Dynamic Task Modeling for Adaptive Runtime Interfaces

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current task models are static and inflexible, failing to adapt to user preferences and changing circumstances, resulting in a fixed user interface that may not meet individual user needs, leading to user dissatisfaction and potential rejection of applications.

Innovation Solution

The development of dynamic task modeling systems that allow task models to be adaptive and executable at runtime, enabling monitoring of task states and updating of task models based on detected changes, thereby providing a customizable and context-aware user interface.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Stability of the object's composition

If task models are defined statically at design time with all tasks and relationships embedded into the software application, then the application structure is stable and predictable, but the system loses flexibility and cannot adapt to varying user needs and preferences

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvetask model structureVSAvoiduser customization capability
Core Design Contradiction:
Stability of the object's compositionVSAdaptability or versatility

Solution Approach 1:

The patent transforms static task models into dynamic runtime-executable models. Task models are no longer fixed at design time but can be modified, updated, and adapted during runtime based on user interactions and changing requirements. This allows the system to maintain structural integrity while enabling continuous adaptation to user needs.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The patent separates task model definitions from application compilation. Instead of embedding all task relationships into the compiled application, the task models are segmented into independent, executable components that can be loaded, modified, and updated at runtime without recompiling the entire application.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

2Adaptability or versatility

If expansive resources are utilized to predict and accommodate all future user needs in static task models, then comprehensive coverage is achieved, but system complexity and development costs increase significantly

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveuser need coverageVSAvoidsystem design complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent implements runtime task model execution where only the necessary task models are loaded and activated based on actual user needs. Instead of pre-defining all possible user scenarios, the system dynamically loads and executes task models as they become relevant, reducing initial system complexity while maintaining comprehensive coverage.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

Solution Approach 2:

The system automatically adapts task models at runtime based on user interactions and contextual information. Rather than requiring designers to manually predict and configure all user needs, the system self-adjusts by monitoring user behavior and dynamically modifying task model execution to accommodate emerging requirements.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

3Stability of the object's composition

If a fixed user interface is provided in static task models, then interface consistency is maintained, but user satisfaction decreases when the interface does not meet individual preferences or becomes obsolete

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveinterface consistencyVSAvoiduser interface adaptability
Core Design Contradiction:
Stability of the object's compositionVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The patent enables the user interface to transition from a static, fixed structure to a dynamic, adaptive interface. Task models define the interface structure at design time for consistency, but during runtime, the interface can be dynamically customized based on user preferences, contextual factors, and evolving requirements, allowing users to personalize their interaction experience.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

4Reliability

If all tasks and information are compiled into the application during design phase, then the application is self-contained and portable, but flexibility and runtime adaptability are lost

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveapplication self-containmentVSAvoidruntime customization
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSAdaptability or versatility

Solution Approach 1:

The patent segments the application into core compiled components and dynamic task model components. The essential application framework remains compiled and self-contained for reliability, while task models are separated into executable modules that can be dynamically loaded, modified, and updated at runtime, combining the benefits of both approaches.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Data Source

PatentUS7676483B2Executable task modeling systems and methods
Publication Date: 2010.03.09 SAP SE
  • US7676483B2 patent drawing
  • US7676483B2 patent drawing
  • US7676483B2 patent drawing

AI summary

Systems and methods are provided for task modeling with models that are adaptive and executable at runtime. In one implementation, a method is provided for executing a task model at runtime. The method may comprise providing a task model comprising a plurality of tasks, executing an application to schedule one or more of the tasks, and monitoring a state of one or more of the tasks. Further, the method may include detecting a change in the state of one or more of the tasks, and updating, during runtime execution, the task model based on the detected change in the state of one or more of the tasks.