{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.022940563086548488, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.2745098039215685, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Situation Vs. Context: Considerations on the Level of Detail in Modelling Method Adaptation

Creating a universal conceptual modelling method, which can be used without modification in all situations, is not feasible. Appropriate methods for problem solving must be chosen, adapted or designed depending on the characteristics of the (pre )supposed application. However, analyses reveal that the situativeness of documented adaptations is not as situational as method engineering theory tends to put it. This paper acts as a primer and provides a survey of the state-of-the-art to systematise the diverse field of (modelling) method engineering. We focus on the cause of adaptation and suggest regarding the overall context of method deployment, rather than focusing on situational details of its application. We conclude by proposing cornerstones of a research agenda to formalise and standardise the definition of context and, thus, make it more manageable.