pith. sign in

arxiv: 2604.19390 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-21 · 💻 cs.SE

Towards Formalising Stakeholder Context using SysML v2

Matthew Harrison , John Carlin , Chengyuan Liu , Sarah Dunnett , Siyuan Ji This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 02:48 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.SE
keywords SysML v2Soft Systems Methodologystakeholder contextsystem architectureformal modelingKerMLarchitecture description
0
0 comments X

The pith

A mapping framework converts Soft Systems Methodology outputs into SysML v2 models to create traceable links from stakeholder views to system architecture.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper develops a structured way to take the often subjective descriptions of stakeholder perspectives generated by Soft Systems Methodology and translate them into the precise, standardized elements of SysML version 2. This translation rests on a reference architecture that draws on the language's semantic precision and its compatibility with international standards for architecture descriptions. A case study illustrates the resulting step-by-step trail from initial stakeholder context through to formal architecture models. The approach is presented as lowering the chance that important needs get lost or misread during system development, though the authors note that broad testing to confirm this benefit has not yet been done and that the text-based notation adds a learning hurdle.

Core claim

The framework defines a reference architecture, grounded in the precision of the Kernel Modelling Language and SysML v2's alignment with the ISO 42010 standard, that maps outputs from Soft Systems Methodology to SysML v2 concepts such as stakeholders and concerns, thereby establishing a traceable path from stakeholder context to system architecture as demonstrated through the case study.

What carries the argument

The reference architecture that maps Soft Systems Methodology outputs to SysML v2 concepts of stakeholders and concerns, built on Kernel Modelling Language precision and ISO 42010 alignment.

Load-bearing premise

The alignment of SysML v2 with ISO 42010 and the precision of KerML provide a suitable reference architecture for mapping SSM outputs to SysML v2 concepts such as stakeholders and concerns.

What would settle it

A controlled comparison in which teams using the mapped SysML v2 models show no reduction in misinterpretation of stakeholder requirements compared with teams using traditional informal documentation.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.19390 by Chengyuan Liu, John Carlin, Matthew Harrison, Sarah Dunnett, Siyuan Ji.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Checkland SSM. The application of the CATWOE mnemonic ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Collaborative Process with Stakeholder Involvement [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: To take advantage of the alignment with ISO 42010, the relationships contained within the 4 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Use Case Modelling. 3.3.2 Conceptual Model Mapping Initial modelling details the input and output of the system, i.e., what is being transformed. The Trans￾formation is then elaborated on, to define how the input is acquired, how to reach the output and how to make the output available. This is used to define a series of activities, their ordering and a monitor-and￾control subsystem, which is itself made u… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Metadata Modelling. 4. Case Study System In the previous section, the technical foundation of the framework was detailed. In order to aid compre￾hension of the framework, a reference architecture has been populated using the outputs of a case study. This reference architecture and completed case study architecture can be found in the dedicated GitHub Repository (Harrison, 2025). Studying the textual notati… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Case Study Rich Picture. The segment of the rich picture used in this case study ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Case Study Individual Modelling. 4.1.2 System Structure To further elaborate on the stakeholder context, it is useful to begin modelling high-level system ele￾ments at this point. From the viewpoint of the manager, the purpose of the system is to give the new hire access to a tool by submitting a request to IT, who will add them to the appropriate tool license according to their job role. This immediately … view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Case Study Initial System Structure - Usage. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: This will ensure that the resulting solution [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Case Study Conceptual Model. developed using the process described previously (2.1.3 Conceptual Models). The central activity sys￾tem details the activities which comprise the Trans￾formation and were assigned to either the manager or IT by colour. These activities were modelled using actions. Two monitor-and-control systems are also included, which specify necessary control actions, as well as required s… view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Case Study Transformation Use Case. tion which alters an attribute. By explicitly linking the possible scenarios to model elements, the accuracy and comprehensibility of the model are increased. 5. Conclusions The application of the framework to a case study re￾vealed the following findings. Firstly, the textual notation has greatly enhanced the ease of precise modelling, making the use of feature typing … view at source ↗
read the original abstract

This paper presents a framework to bridge the gap between subjective stakeholder context and formal system architecture. This is achieved using Soft Systems Methodology (SSM) and Systems Modelling Language version 2 (SysML v2). The methodology utilises the precision of Kernel Modelling Language (KerML) and the alignment of SysML v2 with ISO 42010 to define a reference architecture for the mapping of SSM outputs to SysML v2 concepts such as stakeholders and concerns. Application of the framework is demonstrated through the use of a case study, highlighting the traceable path from stakeholder context to system architecture. The structured mapping and increased semantic precision of SysML v2 are anticipated to reduce the risk of misinterpretation compared to less formal approaches, though empirical validation across diverse stakeholder contexts remains as future work. The primary identified trade-off is the increased barrier to entry associated with SysML v2's textual notation.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

1 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a framework bridging subjective stakeholder context to formal system architecture by integrating Soft Systems Methodology (SSM) with SysML v2. It defines a reference architecture leveraging KerML precision and SysML v2's alignment with ISO 42010 to map SSM outputs (such as stakeholder concerns) to SysML v2 concepts, demonstrates the mapping via a case study showing traceability to system architecture, and anticipates reduced misinterpretation risk relative to less formal methods while deferring empirical validation to future work and noting the trade-off of SysML v2's textual notation barrier.

Significance. If the mapping framework proves robust, the work could advance requirements engineering and systems architecture by providing a traceable, semantically precise path from soft systems analysis to formal models, addressing a recognized gap in handling subjective stakeholder inputs. The explicit qualification of claims as 'anticipated' and the deferral of validation strengthen its positioning as a foundational conceptual contribution rather than an overclaimed empirical result.

major comments (1)
  1. [Case study and reference architecture description] The central demonstration relies on the reference architecture's suitability for mapping SSM outputs to SysML v2 stakeholders and concerns, but the case study section provides only high-level illustration without explicit transformation rules or examples of how specific SSM artifacts (e.g., CATWOE or root definitions) map to KerML-grounded SysML v2 elements; this weakens assessment of whether the alignment with ISO 42010 actually delivers the claimed semantic precision.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract states the primary trade-off but does not quantify or exemplify the 'increased barrier to entry' associated with SysML v2 textual notation; including a short code snippet or comparison table would clarify this for readers unfamiliar with the language.
  2. [Introduction or related work] The paper could strengthen the 'towards' framing by briefly contrasting the proposed approach with prior integrations of SSM and other modeling languages (e.g., UML or earlier SysML versions) to better position the novelty of the KerML/ISO 42010 reference architecture.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive feedback and positive overall assessment of the work as a foundational conceptual contribution. We address the major comment below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: The central demonstration relies on the reference architecture's suitability for mapping SSM outputs to SysML v2 stakeholders and concerns, but the case study section provides only high-level illustration without explicit transformation rules or examples of how specific SSM artifacts (e.g., CATWOE or root definitions) map to KerML-grounded SysML v2 elements; this weakens assessment of whether the alignment with ISO 42010 actually delivers the claimed semantic precision.

    Authors: We agree that the case study would benefit from greater specificity to allow readers to fully evaluate the mapping's precision. The reference architecture section defines the conceptual mapping from SSM outputs (including stakeholder concerns) to SysML v2 elements via KerML and ISO 42010 alignment, with the case study intended to illustrate traceability at a high level. In the revised manuscript we will expand the case study to include explicit transformation rules and concrete examples of how SSM artifacts such as CATWOE and root definitions map to specific KerML-grounded SysML v2 constructs (e.g., stakeholders, concerns, and viewpoints). This addition will strengthen the demonstration without altering the paper's scope or claims. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; framework extends external standards without reduction

full rationale

The paper proposes a conceptual mapping framework from Soft Systems Methodology (SSM) outputs to SysML v2 stakeholder/concern concepts. It grounds the reference architecture in the external alignment of SysML v2 with ISO 42010 and the precision of KerML, then demonstrates the mapping via a case study. All central claims are explicitly qualified as 'anticipated' with empirical validation deferred to future work. No equations, fitted parameters, predictions, or self-citations appear in the derivation chain. The contribution is an application and extension of pre-existing methodologies and standards; the stated path from stakeholder context to architecture is traceable by construction of the proposed mapping rather than by any self-referential reduction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The framework rests on the domain assumption that SysML v2 and KerML provide sufficient semantic precision and standard alignment for formalizing subjective contexts; no free parameters or invented entities are introduced.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption SysML v2 aligns with ISO 42010 to define a reference architecture for mapping SSM outputs to concepts such as stakeholders and concerns
    Invoked to establish the structured mapping and semantic precision in the framework.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5451 in / 1303 out tokens · 50796 ms · 2026-05-10T02:48:28.019552+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

25 extracted references · 25 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    doi:10.1109/IEEESTD.2023.10123367 , isbn =

    work page doi:10.1109/ieeestd.2023.10123367 2023

  2. [2]

    INCOSE International Symposium , title =

    Aurelijus Morkevicius and Aiste Aleksandraviciene and Gintare Krisciuniene , doi =. INCOSE International Symposium , title =

    work page

  3. [3]

    Systems , title =

    Alejandro Salado and Paul Wach , doi =. Systems , title =

    work page

  4. [4]

    TOWARDS A FRAMEWORK FOR EXECUTABLE SYSTEMS MODELING: AN EXECUTABLE SYSTEMS MODELING LANGUAGE (

    Matthew Amissah and Ange-Lionel Toba and Holly A H Handley and Mamadou Seck , journal =. TOWARDS A FRAMEWORK FOR EXECUTABLE SYSTEMS MODELING: AN EXECUTABLE SYSTEMS MODELING LANGUAGE (

    work page

  5. [5]

    Systems , title =

    Zirui Li and Faizan Faheem and Stephan Husung , doi =. Systems , title =

    work page

  6. [6]

    CEAS Space Journal , title =

    Juozas Vaicenavičius and Tilo Wiklund and Daumantas Kavolis and Simonas Draukšas and Antanas Kalkauskas and Rimantas Vaicenavičius , doi =. CEAS Space Journal , title =

    work page

  7. [7]

    CEAS Aeronautical Journal , title =

    Hendrik Kausch and Mathias Pfeiffer and Deni Raco and Bernhard Rumpe and Andreas Schweiger , doi =. CEAS Aeronautical Journal , title =

    work page

  8. [8]

    SAE Technical Papers , title =

    Kyle Litwin and Isaac Amundson and Dinesh Verma and Tom McDermott , doi =. SAE Technical Papers , title =

    work page

  9. [9]

    Almeida and Luís Ferreira Pires and Giancarlo Guizzardi and Gerd Wagner , doi =

    João Paulo A. Almeida and Luís Ferreira Pires and Giancarlo Guizzardi and Gerd Wagner , doi =. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics) , title =

    work page

  10. [10]

    D. W. Bustard and Z. He and F. G. Wilkie , doi =. Proceedings of the Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences , title =

    work page

  11. [11]

    Unified Architecture Framework (

    work page

  12. [12]

    Software, systems and enterprise — Architecture description , url =

    work page

  13. [13]

    Object Management Group Systems Modeling Language (

    work page

  14. [14]

    Leavitt , city =

    Harold J. Leavitt , city =. Applied Organizational Change in Industry: Structural, Technological and Humanistic Approaches , year =. Handbook of Organisations , pages =

    work page

  15. [15]

    Business Analysis , year =

    Debra Paul and James Cadle and Malcolm Eva and Craig Rollason and Jonathan Hunsley , edition =. Business Analysis , year =

    work page

  16. [16]

    Soft Systems Methodology: Conceptual Model Building and Its Contribution , year =

    Brian Wilson , edition =. Soft Systems Methodology: Conceptual Model Building and Its Contribution , year =

    work page

  17. [17]

    About the Unified Modeling Language Specification Version 2.5.1 , url =

    work page

  18. [18]

    Systems Thinking, Systems Practice , year =

    Peter Checkland , publisher =. Systems Thinking, Systems Practice , year =

    work page

  19. [19]

    Mitroff and Tom R

    Ian I. Mitroff and Tom R. Featheringham , doi =. Behavioral Science , title =

    work page

  20. [20]

    Journal of Systems Thinking , title =

    Geoff Peters and Joyce Fortune and Diana White , doi =. Journal of Systems Thinking , title =

    work page

  21. [21]

    Journal of Research in Nursing , title =

    Charity Mukotekwa and Ewart Carson , doi =. Journal of Research in Nursing , title =

    work page

  22. [22]

    Human Resource Development Review , title =

    Alison Gisby and Catharine Ross and Jan Francis-Smythe and Kazia Anderson , doi =. Human Resource Development Review , title =

    work page

  23. [23]

    IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics: Systems , title =

    Robert Cloutier and Brian Sauser and Mary Bone and Andrew Taylor , doi =. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics: Systems , title =

    work page

  24. [24]

    2025 , url =

    Github Repository , author =. 2025 , url =

    work page 2025

  25. [25]

    Proceedings of 2025 IEEE 26th China Conference on System Simulation Technology and its Applications, CCSSTA 2025 , title =

    Rui Wu and Guangwei Wen and Xiaoning Zhang and Xiaojun Liang and Chunhua Yang and Weihua Gui , doi =. Proceedings of 2025 IEEE 26th China Conference on System Simulation Technology and its Applications, CCSSTA 2025 , title =

    work page 2025