Model Definition Language for Automated Business Process Analysis

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current modeling approaches lack a standardized, computer-implemented method for defining and processing business models in a way that allows for automated processing and precise, unambiguous representation, limiting their use in automated analysis and IT system configuration.

Innovation Solution

A model definition language is introduced, based on a meta-model, which includes a root element and participant instances that define relationships between participants, enabling the creation of consistent and automated processing of business models through a visual notation and user interface.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Measurement precision

If current modeling approaches (CAD, ontologies, UML) are used to represent business models, then graphical representation and some automation are achieved, but the models lack precise, unambiguous definition suitable for automated processing

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvemodel definition precisionVSAvoidmodeling system complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent segments the business model into distinct structured components: root element, participant instances, and relation port instances. Each component has a specific role and defined attributes, allowing precise representation while maintaining manageability through modular organization rather than treating the model as an unstructured whole.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The patent changes the parameter of model representation from natural language or semi-formal graphical notation to a formalized structure with explicitly defined parameters and attributes. Each participant and relation has specific parameters that can be automatically processed, transforming the model from qualitative to quantitative representation.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

2Extent of automation

If business models are defined using semi-formal ontologies or UML, then comprehensive description is achieved, but automated processing and analysis are limited

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveautomated model processingVSAvoidmodel detail loss
Core Design Contradiction:
Extent of automationVSLoss of information

Solution Approach 1:

The patent creates a formalized copy or representation of the business model that preserves all essential information while being suitable for automated processing. The structured format with defined participants, relations, and attributes serves as a machine-processable copy that maintains fidelity to the original business model concepts.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #26Copying

Solution Approach 2:

The patent substitutes manual analysis and interpretation of semi-formal models with automated computational processing of formally structured data. The defined schema allows algorithms to automatically validate, analyze, and process business models without human intervention, replacing manual mechanical analysis with computational automation.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

3Reliability

If detailed participant relationships and interactions are modeled, then comprehensive business model representation is achieved, but the model becomes difficult to process and validate

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvemodel validation reliabilityVSAvoidmodel structure complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent creates a universal schema that can represent various types of business model participants and relations through a common structure. The same framework handles different kinds of entities (organizations, processes, products) and relationships (supply chains, value flows, partnerships) uniformly, enabling consistent validation rules across diverse model elements.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

Solution Approach 2:

The patent incorporates validation mechanisms that provide feedback on model consistency and correctness. The structured format with defined relationships and attributes enables automatic validation checks that feedback errors or inconsistencies to users, improving model reliability through iterative correction rather than manual review.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Data Source

PatentUS10339488B2Method and system for the definition of a model
Publication Date: 2019.07.02 SAP SE
  • US10339488B2 patent drawing
  • US10339488B2 patent drawing
  • US10339488B2 patent drawing

AI summary

The disclosure generally describes methods, software, and systems, including a method for defining and using models. A model definition language is provided for defining models. The model definition language includes elements of a meta-model. The elements define, for a model, a root element of the model and plural participant instances of the model. Each participant instance is linked with the root element. Each participant instance defines at least one of plural participants of the model. Each participant instance is an instance of a participant class. A relation port for the model defines plural relations and flows among the plural participants. Each relation is defined by a relation instance being of a relation class and defining a relationship between participants.