<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Archiving and Interchange DTD v1.0 20120330//EN" "JATS-archivearticle1.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">
  <front>
    <journal-meta>
      <journal-title-group>
        <journal-title>Barcelona, Catalunya, Spain, April</journal-title>
      </journal-title-group>
    </journal-meta>
    <article-meta>
      <title-group>
        <article-title>Digitalisation of Agriculture: Development and Evaluation of a Model-based Requirements Engineering Process</article-title>
      </title-group>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Chiara Mannari</string-name>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2">2</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Giorgio Oronzo Spagnolo</string-name>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2">2</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Manlio Bacco</string-name>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2">2</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Alessio Malizia</string-name>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1">1</xref>
        </contrib>
        <aff id="aff0">
          <label>0</label>
          <institution>Computer Science Department, University of Pisa</institution>
          ,
          <addr-line>Pisa</addr-line>
          ,
          <country country="IT">Italy</country>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff1">
          <label>1</label>
          <institution>Faculty of Logistics, Molde University College</institution>
          ,
          <addr-line>Molde</addr-line>
          ,
          <country country="NO">Norway</country>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff2">
          <label>2</label>
          <institution>Institute of Information Science and Technologies "Alessandro Faedo" - ISTI, CNR</institution>
          ,
          <addr-line>Pisa</addr-line>
          ,
          <country country="IT">Italy</country>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <pub-date>
        <year>2023</year>
      </pub-date>
      <volume>17</volume>
      <issue>2023</issue>
      <fpage>0000</fpage>
      <lpage>0002</lpage>
      <abstract>
        <p>[Context and Motivation] The requirements elicitation process for socio-technical systems requires the involvement of diverse stakeholders with diferent backgrounds and skills. In these contexts, effective communication between business analysts and stakeholders can be supported by model-based requirements engineering (MoDRE) strategies, which leverage diagrammatic notations as a means for information exchange. [Question/Problem] Several diagrams and approaches exist to facilitate MoDRE. However, empirical evidence on their applicability to real-world contexts with a relevant social component, and going through a process of digitalisation, is limited. Furthermore, existing approaches do not evaluate the impact that the deployment of a novel digital system has on the process and its actors. [Principal idea/Results] The research outlined in this paper aims to evaluate the joint usage of typical requirements engineer notations, namely i*, class diagrams, and business process models in the elicitation of requirements for socially-intensive systems that are going through a transformative digitalisation process. We apply these notations to represent the system as-is, and the system to-be, with the goal of also evaluating the impact of digitalisation. We focus on living labs (networks of stakeholders in a socio-technical system) belonging to the agriculture domain, and provide a preliminary application on a farm that is introducing an AI-based irrigation system. [Contribution] The results show that efective communication with non-technical stakeholders is feasible with the envisioned approach. Although multiple iterations are required, agronomists and farmers are able to provide constructive feedback on the basis of the models. Furthermore, impacts in terms of additional/removed tasks and actors can be efectively characterised through business process models. As part of our overall project, we will refine the method, and then apply it in 20 living labs in the EU.</p>
      </abstract>
      <kwd-group>
        <kwd>eol&gt;requirements elicitation</kwd>
        <kwd>socio-technical system</kwd>
        <kwd>agriculture</kwd>
        <kwd>living labs</kwd>
        <kwd>process modelling</kwd>
      </kwd-group>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
  <body>
    <sec id="sec-1">
      <title>1. Introduction</title>
      <p>
        Digitalisation in agriculture is a socio-technical process to be considered from multiple
perspectives, such as social, economic, environmental, and technological. The focus on the introduction
and adoption of Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) — a specific class of
technical tools — has brought to the development of the concept of socio-cyber-physical systems
in [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref1">1</xref>
        ], in which the relevance of the perspectives mentioned is considered as well. While there
has always been great interest in the most innovative digital technologies, as emerges from
[
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref2">2</xref>
        ] and [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref3">3</xref>
        ], recent studies consider the impacts of the adoption of such technologies in real
contexts, analysing drivers and barriers [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref4">4</xref>
        ]. The EU-funded research project Maximizing the
co-benefits of agricultural digitalisation through conducive digital ecosystems (CODECS), started
in late 2022, aims to evaluate the impact of digitalisation in agriculture by developing a method
to map, model, and assess the context in which a digitalisation process occurs. CODECS aims
to improve the collective capacity of farmers to understand and adopt digital technologies
as enablers of sustainable and transformative change. To fulfil such objectives, an
interdisciplinary consortium and multiple living labs (LLs) has been set up. LLs are networks of farmers,
knowledge intermediaries, stakeholders, and policymakers addressing emerging challenges
by co-developing user-friendly approaches, methods, and tools to assess the cost-benefits of
technologies in real agricultural contexts. Thus, in order to generate a common understanding,
two pillars are part of the project strategy: the adoption of a conceptual framework as a common
language to carry on project activities and a problem-based approach, which gives the priority
to the problem and encourages actors and stakeholders with diferent expertise to address it.
      </p>
      <p>
        The reference conceptual framework is Ostrom’s socio-ecological System (SES) framework
[
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref5">5</xref>
        ], a multi-level scheme of concepts and variables to describe systems in terms of resources,
such as natural ones, but also digital technologies and knowledge. Considering concepts such
as resource systems, resource units, governance systems, and actors, Ostrom’s framework plays
an important role in enabling comparison, in the gathering of knowledge in multiple case
studies (LLs), and supporting the analysis of digital ecosystems (DEs), i.e. organized sets of
digital, social-economic, organisational, and physical components that support the production,
storage, communication, and use of digital technologies and data. The analysis will cover —
but will not be limited to — the role of digital resources (data, application systems, etc.), digital
resource systems (platforms, infrastructures, clouds, etc.), digital governance systems (data
sharing and use regulation), actors and capabilities that are involved in the digitalisation process.
The starting point for the analysis will be the focal action situation (FAS) defined by each LL,
a condition in which individuals (acting on their own or as agents of formal organizations)
interact with each other and thereby jointly afect outcomes that are diferentially valued by
those actors [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref5">5</xref>
        ]. For the purposes of our research, we assume that the diferent components of
a FAS leverage digital technologies for diferent outcomes.
      </p>
      <p>
        A key activity will be process modelling, aiming at the creation of easy-to-read graphical
representations of processes in FASs to describe and evaluate how the introduction of digital
technologies may reshape a context (i.e., their impacts). The results of the analysis will be used
as input for further activities, such as the description of DEs and the cost-benefits analysis.
The models will represent a fraction of the FAS each LL will define, and they will be focused
on the re-engineering of the processes, aiming at the representations of the processes before
and after the introduction of digital technologies. The process modelling will be developed by
applying MoDRE strategies. This will contribute to filling the lack of empirical evidence on the
applicability of MoDRE to real-world contexts with a relevant social component, as evidenced
in [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref6">6</xref>
        ]. The following sections present the methodology applied for a feasibility study on smart
irrigation1, and the discussion of some preliminary results. The methodology is to be considered
tentative, as its definition is still in progress and may need to be tailored to the 20 diferent LLs.
      </p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-2">
      <title>2. Research Methodology</title>
      <p>
        The overall objective of the project is to perform an analysis of DEs from multiple
perspectives. However, both the transdisciplinarity of the research and the direct involvement of
LLs challenge the communication at diferent layers: among diferent academic disciplines
(economics, sociology, ecology, engineering, etc.); among diferent actors (researchers, farmers,
intermediaries, stakeholders, policymakers, etc.); among domains and specialisations (water
management, nutrient management, crop protection, livestock, etc.). Therefore, the purpose of
our study is to address these research questions:
• RQ1: How to perform requirements elicitation in socio-technical systems in order to
create representations that account for social relations and goals, structural elements,
processes, and impacts of digitalisation?
• RQ2: What is the degree of user acceptance (usefulness, ease of use, and intention to use)
of the devised elicitation procedures and system representations?
To answer RQ1, we will: 1) select graphical models from the MoDRE field, considering prominent
notations for the representation of social interactions and goals, system components, processes,
and impacts, and adapt the notations to maximise usefulness and understandability; 2) develop
structured communication procedures between requirements analysts and stakeholders, with
the goal of capturing elements of the systems and relations thereof, as well as impacts due to
digitalisation. The objective of these procedures is to enable the representation of the system
and its transformation according to the selected MoDRE notations. To achieve these goals,
we will follow the design science paradigm [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref7">7</xref>
        ] to come to a consolidated artefact consisting
of a set of procedures and diagrams. Diferent sub-activities will be carried out with LLs,
which will shape the community of local practices and will benefit from the research, while
the FASs will contribute to investigating the context of the problem and refining the artefact
itself. Furthermore, Ostrom’s framework adopted by the project as the common knowledge
base will constitute the theoretical reference underpinning the research. To answer RQ2, the
output of RQ1 will be evaluated by means of a multiple-case study [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref8">8</xref>
        ], to be carried out within
LLs of the CODECS consortium. To ensure that the representations produced are useful and
understandable, we will evaluate them according to the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref9">9</xref>
        ].
Specifically, we will use standard questionnaires to evaluate the constructs of Perceived Ease of
Use (PEOU), Perceived Usefulness (PU) and Intention To Use (ITU), as done by other authors [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref10">10</xref>
        ].
1The documentation produced is available at https://zenodo.org/record/7713556
      </p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-3">
      <title>3. A Pilot Study of Process Modelling Based on Smart Irrigation</title>
      <p>
        The activity is based on the application of MoDRE strategies to understand how current
processes are re-engineered after the introduction of digital technologies. The transformation is
emphasized by qualitatively highlighting the diferences in the process as-is (before) and in the
process to-be (after). To ensure completeness, a set of languages has been so far identified and
the following diagrams will be developed by each LL following a guided procedure:
• the UML class diagram will provide an overview of the classes, i. e. actors, tools and
infrastructures involved in the process to-be, and the relationships among them [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref11">11</xref>
        ];
• the i* goal diagram will model the goals of the process to-be focusing on the intentional,
social and strategic dimensions [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref12">12</xref>
        ];
• the BPMN process diagrams will represent the detailed flow of the process and will allow
comparisons between the overall process before (as-is) and after (to-be) the introduction
of the digital technology [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref13">13</xref>
        ][
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref14">14</xref>
        ][
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref15">15</xref>
        ].
      </p>
      <p>The i* and UML diagrams focus on the process to-be only to simplify the overall representation,
considering that the core models to visualise the process transformation are the BPMN diagrams.
This was a pragmatic decision of the authors.</p>
      <p>In order to assess the modelling methodology, a pilot study based on a smart irrigation system
adopted on a pear orchard by Illuminati Frutta2, a fruit farm in Tuscany, was analysed and
diagrams were drawn. The adoption of a precise irrigation system, composed of a wireless
sensor network (WSN) and a decision support system (DSS), has promising potential in terms
of economic, productive and environmental benefits. Figure 1 contains the UML class diagram
which provides an overview of the classes, i. e. actors, tools and infrastructures involved in the
precision irrigation system and the relationships between them, i.e., roles and actions performed.
The new classes introduced by digital technology are in light blue. In Figure 2, the i* diagram
represents the goals of the irrigation process. Highlighting actors, components and activities
in relation to the goals and qualities, the model focuses on the demonstration of the positive
impact of the introduction of the new actor “DSS infrastructure” and its measurement activities
in supporting the irrigation task of the farmer. Figure 3 is an overlap of two BPMN models: a
ifrst diagram describing the process before the introduction of technology, and a second diagram
representing the precision irrigation system introduced by the DSS infrastructure. In the picture,
the new participants, activities and gateways introduced by technology are in blue; in green the
items that do not change; in red the items that are not present anymore (an accessible version of
the picture, along with an animated version and the single process diagrams, is available in the
replication package— see Footnote 1). The aim of this visualisation is to provide an overview
of the process re-engineering impacts. This is expected to be used for an in-depth qualitative
discussion on the efects of digitalisation (novel/removed tasks, actors, consequences of the
transformation, etc.) with the involved stakeholders.</p>
      <p>The procedure adopted to define the models is as follows:
• The authors of the paper (computer scientists) visited the farm and dedicated half a day
to interacting with a group of ten people who consisted of farmers, agronomists and the
owner of the farm.
2http://www.illuminatifrutta.it last visited 9 February 2023
• The agronomists were asked to write a document in natural language describing the
system structure and the automated process currently under development, especially
describing the change with respect to a manual process.
• Based on the document, the first author created the diagrams. These were revised with
experts in i*, class diagrams and BPMN, and this led to 11 changes to better comply with
the grammar of the notations (all changes are tracked in an Excel file, available in our
replication package—see Footnote 1). This suggests that, also in future instances of the
methodology, this step requires the involvement of experts to ensure that the diagrams
are syntactically correct.
• The diagrams were used to further clarify certain aspects of the system in a 2-hours
meeting with the agronomists. This led to 2 substantial changes in the diagrams, (new
components and relationships in the UML), and the meeting showed that the agronomists
clearly understood the notations and were able to provide feedback. The agronomist
particularly appreciated the BPMN diagrams, but highlighted that the representations
did not consider the process for setting the setup of the new system, not allowing for
an analysis of the costs of the transition (e.g., training, pilot tests). Despite that, it was
agreed not to include additional diagrams, in favour of leaner models focusing on the
representation of the system before and after the introduction of digital technologies. The
representation of the transition will however be considered in other tasks of the project.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-4">
      <title>4. Current Stage and Road Map</title>
      <p>The current stage of our research consists of the requirements definition step of the design science
treatment targeted to RQ1. The pilot study is the output of the outline artefact sub-activity aimed
at identifying the type of artefact to develop; it includes the diagrams presented above and a
proposal of process modelling methodology. Following the project timeline, the feasibility study
was carried out as a preliminary activity and was evaluated during a focus group with project
partners and a plenary meeting with LL coordinators. The evaluation allowed to complete the
sub-activity of requirements elicitation and the positive feedback reafirmed the potential of
MoDRE to produce standard and understandable representations of processes to be used in
further analysis by stakeholders with diferent backgrounds. The methodology to carry out
process modelling is based on the same procedure adopted for the development of the models.
Some adjustments were made to comply with two major project constraints: 1. data collection
will be performed in coordination with other tasks 2. limited number of available iterations
necessary to refine the models. On the one hand, iterations are fundamental for precision and
high levels of detail in the models; on the other hand, they are time-consuming and require
the availability of multiple actors. Eventually, a five-step methodology to carry out the process
modelling has been agreed upon. The methodology is based on these steps: 1) data collection;
2) reporting; 3) check; 4) formalisation; 5) agreement. Steps 1 and 2 will be performed by LLs
together with LLs coordinators, steps 4 and 5 will be carried out by task leaders with LLs’
support, while step 5 will be the final agreement between task leaders and LLs. The current task
is the production of guidelines for LL coordinators in charge of data collection. Clear guidelines
describing the activities to be carried out are fundamental to collecting information for applying
RE techniques in the representations of the systems. Thus, the next stages will consist of the
design and development of the artefact, and the demonstration. As a design science project,
it will be carried out in an iterative manner, moving back and forth between all the activities,
adapting the models and the procedures to LLs needs and refining the overall process. The final
phase will be devoted to answering RQ2, with the evaluation both of the system representations,
and the overall methodology through standard questionnaires administered to the LLs.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-5">
      <title>5. Conclusions</title>
      <p>This paper presents preliminary results arising from the ongoing research project EU CODECS.
LLs involvement helps both to address emerging challenges related to the adoption of ICT and
to perform research in real agricultural contexts. Diagrammatic notations are the common
language for information exchange between diferent actors, and MoDRE strategies help to
describe socio-technical systems. On the one hand, having a clear representation of the processes
tailored to farmers’ needs is fundamental to performing the technology assessment of such
systems; on the other, the focus on the process re-engineering will allow describing the impacts
of the introduction of digital technologies. Future challenges include the development and
evaluation of a successful methodology for data collection and modelling, and additional models
to tackle the transition phase between the before and after the introduction of technology.
This work has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon Europe research and
innovation programme under grant agreement no. 101060179.</p>
    </sec>
  </body>
  <back>
    <ref-list>
      <ref id="ref1">
        <mixed-citation>
          [1]
          <string-name>
            <given-names>K.</given-names>
            <surname>Rijswijk</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>L.</given-names>
            <surname>Klerkx</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
            <surname>Bacco</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>F.</given-names>
            <surname>Bartolini</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>E.</given-names>
            <surname>Bulten</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>L.</given-names>
            <surname>Debruyne</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
            <surname>Dessein</surname>
          </string-name>
          , I. Scotti,
          <string-name>
            <surname>G.</surname>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>Brunori, Digital Transformation of Agriculture and Rural Areas: a Socio-Cyber-Physical System Framework to Support Responsibilisation</article-title>
          ,
          <source>Journal of Rural Studies</source>
          <volume>85</volume>
          (
          <year>2021</year>
          )
          <fpage>79</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>90</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref2">
        <mixed-citation>
          [2]
          <string-name>
            <given-names>R.</given-names>
            <surname>Bertoglio</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>C.</given-names>
            <surname>Corbo</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>F. M.</given-names>
            <surname>Renga</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
            <surname>Matteucci</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <article-title>The digital agricultural revolution: A bibliometric analysis literature review</article-title>
          ,
          <source>IEEE Access 9</source>
          (
          <year>2021</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref3">
        <mixed-citation>
          [3]
          <string-name>
            <given-names>P. R.</given-names>
            <surname>Bhagat</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>F.</given-names>
            <surname>Naz</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>R.</given-names>
            <surname>Magda</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <article-title>Artificial intelligence solutions enabling sustainable agriculture: A bibliometric analysis</article-title>
          ,
          <source>PLOS ONE 17</source>
          (
          <year>2022</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref4">
        <mixed-citation>
          [4]
          <string-name>
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
            <surname>Ferrari</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
            <surname>Bacco</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>K.</given-names>
            <surname>Gaber</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
            <surname>Jedlitschka</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
            <surname>Hess</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
            <surname>Kaipainen</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>P.</given-names>
            <surname>Koltsida</surname>
          </string-name>
          , E. Toli, G. Brunori, Drivers,
          <source>Barriers and Impacts of Digitalisation in Rural Areas from the Viewpoint of Experts, Information and Software Technology</source>
          <volume>145</volume>
          (
          <year>2022</year>
          )
          <fpage>106816</fpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref5">
        <mixed-citation>
          [5]
          <string-name>
            <surname>M. D. McGinnis</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>E.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Ostrom</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <article-title>Social-ecological system framework: initial changes and continuing challenges</article-title>
          ,
          <source>Ecology and society 19</source>
          (
          <year>2014</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref6">
        <mixed-citation>
          [6]
          <string-name>
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
            <surname>Mavin</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>P.</given-names>
            <surname>Wilkinson</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
            <surname>Teufl</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>H.</given-names>
            <surname>Femmer</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
            <surname>Eckhardt</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
            <surname>Mund</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <article-title>Does goal-oriented requirements engineering achieve its goal?</article-title>
          ,
          <source>in: 2017 IEEE 25th International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE)</source>
          ,
          <year>2017</year>
          , pp.
          <fpage>174</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>183</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref7">
        <mixed-citation>
          [7]
          <string-name>
            <given-names>P.</given-names>
            <surname>Johannesson</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>E.</given-names>
            <surname>Perjons</surname>
          </string-name>
          , An Introduction to Design Science, Springer International Publishing, Cham, Switzerland,
          <year>2014</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref8">
        <mixed-citation>
          [8]
          <string-name>
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
            <surname>Host</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
            <surname>Rainer</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>P.</given-names>
            <surname>Runeson</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>B.</given-names>
            <surname>Regnell</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <article-title>Case study research in software engineering: Guidelines and examples</article-title>
          , John Wiley &amp; Sons,
          <year>2012</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref9">
        <mixed-citation>
          [9]
          <string-name>
            <given-names>F. D.</given-names>
            <surname>Davis</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <article-title>Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology</article-title>
          ,
          <source>MIS quarterly</source>
          (
          <year>1989</year>
          )
          <fpage>319</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>340</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref10">
        <mixed-citation>
          [10]
          <string-name>
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
            <surname>Abrahão</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>E.</given-names>
            <surname>Insfran</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>J. A.</given-names>
            <surname>Carsí</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
            <surname>Genero</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <article-title>Evaluating requirements modeling methods based on user perceptions: A family of experiments</article-title>
          ,
          <source>Information Sciences 181</source>
          (
          <year>2011</year>
          )
          <fpage>3356</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>3378</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref11">
        <mixed-citation>
          [11]
          <article-title>Unified modeling language (UML) 2.0 core specification</article-title>
          , https://www.omg.org/spec/UML/ 2.0,
          <year>2005</year>
          . Version 2 | Online; accessed 9-February-
          <year>2023</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref12">
        <mixed-citation>
          [12]
          <string-name>
            <given-names>E.</given-names>
            <surname>Yu</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>P.</given-names>
            <surname>Giorgini</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>N.</given-names>
            <surname>Maiden</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
            <surname>Mylopoulos</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
            <surname>Fickas</surname>
          </string-name>
          , Social Modeling for Requirements Engineering, The MIT Press,
          <year>2011</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref13">
        <mixed-citation>
          [13]
          <article-title>Business process model and notation (BPMN) v2.0</article-title>
          , https://www.omg.org/spec/BPMN/2.0/, 2010. Version 2 | Online; accessed 9-February-
          <year>2023</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref14">
        <mixed-citation>
          [14]
          <string-name>
            <given-names>W.</given-names>
            <surname>Van Der Aalst</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <article-title>Process mining: discovery, conformance and enhancement of business processes</article-title>
          , volume
          <volume>2</volume>
          , Springer,
          <year>2011</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref15">
        <mixed-citation>
          [15]
          <string-name>
            <given-names>F.</given-names>
            <surname>Corradini</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
            <surname>Ferrari</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>F.</given-names>
            <surname>Fornari</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
            <surname>Gnesi</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
            <surname>Polini</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>B.</given-names>
            <surname>Re</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>G. O.</given-names>
            <surname>Spagnolo</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <article-title>A Guidelines framework for understandable BPMN models</article-title>
          ,
          <source>Data &amp; Knowledge Engineering</source>
          <volume>113</volume>
          (
          <year>2018</year>
          )
          <fpage>129</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>154</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
    </ref-list>
  </back>
</article>