Human-Centered Evaluation of an LLM-Based Process Modeling Copilot: A Mixed-Methods Study with Domain Experts
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Integrating Large Language Models (LLMs) into business process management tools promises to democratize Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN) modeling for non-experts. While automated frameworks assess syntactic and semantic quality, they miss human factors like trust, usability, and professional alignment. We conducted a mixed-methods evaluation of our proposed solution, an LLM-powered BPMN copilot, with five process modeling experts using focus groups and standardized questionnaires. Our findings reveal a critical tension between acceptable perceived usability (mean CUQ score: 67.2/100) and notably lower trust (mean score: 48.8%), with reliability rated as the most critical concern (M=1.8/5). Furthermore, we identified output-quality issues, prompting difficulties, and a need for the LLM to ask more in-depth clarifying questions about the process. We envision five use cases ranging from domain-expert support to enterprise quality assurance. We demonstrate the necessity of human-centered evaluation complementing automated benchmarking for LLM modeling agents.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 2 of its 28 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 13 Mar 2026.
Builds on
2 of 28 references.
References · 2
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.
1 paper.