Barros, A., Gal, A., Kindler, E. (eds.) BPM 2012. LNCS, vol. 7481, pp. 65–81. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). Scholar
  14. 14.
    Malinova, M., Leopold, H., Mendling, J.: An empirical investigation on the design of process architectures. In: 11th International Conference on Wirtschaftsinformatik, pp. 1197–1211 (2013)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Business process Model and Notation, v2.0.
  16. 16.
    De Giacomo, G., Dumas, M., Maggi, F.M., Montali, M.: Declarative process modeling in BPMN. In: Zdravkovic, J., Kirikova, M., Johannesson, P. (eds.) CAiSE 2015. LNCS, vol. 9097, pp. 84–100. Springer, Cham (2015). Scholar
  17. 17.
    Bhattacharya, K., Gerede, C., Hull, R., Liu, R., Su, J.: Towards formal analysis of artifact-centric business process models. In: Alonso, G., Dadam, P., Rosemann, M. (eds.) BPM 2007. LNCS, vol. 4714, pp. 288–304. Springer, Heidelberg (2007). Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hull, R., Motahari Nezhad, H.R.: Rethinking BPM in a cognitive world: transforming how we learn and perform business processes. In: La Rosa, M., Loos, P., Pastor, O. (eds.) BPM 2016. LNCS, vol. 9850, pp. 3–19. Springer, Cham (2016). Scholar
  19. 19.
  20. 20.

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Zia Babar
    • 1
    Email author
  • Eric Yu
    • 1
  • Sebastian Carbajales
    • 2
  • Allen Chan
    • 2
  1. 1.University of TorontoTorontoCanada
  2. 2.IBM CanadaMarkhamCanada

Personalised recommendations